[Geee]

In addition, bitcoin limits government power. Most autocracies fund their operations with inflation. Even in liberal democracies, deficit spending funded with inflation is not really what people have voted for. People are fine with taxes to the extent they have voted for them, but that should be enough. Inflation is a way to covertly siphon wealth from citizens on top of tax revenues.

[JumpCrisscross]

> autocracies fund their operations with inflation

There is limited evidence for connecting countries' foreign debt levels to their degree of democratization [1].

More pointedly, there is ample evidence--millenia of it!--for empires on commodity money waging war and whatnot and having a fine time of it.

> deficit spending funded with inflation is not really what people have voted for

Deficit spending / bond issuance is voted on at multiple levels of government practically every cycle. People have voted for this. Because the alternative is austerity, and fanatical governments that pursue that for its own sake tend to get replaced.

[1] https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/68966375/bf00224681202...

[Geee]

Well, you are right in that people usually do vote for more government spending. The problem exists in all kinds of governments.

Anyway, my point was that bitcoin can limit government spending and protect individuals against inflation due to government spending. It doesn't mean that a rich nation couldn't wage war.

[randomhodler84]

It would be deeply unpopular as it could only be funded by austerity at home, and it would be very short.

I believe Bitcoin standard world is post war. It is uneconomical, and that hits the people very hard very quickly. No home propaganda could convince the people it was just…