Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (480167)	9/27/2021 8:17:11 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541119

Well perhaps throw out the word energy and instead substitute effort. If you were designing a monetary system, would you consider it a feature or a bug if the system was predicated on extreme effort? I have always thought it would be a goal to minimize effort in the effectuation of any system of endeavor. Crypto appears to be the opposite, the entire structure is predicated on maximum effort. What do you get for this effort? What is the salient feature that extreme effort brings to the table?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (480167)	9/27/2021 8:22:36 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541119

BTW, the thing that most interests me about crypto is something I have never understood in our Fed Res monetary system: The Feds for some reason bow down before 2% inflation. I've never understood why exactly. Now bitcoin comes along and with its fixed cap of total possible coins at infinity is a huge deflationary monetary system. Why aren't there scads of academic papers looking at this contrast? How can it be that both a system of 2% inflation target, and the printing of money to achieve that can work while its claimed that a system with a finite number of coins could also work? Something is badly off here. There should be some theoretical basis for what sort of inflation or deflation is optimal for a monetary system. What is it?