Hmm, even though 41% think crypto is in a bubble, nobody seems to have good ideas for how to measure bubbliness. In stock bubbles, P/E is a good metric. In debt crises, debt-to-tax-revenue is a good metric. What the heck do you measure here?https://twitter.com/vgr/status/951339822739734528 …
-
-
Replying to @vgr
Cryptocurrency is incompatible with a functioning macro economy, which requires institutions that can regulate the money supply. If it gets too large, it must be shut off. The only reason that is not happening may be that some folks involved with regulation are still invested.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Why is it necessary for institutions to regulate the money supply?
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @EidoSearch @vgr
Because (a) the amount you make is on average proportional to the amount of money you can invest, so money tends to concentrate in very few hands and the circulation gets stuck, (b) non-synchronized economies require flexible exchange rates.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Do you think (a) and (b) could be handled by software, i.e. rules put in place that would accomplish what human & gov't-sponsored central bankers do? If so, innovation in money could come from individuals and private & public institutions. Let the best coin(s) win.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Government and regulation are literally the same thing. Private parties with power and incentives to regulate are a form of government, just an autocratic one. Competing government does not work, so one has to give. What form of government do you want?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
A scheme where those in control cannot easily influence the usefulness of a coin in an undesirable way but still allows for innovation. And one that can correct problems, which are inevitable. Whatever form of gov't that takes.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Popper: ‘Who should rule’ begs for an authoritarian answer, e.g. the ‘best’, the ‘wisest’, the ‘people’, or the ‘majority'. This political question should be replaced by: “How can we organize our political institutions so that bad or incompetent rulers cannot do too much damage?”pic.twitter.com/ODOgBHHQLi
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This question has an empirical answer, not an ideological one. Look at well-functioning countries. While it is hard to set incentives for good, error correcting governance the larger the units get, absence of governance tends to be disastrous.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I agree it's unlikely to work out. But the same empirical argument could have been made at the birth of Enlightenment values and to deflate the unstable, untested political institutions that followed. We might lack the knowledge of how to make it work...but we might create it too
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
You are right, most people did not foresee the horrors if the French revolution, but despite the terror it paid off. For many other revolutions, like the Khmer Rouge or the Chinese cultural revolution, not so much. I hope we can have good models and simulations, not ideals first.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.