reply on: The Fed’s ‘Gain of Function’ Monetary Policy (WSJ, Bessent) \ stacker news ~econ

pull down to refresh

42 sats \ 6 replies \ @optimism OP 6 Sep \ parent \ on: The Fed’s ‘Gain of Function’ Monetary Policy (WSJ, Bessent) econ

I think you're right, but I'd argue that narrower mandate is a step in the right direction if you're an evolutionist rather than a revolutionist though, right? If they would end the Fed today with a pen stroke, then what? Panic?

The establishment profiting off policy at the cost of starters that missed out is in abstract how I've felt about the ZIRP stuff (which fwiw was even worse in the EU than in the US - I was endlessly pitched on taking loans every time I needed my banker to take care of something for me (and scolded about Bitcoin)) and I like that I can find agreement with Bessent, whom I generally don't appreciate much.

100 sats \ 5 replies \ @Undisciplined 6 Sep

I'm all for whatever movement in the right direction we can get.

Yes, there would be an enormous acute panic if the Fed were abolished. But, then the economic correction could really begin. Everything else is some form of kicking the can down the road.

42 sats \ 4 replies \ @optimism OP 6 Sep

The counterargument to that is that you'd create enormous weakness in the West, and in the East, I'd be surprised if there isn't a constantly updated playbook of how to exploit such a situation, that will be guaranteed to be executed.

The main question on my mind these past years has been: is Bitcoin still for the people like it was the first decade? Or is it, since Foundry/ETFs/Treasury scams, no longer just for the people? If the former, then honeybadger dgaf about the printers. If the latter, then honeybadger better stay in shape and find ways to actively decouple from the establishment.

100 sats \ 2 replies \ @daolin 21h

Bitcoin protects its users if they know how to use it. It doesn't judge whether you're a high ranking official bailing on the old system, or a former victim of it that never supported it, it only demands that you submit to the new rules.

My guess is that normies scramble for the ETF's at higher prices and with higher leverage until a dip in price triggers an issue with withdrawals. The price crashes below $1 million and critics gloat that Bitcoin failed.

8 sats \ 1 reply \ @optimism OP 21h

More likely their ETF IOUs turns out to have been a fractional reserve vehicle. Bankers be banking.

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @daolin 19h

You and I know that. I was thinking of what the vague and misleading headlines will look like.

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 6 Sep

I'm confident that it's the latter. Early on, bitcoin was too irrelevant to meaningfully be "for the people". Now, it's too relevant to just be "for the people".

I don't think it matters, though. It's the tool that will bring down the corrupt monetary system and they can't change that fact.