в защиту миллиардеров
Jan. 18th, 2021 10:26 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gluckqТребования раскулачить миллиардеров весьма популяны среди плебеев. Рационализировать их можно как угодно, однако зиждятся они всегда на одной и той же эмоции -- зависти. Исключений не бывает. И поэтому мне всегда приятно наткнуться на хорошие аргументы против этого безобразия. Здесь речь идёт о крипте, однако некоторые аргументы справедливы и для других отраслей народного хозяйства.
========
Some people want to tax crypto-billionairs because "they did not build that", and "they should give back to the society" which helped them to achieve success. This is very wrong on so many levels:
The state did not help to build cryptocurrencies. On the contrary, it demonized cryptocurrencies and obstructed their development. The states consider cryptocurrencies immoral, and in some cases illegal. It is therefore absurd to claim any share in something "immoral". Moreover, it would be like a bully, who used to kick Satoshi Nakamoto when he was a kid, to claim part of his wealth because he "helped to keep Satoshi in good shape", or simply because the poor bully is in need.
The success of cryptocurrencies was due to the failure of the state-enforced financial system. This failure should not be rewarded in any way. Cryptocurrencies are part of the new technological revolution. Decentralized systems prevail because of their supriority over the centralized ones. It would be utterly absurd to cannibalize new technology in order to save the obsolete system. It's like forcing the car manufacturers to help the horse-driver associations. It would neither save the old system, nor would it do any "justice" to the "disadvanaged" horse-drivers. And it is completely irrelevant if horse-driver unions run some charities.
The centralized state systems used to rely on coersion for so long, that they lost any desire to innovate. The burocrats still use the stone age technologies in government, whereas in any other sphere we use 21st century tech. Blockchain participation is voluntary, and therefore morally superior. If the old coersive system does not want to innovate, we should let it die, and make place for something better.
The governments can coerce the most powerful man in the world, but crypto is designed in such a way, that it's impossible to coerce even the least powerful man in the world. Want to confiscate the assets of Satoshi Nakamoto? Then go ahead, what are you waiting for? Μολὼν λαβέ!
========
Some people want to tax crypto-billionairs because "they did not build that", and "they should give back to the society" which helped them to achieve success. This is very wrong on so many levels:
The state did not help to build cryptocurrencies. On the contrary, it demonized cryptocurrencies and obstructed their development. The states consider cryptocurrencies immoral, and in some cases illegal. It is therefore absurd to claim any share in something "immoral". Moreover, it would be like a bully, who used to kick Satoshi Nakamoto when he was a kid, to claim part of his wealth because he "helped to keep Satoshi in good shape", or simply because the poor bully is in need.
The success of cryptocurrencies was due to the failure of the state-enforced financial system. This failure should not be rewarded in any way. Cryptocurrencies are part of the new technological revolution. Decentralized systems prevail because of their supriority over the centralized ones. It would be utterly absurd to cannibalize new technology in order to save the obsolete system. It's like forcing the car manufacturers to help the horse-driver associations. It would neither save the old system, nor would it do any "justice" to the "disadvanaged" horse-drivers. And it is completely irrelevant if horse-driver unions run some charities.
The centralized state systems used to rely on coersion for so long, that they lost any desire to innovate. The burocrats still use the stone age technologies in government, whereas in any other sphere we use 21st century tech. Blockchain participation is voluntary, and therefore morally superior. If the old coersive system does not want to innovate, we should let it die, and make place for something better.
The governments can coerce the most powerful man in the world, but crypto is designed in such a way, that it's impossible to coerce even the least powerful man in the world. Want to confiscate the assets of Satoshi Nakamoto? Then go ahead, what are you waiting for? Μολὼν λαβέ!
no subject
Date: 2021-01-18 03:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2021-01-18 04:26 pm (UTC)чтобы один час в год сэкономить.no subject
Date: 2021-01-18 07:10 pm (UTC)The world spends almost 2x more energy watching Netflix (140 TWh) than mining Bitcoin (78 TWh). I propose to ban Netflix. At least with Bitcoin you get something valuable.
no subject
Date: 2021-01-18 04:14 pm (UTC)Отлично!
no subject
Date: 2021-01-19 08:28 am (UTC)