←back to thread

194 points aorloff | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.411s | source
Show context
throw0101d ◴[] No.44467342[source]
Personally I think that this can be considered on the "bug" side of Bitcoin's finite number coins: if, over time, they are lost, then there's a smaller quantity† of currency that is useable to actually do stuff with.

This can make the 'rate of deflation' that occurs worse:

* https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Deflationary_spiral

* https://isps.yale.edu/news/blog/2014/06/the-perils-of-bitcoi...

* https://crypto.bi/deflationary/

† I am aware of satoshis.

replies(8): >>44467392 #>>44467410 #>>44467413 #>>44467486 #>>44467668 #>>44467917 #>>44469713 #>>44469776 #
serial_dev ◴[] No.44467392[source]
When I listen to Bitcoin discussions, one of the advantages people bring up is that there is a limited number of it and you can’t just “print” more.

Considering this, while it is true that all this makes deflation worse, I’d assume most bitcoin hodlers would not mind this.

replies(3): >>44467652 #>>44467687 #>>44470300 #
strogonoff ◴[] No.44470300[source]
It is under-appreciated that inflation actually is desirable in a working economy.

Look at it this way. If your money (in money form) is worth less tomorrow than today, you are incentivised to spend it, thus fueling economic activity of all sorts (from going out and buying a drink to buying a car, traveling, investing). If your money is worth more tomorrow, then you are incentivised to tighten your belt and not spend for as long as you can. At scale, this negatively affects production, economic mobility, and so forth; the rich get richer and hoard the money. I do not believe any of today’s economies can be healthy and competitive (or even functional) with a deflationary currency.

replies(5): >>44470411 #>>44470809 #>>44471639 #>>44472354 #>>44472762 #
rufus_foreman ◴[] No.44472354[source]
>> If your money is worth more tomorrow, then you are incentivised to tighten your belt and not spend for as long as you can. At scale, this negatively affects production, economic mobility, and so forth

By your logic, bonds are bad for the economy.

replies(1): >>44472879 #
strogonoff ◴[] No.44472879[source]
Care to write more than a sentence and explain your logic?
replies(1): >>44473325 #
rufus_foreman ◴[] No.44473325[source]
When you invest in bonds, they are worth more tomorrow than they are today. So you would have the same incentive to put off spending as long as you could as you would owning a deflationary currency. If that is bad for the economy when you're holding a deflationary currency, it should be bad for the economy when you're holding an appreciating asset.
replies(1): >>44477632 #
1. strogonoff ◴[] No.44477632[source]
I don’t think bonds are currency. You buy bonds, you spend money, now your money is doing something in the economy as opposed to if you just held on to it.