Comment

Comment by throwawash

>If your car breaks down, you won't let it get fixed right now but next month because it's cheaper?

Which car? The one I don't have because I'm saving to buy two next year? You're changing the example I gave into something else entirely. If you're saying that drastically reducing or eliminating the purchase of everything that is not absolutely essential to have won't be bad for the economy, or if it is, it won't be bad for society in the long term -- then say that.

>> If know I can use the same money to buy two cars next year instead of buying a car this year, I will not buy a car this year.

>You sure?

Yes. (I lived someplace where there was a ridiculous price markup for electronic goods. I needed a new phone and laptop but I refused to buy them because of the ridiculous prices. Then the currency crashed a year later and I immediately bought them by exchanging US dollars before they could markup the prices or pause sales. I ended up getting them for less than the US price incidentally. Otherwise I would have waited until the old ones were preventing me from doing essential tasks. This is same for cars.)

"People consume because there's a limitless desire to consume" he says. And when Fridman calls him on it, he says yes well people economize due to constraints no matter what.

>same money, next year worth 2x is dramatically exaggerated.

Well yes that’s the point. aren’t we talking about a bitcoin economy in the end after all? If a transition from fiat to bitcoin standard starts happening, this is the path its going to take until the price stabilizes, no? People doubled their money in half a year in 2021 after all.

EDIT: his odd comment that he is migrating from anarchism towards supporting benign dictatorships doesn't exact endear him either.

parent throwawash 4 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton