Topic: Bitcoin will NOT solve all problems but will make rich people richer! - page 3. (Read 4282 times)

I've felt from early on that Bitcoin is even more amenable to allowing for exploitation than even gold.  And both much more so than fiat.

I've also felt that the barrier to 'the masses' abandoning a solution which is significantly exploitative is much less with something like Bitcoin which cannot be hidden in some hole like gold.  Thus, for those who manage to obtain the reins of power under a crypto-currancy solution such as Bitcoin will be forced to either use their power with some moderation or stand a very real chance of losing it.  That, to me, is the real magic of Bitcoin.

Oh but it's going to be different! Why? Because bitcoin is a different kind of money (money based on a scarce commodity as opposed to fiat money that can be printed up).

Yes, there will be rich people and some of them will get richer (the ones who make the right choices). But some of the will get poorer (because they make the wrong choices). This is good. Money isn't fair: if it was fairly redistributed every month evenly to every person on earth there would hardly be any incentive to acquire more.

Here is some of the things that will be different when bitcoin become "the one world currency" (sounds bad because of the connotations, but really isn't):

• Governments (if they still exist) will have to get by with the taxes they collect (there's a limit to that). They could theoretically borrow money, but there would be no lenders, at least not to such extent as nowadays. This is a positive difference because then politicians have to actually do their work and try to act in favor of the people (no handouts possible without taking from other parts of the population)
• Governments will be forced to downscale
• People/Companies/Systems making the wrong choices will fail (no bailouts)
• Free markets will thrive. No distorted/false price signals will make the participants blind. No misallocations of capital will effect actions that are not really desired.
  
• The economy will be much more efficient (regarding both the usage of natural and human resources (wear and tear) and the fullfillment of the participants (consumers) needs and wants. People would be happier and humanity would be less destructive towards live on earth.
• There will be less wars.
• Entry to markets will be easier (less protectionism), big corporations will downscale (sell unprofitable parts), lively innovative markets with small and mid-sized companies will be the norm (no monopolies or regulatory capture)
  
• Simple "saving" will be a possible solution to ensure ones well-being after worklife
• The world will be a fairer place.

Now, these points are debatable and I couldn't possible reason them all here and now, but I think you can tell that I am of the opinion that the kind of money we use has immense impact. If you don't think so, I'd like to discuss that.

So yes: there will be rich people, there will be banks, there might be governments... but all of them will have to wake up to a new reality. A reality that in the end is better for all except maybe a few, a bunch I naively call "the assholes". And no, money doesn't solve problems, people do. The kind of monetary system they use can greatly influence their ability to do so effectively.

Das sind ja Töne. 

I'd also tend to say that Bitcoin tech is an equalizer, just like the internet. Sure, the rich have more internet than the poor, but it gives the poor much more possibilities and chances. Also, Bitcoin may set resources free for those in the first world who genuinely want to help (by not making the third world dependent on Monsanto).

Have to disagree with you there. Those with well-established wealth are incredibly risk averse; they have quite a lot to lose, after all. There's a reason bitcoiners are mostly young and lower/middle class-- they can afford to start over, because they don't have far to fall.

+1

Sounds good. Like a bright future. That is where we want to go.

Bitcoin will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants; bitcoin will not give him a code of values, if he's evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he's evaded the choice of what to seek. Bitcoin will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his bitcoin replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his bitcoin.


Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth – the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his bitcoin, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that bitcoin corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his bitcoin? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Bitcoin is a living power that dies without its root. Bitcoin will not serve that mind that cannot match it.


When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns – or bitcoins. Take your choice – there is no other – and your time is running out.

I agree with all those statements. phelix's and molecular's .

I would say there will be some change mostly among rich people from conservative towards technologically open people.

agreed. It will bring plenty of advantages. Hard money for small countries, without having to worry about local speculation or rip of from the issuer (currently the usa is doing this job I think). But there are enough problems it will not solve and some people only think of rainbows.

no, we will have mining cartels that create a union to increase tx fees.


If the volume of taxed money is the same, I'm not aware of any worse way to tax than via inflation directed to the credit market. Any other taxation scheme ever created is economically less destructive than inflation. Basically, even if they keep milking us just as much, the way they milk does make a significant difference. All these brutal economic cycles which destroy so much capital, for instance, would not occur if it weren't for inflation directed to credit.
Plus, another quite destructive taxation type is that which attacks savings and investments, since these are the fuel for future economic growth. Income taxes attack savings and investments. Some argue that a world in which cryptocurrencies are the norm would render income taxation unpractical: http://falkvinge.net/2011/05/19/the-information-policy-case-for-flat-tax-and-basic-income/