Conversation

Notices

1. Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 05:19:27 UTC Hallå Kitteh
   @dtluna He is saying "[here's what Hayek says in brief]", and you may be correct if you're saying that's not what Hayek says at all, but I wouldn't know.
   
   Either way, I don't find the article as controversial as you do. I think I need to put on some Tom Woods and snort some praxx first. ;-)
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 02:10:47 UTC Hallå Kitteh
     > If this does in fact work, it will be a fun twist-ending to the long tradition of alchemy: we have finally turned tin into gold, not by physically creating gold, but by turning it into ASIC miners and convincing each other that its output should be valued as a gold-like commodity.
     
     Nice.
     
     https://paulbutler.org/archives/stop-dragging-hayek-into-bitcoin/
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 02:57:57 UTC Hallå Kitteh
     @dtluna Do you disagree that usability for paying for taxes creates value, or do you disagree that value stability is an advantage for a medium for accounting and exchange of value?
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 04:48:21 UTC Hallå Kitteh
     @dtluna I read http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Regression_theorem and it makes sense, but it doesn't have to be the sole explanation for why money has value. In fact, any single and definite explanation is likely to be wrong.
     
     The monopoly on force not beating you up has a pretty high value, they put a price tag on it that is probably lower than that value, and they require you to pay it in their currency. This is an excellent source of demand, and it is regulated based on your actual available resources and everybody else's, as a share of the economy. I don't see how that couldn't give it a pretty stable value unless you happen to be the world reserve currency, or you mess up by providing ridiculous supply -- then other factors become dominant.
     
     This guy is not the first guy to mention the idea that taxation creates value in money even without general legal tender laws, and just because it's not part of Mises's one explanation for the value of money doesn't mean it doesn't have a basis in reality.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 04:52:44 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     in reply to
     @dtluna Applying the regression idea to bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is interesting, because they all have the root of their value in the near past, and then we can see how the expectation of future value controls the value of today, informed by past value.
     
     So Mises explains the value of Bitcoin quite well, this guy is mostly saying that Hayek doesn't even though people claim he does.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 04:54:50 UTC Hallå Kitteh
     @dtluna Sure! And Newton's laws explain force, energy and movement. But under what edge conditions and to what degree?
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 04:55:12 UTC Hallå Kitteh
     @dtluna I couldn't say, because I don't understand Hayek probably.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 04:55:29 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     in reply to
     @dtluna ... nor properly. :-)
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 05:06:36 UTC Hallå Kitteh
     @dtluna The pegged HKD and SGD are in one aspect exactly the kind of money he is talking about, except they track the USD instead of some non-currency commodity.
     
     Mises explains them of course, but only because his explanation (as communicated by that one article) is so generic as to explain everything, "[and then market forces come in and, you know, all that]". Government coercion is one market force, a massive monetary reserve is another.
     
     Mises grounds "market forces all the way down" in barter and something that originally had intrinsic value, and that may be a good historic description of how some money originally happened, but there's no reason it would be the full explanation why all money happens.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 05:13:59 UTC Hallå Kitteh
     @dtluna Let's pull this all the way back to the top.
     
     This guy is saying "[Some people claim Bitoin is somehow related to Hayek's ducat, but the ducat had a regulated value and Bitcoin doesn't, so there is no relation.]".
     
     That's the whole article. That's it.
     
     The article doesn't claim any specifics of where money came from or comes from and it doesn't analyze any theory, all it says is that Bitcoin is not a currency created by a bank, which regulates it to hold some particular value, so people should shut up about Bitcoin and Hayek.
     
     And your response to that is "[But muh Mises]".
     
     Sorry, that's just a non sequitur.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 05:16:57 UTC Hallå Kitteh

     in reply to
     @dtluna Cryptos that *are* something like the ducat are e.g. the Makercoin or Nubits, but like the HKD and SGD they are tracking a currency basket and not something like a CPI.
   • Hallå Kitteh (clacke@social.heldscal.la)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 05:19:45 UTC Hallå Kitteh
     @dtluna Consumer Price Index
   • The God of Synthetic A Priori 🏴 (dtluna@libertarianism.club)'s status on Monday, 13-Nov-2017 05:19:56 UTC The God of Synthetic A Priori 🏴

     in reply to
     @clacke snort praxx fam
     it's good shite
     Hallå Kitteh repeated this.