Comment: That assumption might make

(See in situ)


That assumption might make

That assumption might make sense if Bitcoin is the property mainly of long term investors, speculators, hard money advocates, early adopters, libertarians.

But if BTC was the dominant market currency, it would be subject to the interests of the vendor too, the borrower, the mass consumer brainwashed by the media, also by the political system. Just like FRNs are. We are all FRN users, and collectively we decide monetary policy through elections. The positive inflation rate monetary policy is the product of that whole dialog and that collection of interests.

You can't have it both ways. If BTC is supposed to be the future of currency, you can't treat it as if it will always be controlled by a small group of committed advocates of hard money or of long term investors with specific monetary attitudes or private interests.

Its easy to imagine wealthy influential BTC owners wanting more coins to be available to mine if they have special access to computing power. Why are the incentives so different?