Earlier this month, the European Central Bank (ECB) published a paper In which the authors claim that the existence of Bitcoin could make non-holders and latecomers poorer.
Specifically, he wrote:
“Since Bitcoin does not increase the productive capacity of the economy, the consequences of the assumed continued increase in value are necessarily redistributive, i.e. the wealth effect on the consumption of early Bitcoin holders can only come at the expense of the consumption of the rest of society. “
This attracted the ire of many Bitcoiners, including Frank… but isn’t this essentially hyperbitcoinization? If Bitcoin Becomes the World’s Money, Become HODLers nouveau riche elite Whereas fiat bag holders would effectively break, right?
I think the real essence lies in the first part of the quote. Many Bitcoiners, including me, believe that Bitcoin is actually would like To increase the productive capacity of the economy. (There are several reasons for this, but a big one is that it gets rid of the Cantillon effect of fiat currency, which largely benefits governments.)
If it were possible to swap all the world’s fiat currency for Bitcoin in 2009, so that everyone gets a representative share (thus no redistributive effect), that might arguably be better… but ECB economists would do that still Be against it: They don’t see the benefits of Bitcoin at first sight.
Since there was no way for Satoshi Nakamoto to swap everyone’s fiat currency for Bitcoin even if he wanted to, it makes sense that he launched the project just in case, giving anyone a chance to get access to this better money. They are allowed to adopt the same as and when it suits their individual risk appetite.
If ECB economists believe there is a better way to distribute this new form of money, I would suggest they use their Cantillon-funded salaries to write a paper about it. He,
This article is a TakeThe opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BTC Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.
