baseless claim as evidenced by your lack of eg; here are some eg that counter your convenient false claim. Donald Trump was bankrupt ~ 6 times, fiat did help him to hold his supposed wealth. Leonard Tose, former billionaire who once owned the Philadelphia Eagles football team lost all his fortunes, fiat didn't help him hold wealth. there are hundreds of professional athletes (steve garvey, antoine walker, bernie kozar, jr richard, et al) who lost their fortunes, fiat didn't help them hold wealth convenient claim w no eg, if only you could give egs. in general, QE leads to lower cost of living, keeping inflation at bay. the poor are most adversely affected by inflation / rising cost of living after W bankrupt the US economy. The Fed adroitly use its tools to stabilize the economy---leverage the economic benefits of QE---and then help it to grow. it's too bad that you don't understand it
I would insist many of these crisis was started from the abuse of fiat, as the 2009 example. In addition to bailouts, much of that money should have been confiscated (I understand that is unconstitutional) and many of those bankers should have gone to jail. I dont know how much you have delved into finance and I dont want to even begin to claim I have a good understanding, but what goes on behind the fiat system is flat out criminal. Those with the wealth are constantly getting bailed out and the victims get the scraps. With COVID, the end result was no different. Tech companies are getting more wealthy than ever while small business were forced to shut down and those who were truly hurt received scraps. Setting the fiat/BTC debate aside, every since we got off the gold standard in '71, fiat hasn't done anything to help poverty over the last 50 years. On the other hand, digital remittances is showing signs of helping out poor people on a global level, albeit not in the US. Your Afghanistan example highlights my point of the importance of having regional currencies. However Afghanistan is not a good example. Their issues stem from their culture not wanting to join the rest of the world, but lets not chase that rabbit. Africa is a better example. A lot of capital has been flowing into Africa, helping to establish a digital network. Hopefully Starlink will improve on this capability. As long as one faction does not take control of Bitcoin, it will remain very resilient. Keep in mind if this scenario plays out, it wont happen overnight. It will come from attrition, including those who see writing on the wall and bail on the asset. It is simply too expensive for one faction to take control. Again, I do need to repeat that I do not view Bitcoin as the ONLY asset that can be used as a reserve. As Bitcoin's monetary policy will not be changed by a partisan body, it doesn't matter if rich people buy up all the Bitcoin. If the top 100 billionaires succeeded in buying up all the Bitcoin, it will just go to zero. But they can't because the demand of Bitcoin will go astronomically high, to the point where the top 100 billionaires wouldn't have enough money to buy all of it .... or even close. There would be a breaking point, leading to a massive crash in price, leaving the billionaires at a loss in the long run. This is exactly why we see these large run ups with massive crashes. Manipulation doesn't do well in the Bitcoin market. For the last 3 months, on chain analytics have been doing a good job of predicting the price of Bitcoin....because it is an open network not controlled by a few. Im not trying to 'orange pill' you, however I do encourage you to delve into the mechanics and game theory of Bitcoin. Its fascinating. But I would suggest you go to the unbiased experts and observe their views on the true threat to Bitcoin. It will fast track you past the debates that have been raging on for several years now.
Ahh so a wealthy person who loses their wealth negates the argument. The red herrings of the argument. Also, ponder the difference between wealthy and rich. If I win a 100 million in the Lotto, Im rich. If I can grow that wealth by 4x, that is wealth. QE leads to inflation. Low cost of living comes from technological innovations and taking advantage of others. I don't think the central american farms and asians are doing well.
it's too bad that you don't understand you can't possibly be this ignorant short of you giving eg, i can only conclude that you have no idea what ur talking about
you should heed the sage words of Abe Lincoln Best to remain silent and be thought of as a fool, than to speak to remove all doubts !
QE keeps the cost of borrowing low, making it easier (borrowing $ at low interest rate to fund the new business) for new tech firm to get started, as well as making it more affordable for existing tech firms to invest in innovation you conveniently ignore that QE leads to more innovations, which lower the cost of living
Raising the debt ceiling scenarios 1- Senate Rep back down on their filibuster (simplest and fastest ?) 2- Senate Dem crave out no-filibuster rule (not sure what's involved to do this) 3- Senate Dem use reconciliation process (complex; knowing how Congress work, this will be off the table soon leaving only #1 and #2 left; plus even if it's on the table, Rep can still obstruct this process to hell)
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-market-news-live-updates-october-6-2021-221413376.htmlon at ~ 11AM EST, Bloomberg reported that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was set to offer Democratic lawmakers a deal to temporarily raise the government debt ceiling through November, afterwhich, Wall Street has turned a red day to a green one
McConnell doesn’t want any type of filibuster reform, but I am surprise he caved so quickly. It tells you the importance of getting rid of it so legislation can actually pass. I was against it but I have warmed to the idea.
Not denying that there haven't been many problems with fiat currency and I'm not one of those that buy into Modern Monetary theory that we can just endlessly print money. That said whatever the causes of the 2009 crisis it still did create a liquidity crisis that did require an increase in the monetary supply. That tech companies are getting wealth while small businesses are forced to shut down I don't see Bitcoin as being an answer to that. Given that we're having this discussion on social media just shows that no matter what the exchange of value tech companies are still benefiting. I'm not sure what standard you're using for relieving poverty. While poverty is still stubborn and endemic globally the standard of living has improved. Just look at the PRC. In 1971 there was mass starvation there. I will agree currency policy hasn't been the major factor in that but fiat currency did make trade much easier than using precious metals which greatly benefitted the PRC, Taiwan, SK and other trade based economies. A lot of capital has flowed into Africa but much of the investment has been driven by the PRC which has taken a strong stand against Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. I will agree though it's far too early to see what effect small investment and capital movement might have on Africa. I have experience dealing with Haiti and from what I've seen there I'm not sure Bitcoin is anywhere near benefitting Haiti. Except if Bitcoin were used so widely and crashed that would be a disaster especially if it's used as a currency. That is problem that has faced countries like Malaysia and Thailand where currency speculation has created crisis in their economy. YOu're outlining here where Bitcoin speculation would lead to a crisis. That some Billionaires might get screwed over doesn't mean that a lot of other people won't too who have put savings into Bitcoin or countries that are using Bitcoin as a reserve. You've certainly raised a lot of interesting stuff and to your credit you've changed my opinion on Bitcoin as an unstable fad. That said I'm not sold on it and I think there are many problems with it.
