Damus
Globe99 · 4w
Bitcoin limits State action, which in turn limits the ability for people to own vast amounts of material wealth that isn't actually generating some kind of economic and/or social good. This is the "b...
Laeserin profile picture
The thing about the super-rich is that they control so many assets that they don't need to spend money for services.

The doctor or engineer can't press the rich for their services, to gain Bitcoin, because the rich own the title on their house, they own the drinking water, they own the roads, they own the hospitals, etc. They can simply threaten to throw the doctor out of the hospital, or fire the engineer or the baker, if he doesn't service them. If those service providers try to become independent, the asset owners can set up a private credential system and refuse to give him one or cut ties with anyone who hires uncredentialed workers.

Assets >>> Services because you need to use assets/capital to deliver services/labor, so asset owners always have the longer lever. Asset owners control the wealth _and_ the services.

Academics and other highly-skilled workers think they are buddies with the billionaires, and sneer at the unwashed masses around them, but they're actually just upper working class. If they don't get smart about that, soon, they'll be eaten by inequality, next.
❤️1🔥1😭1
Globe99 · 4w
You can "own" Bitcoin. There are limits to which you can "own" anything else, especially to the point of getting to the dystopian scenarios you describe of the wealthy "owning" the water, the hospitals, the roads, etc, in the *absence* of robust State intervention and protection on the behalf of t...