jonkho

A broken hydraulic if that. Interest rates have been pushed down and stayed down over the decades.

Which gold standard? Bretton woods wasn’t it (only state actors could redeem). Literally the history of boom and busts are from the excesses of money printing.

Opportunity abounds in the defi crypto space. Being a liquidity pool provider on a usd stable coin pair yields ~40% apy currently[1].

[1]https://app.beefy.finance/

Do you think you may be unsuccessful and get blown away by their own security apparatus?

Yet another reminder: looting perhaps already started elsewhere in other parts of the country. Also the Rodney king riots had a precedent of looting. Learning from past lessons would be wise.

Also as you imply, why would being treated poorly by a public servant (the police) justify the looting of an unrelated private party? It doesn’t. One is not a justified cause for the other.

*wide-spread looting lasting for days and days on private businesses. Tally the dollar amounts and do the math. I stand by my point 100%.

Reminder: BLM protests had wide-scale looting. Looters breaking into luxury stores and hauling off with anything not bolted down. Not the same scope. Not the same standard.

Not until the USD loses reserve status. Until then, it’s cheaper to print and export these USD tokens for imports rather than to exert labor to make stuff to trade for imports.

Hard assets such as real estate and buildings are hardly considered virtual. More real than printed up dollars I’d say.

Because the self interest is to have cheap food. No majority would vote to have high menu prices.

Imagine a restaurant whose menu and prices were voted on by the people at large. What would happen? The menu would look deranged and prices would be too darn low for the restaurant to function in an economically viable manner. The whole restaurant operation would collapse! Who said democracy is a good way to bring about stability and prosperity to an organization/operation in the long run?

The agents in a system tends to work in the way the system incentivizes them. Understand the forces of these incentives to predict behavior.

Victimhood need not apply here. On balance, your employer decides the benefits of using a Mac outweighs the cons. On balance, you decide the benefits of staying on the job outweighs the cons of using a Mac. The world is not perfect and is not meant to be. You however do get to weigh your choices, make your tradeoffs and act on it.

Right. Your's a textbook answer to the textbook question. What are the causes of bank panics? Who are the winners and losers of this inflationary intervention/"reduction" of recessions? If the winners of these policies continue to keep winning, is this good for society at large? You don't seem to see the big picture. Product of one-step thinking. But my contributions to this thread ends here.

Says you. Like all interventions, there are winners AND losers from this type of intervention.

Money is a social construct. This social construct is valuable. Why? Because this construct solves the problems associated with bartering by allowing us to frictionlessly keep track of who owes what and how much to whom (claims on goods and services). This social construct can use tokens such as dollar bills or gold, for example, as the abstraction for the ledger of record. There are problems using dollars and gold as the abstraction. Dollars (or fiat) violates our common sensibilities as a record on claims on goods and services. The problem is it can be printed without regard and used to extract goods and labor from you (if you choose to accept it). Some people would consider this fundamentally unfair because they are trading their product of their efforts for something that is created infinitely without effort by the privileged few (i.e. something for nothing). Gold is better in this regard but as a money abstraction it is also leaky because it takes up physical space and has transportation and storage inconveniences. Bitcoin is better by having none of these issues which makes it more relatively suitable for the social construct of money (again, it is the social construct of money that is valuable - for which bitcoin happens to be better suited than the current alternatives).

From the macroeconomic perspective, since the US dollar had reserve status and unlimited foreign demand, it just becomes more efficient to print and export dollar bills and import real goods than to actually exert physical labor to produce goods to export and balance trade. Once this realization sets in, the optimal game theory outcome is to reorganize the economy around this structure of print-and-export-dollars debt-based system. Debt only becomes a problem when other people don’t want to hold it anymore.

How about law as a subscription service? The maxim is if it has value in people’s eyes, then people should be willing to pay a monthly fee for it, voluntarily and without coercion.

The latest news that the majority of young adults in US live with parents.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-...

FYI: Student debt is not discharged by bankruptcy in the United States.

If the average worker had to pay for those that didn’t via increased taxes of $1000 a month (to balance that budget), I cannot see that happening without a revolt. Would you even agree to pay an extra $500 per month in taxes to pay for someone else’s living expenses? Most workers are living almost paycheck to paycheck as is.

I imagine for most people, and I’m talking about the ones that would continue keep at their their existing job, if there was an extra $2000/month spare cash coming in or $4000 for a couple, it wouldn’t be a difficult stretch of imagination to say they would spend the money on the two most immediately obvious things: 1) upgrade their car 2) upgrade their shelter. If everyone is now affording a new $1000/month car payment and a $2000/month in extra rent budget, how would this ultimately not lead to people trying to outbid each other and cause inflation, especially rent? Wouldn’t rent or mortgage payments essentially rise to absorb this new quantity of money? Would this be essentially a transfer of wealth to landlords?

Fair enough, but I’m more concerned if UBI turned out to be a bad policy, would it be repealed? Practically speaking, the government has a poor track record of back pedaling on bad policies once they are in place.

Here is an idea: let’s have colleges themselves act as the guarantor for a student loan. This way the incentives are aligned; if the colleges are poor judge of a students talent (and admit too many low performers), or having teaching standards are too weak will stand to lose money when a student cannot secure a job and repay their loans.

Couldn’t the spike in nyc deaths be inflated due to the standard operating procedure of using mechanical ventilators for which 9 of 10 patients die [1]? Wasn’t there a big fuss (several articles posted here) about how mechanical ventilators were overused when less invasive methods produced better outcomes, therefore reducing mortality[2]?

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-22/almost-9-...

[2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ventil...

Sounds like mincing words. Still you have not provided sources to support your assumptions whatsoever.

Sources? I would disagree, reports show that by not intubating, outcomes are dramatically improved. [1][2]

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-22/almost-9-...

[2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ventil...

Also, how does this affect the actual death rate numbers in NYC if unnecessary deaths caused by outcomes of ventilator use are factored into the picture? Could change the picture quite drastically.

No only that, there’s plenty of evidence showing virus + mechanical ventilators leading to deaths that virus + simpler interventions otherwise wouldn’t. How many deaths were actually unnecessary and preventable[1][2]? I suppose under ordinary circumstances, these deaths could be considered medical malpractice?

[1]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-22/almost-9-...

[2]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ventil...

The difference is that a physical process makes specific physical state changes to the physical world while an emulation does not. A computer simulation of an ice cube melting does not and cannot make state changes to the physical world as a physical ice cube can. For example, if you wanted to chill your beverage, dropping an ice-cubed sized computer running the algorithmic emulation of an of an ice cube melting will not chill your drink no matter how perfect your emulation is, while a physical ice cube can perform that physical state change of your drink.

Is consciousness a physical phenomenon? If it's not physical, then what is it? Is it an algorithm? Well, for one, there is no precedent. Nothing else in the material world is purely an algorithm...except maybe a computer running an algorithm...