Exo_Tartarus

That's exactly what I've been thinking. Of course the inflation target would be arbitrary, but once agreed upon and baked into the blockchain logic it could maintain itself based on some parameter or set of parameters

I wonder how that train it? The network is built into the silicon so I don't see how training could occur after its creation... But maybe they build a simulated network and train it then construct a faithful hardware representation

People need to work not because of inflation, but because they get a fixed amount of money and spend most of it on things they want.

Not only that, but wages largely track inflation so your argument fails.

Inflation can be properly managed by responsible central banks. It's not really a problem.

Also "wage slavery" is perpetuated by private companies not governments, so not sure how you aim to eliminate that by killing governments.

Have efforts been made to produce a cryptocurrency that is compatible with monetary policy? Such that supply can increase or decrease either on command or naturally?

Governments should make it illegal because governments need to have control over the money supply.

We need taxation. We need monetary policy. The Bitcoin obsessives think these are bad things. No. They are very important and good things.

Well the author starts out by saying 15% of Economics Professors are women. Then says

"Across all the years, only 18% of the authors are female. This disparity between male and female authors alone exemplifies the gender gap."

Which is in line with the previous acknowledgment, so there is no additional conspiracy at play, just a result of the gender composition of the field.

But then the statistic about collaboration.

Men tend to collaborate with other men, just as women tend to collaborate with other women. The natural tendency for people to collaborate with people like themselves is universal.

So don't blame male economists for collaborating with other males slightly more than with females. It's a natural human tendency to do so. Women are more likely to collaborate with other women.

I worked in the administration of a flagship state university. Instead of spending millions of dollars on salaries for bogus administrative positions like 'Senior Vice President of Strategic Initiatives', put that money towards grad student salaries and bringing down general tuition.

These are just words that don't mean anything without a concrete implementation plan. Owning a piece of America... What is America? Is it US based companies? Is it physical property and capital? These things are already owned by people. Everything worth being owned is already owned by someone or some corporate structure. Who is going to rearrange and adjust all these existing ownership structures to introduce joint ownership by the American people? Why would we expect existing stakeholders to want anything to do with such a plan?

Silliness.

That may be true, but wouldn't that not affect my argument?

The assumptions I'm making are that most people drink water and non water, and the non water they drink is not going to be more than 3 to 4 drinks (cups/bottles) per day, and that people drinking coffee are already filling their quota of non water drinks by drinking coffee so they don't drink sugary drinks.

Just like milk, there is probably a sub population of people whose body chemistry is not compatible with caffeine or coffee. You may fall into that category.