An ethical question? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

1119 sats \ 23 comments \ @guerratotal 11h bitcoin_beginners

In my last post, there was a good debate about how, by going into debt, we're actually contributing to the creation of more money in circulation, which ends up affecting the poorest people the most because inflation hits them hardest. That reflection made me think about another dilemma I want to put on the table so the wisest people at stacker.news can hear.

Let's imagine this scenario: let's suppose I manage to save and accumulate about 40 million sats, which today would be equivalent to approximately R$250,000—the value of a plot of land with a simple house. Now, instead of selling my sats to buy it for cash, I consider the following strategy:

I keep those sats saved, considering their future appreciation.
I take out a loan from the bank for the same amount (R$250,000).
I pay it off in fixed installments of about R$500 per month for 35 years.
Over time, due to inflation, those R$500 will have less and less purchasing power, and therefore I would be "paying less."
Meanwhile, my sats will likely appreciate in value, preserving (or even multiplying) my purchasing power.

In theory, it sounds like a win-win: on the one hand, I keep my sats, and on the other, I take advantage of the fiat system itself, which degrades over time. But here my ethical question arises:

-> Would it be right, knowing that I have the ability to buy that land with my sats, to still take out a loan and let inflation "work in my favor"? -> Or would I be repeating the same cycle I criticize: generating debt and contributing to the expansion of fiat money, indirectly affecting the poorest?

I'm very interested in hearing your perspectives, because beyond the financial mathematics, what's at stake here is also the Bitcoiner's ethics vis-à-vis the fiat system.

@DarthCoin @Bell_curve @Solomonsatoshi @grayruby @siggy47 @Scoresby

view all related items

131 sats \ 10 replies \ @Scoresby 10h

I'd keep the sats and buy the land with a loan.

Loans, even when from fractionally reserved banks, are a reasonable and useful tool in the world.

Tied up with the fiat world it's harder to see, but I disagree with the mindset that you are inflating away the poor guy by taking a loan.

102 sats \ 8 replies \ @DarthCoin 10h

I will invite to do an experiment:

go to a bank and ask for a loan
then ask if they can really prove they have those money, show the balances
even they can prove it, ask to be paid in cash, at the instant

The money you ask for the loan are created with your signature on that paper. You are the creator. Then ask yourself: if you create the money, why do you have to give them back + interest? Taking a loan from a fiat bank is creating a perpetual problem. Don't be that problem.

Fiat mindset = spend money you do not have on thing you don't really need Bitcoin mindset = spend money you have, only when is really needed

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @Scoresby 10h

In the context of buying a house, the money from the loan is usually paid out to the person you're buying the property from -- often very shortly after you sign for the loan. So, the money of the loan does exist and does move.

Maybe you could argue that if the person you are buying the property from has an account at the same bank that issues the loan, no money has to move. But in most of the real estate transactions I have been involved with, they aren't at the same bank. So where does that money come from?

When I sold a house, the people who bought it used a loan. I received real dollars in my bank account which I then used to do other things. Did the buyers of my house create the money out of thin air with their signature? and if they did, how was I able to use that money to buy real things in the world?

109 sats \ 5 replies \ @DarthCoin 10h

2 min video explaining it

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Scoresby 9h

If I owned a construction company and you bought a load of materials from me, I could send you an invoice for the materials. This invoice could likely be payable in something like 30 days.

What is the difference between the your signature that signs for the materials and your signature that signs for a mortgage?

They are both promises to pay. Now, we might say, the mortgage gets used as an asset on the bank's balance sheet. Maybe the bank even sells it. But the same is true for accounts receivable. My construction company counts your promissory note as an asset. Thinks makes good sense to me.

In the video, they talk about promissory notes as if they are not assets -- which I don't understand. A promise to pay clearly seems like an asset -- even if it's actual value is not the face value of the promise. If it's an asset, why shouldn't it be traded?

109 sats \ 3 replies \ @DarthCoin 9h

If you accept my promissory note, why we have to involve anyways a 3rd party like a bank in our trade?

Do the same to a bank and let's see what they say. Take a loan and then when is about to pay back, give them a piece of paper saying that you will promise to pay. Just a piece of paper that you give them over and over.

And talking about promissory notes, check this out

https://babylonobserver.com/mystery-paper/

And more documentaries about these aspects in my guide: https://darth-coin.github.io/beginner/5-stages-became-bitcoiner-en.html

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Scoresby 9h

Probably because evaluating the value of a promissory note is a very hard thing to do -- it can be risky.

If I know you well, maybe a promissory note suffices. I once lent my brother some money with such an arrangement.

The whole complicated banking system thing also probably exists to diffuse the risk. One loan to one individual is highly vulnerable to bad luck -- if something goes wrong, you get 100% of the downside.

With a third party sitting in the middle, any particular loan going bad doesn't spell doom. It seems similar to how insurance works.

I agree that banks do shitty things and get fat sucking off the teat of gov't, but to me this is a problem of over regulation, too big to fail, fdic, and Cantillon effects rather than a root problem of fractional reserve banking.

109 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 9h

I gave you more than enough material to study. Please take some time and watch them (some of them are long videos) and think about. Worth it.

view all 1 replies

102 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 10h

The bank doesn't have those money. You received money from other people that the bank took from them.

Very clear even on ECB site, it's a fucking scam and people just go with it, ignoring the consequences (then just complain because things are not going well... THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM).

If you want a more detailed explanation, watch the excellent documentary named: The history of money

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE88E9ICdiphYjJkeeLL2O09eJoC8r7Dc

7 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 10h

It's only worth it if the sats appreciation is more than the interest you'll pay. And that's a 'gamble'! I'd rather be debt-free.

23 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xbitcoiner 10h

Buy the land with sats and then start buying sats again!

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @guerratotal OP 10h

I don't really have the sats right now, although if I wanted to buy the land later, it would be good to buy land with Bitcoin when I had the money. What a great experience.

23 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 7h

I know some would disagree and I understand their position but I think it is perfectly ethical to exploit a rigged game that is designed to steal from you for your benefit.

23 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 7h

If our expectation is that fiat is dying and will be replaced by bitcoin, then it makes sense to keep your bitcoin and trade as much fiat for truly valuable stuff as possible.

I think of spending bitcoin as something like activism. I want to get to bitcoinization faster and I'm willing to support bitcoin merchants because it helps us get there.

If there's a bitcoin-only seller, I'd definitely consider buying from them. If it's someone who's just going to immediately exchange the bitcoin I pay them for fiat, then I'd rather keep my sats and short fiat by taking a mortgage.

23 sats \ 6 replies \ @DarthCoin 11h

No. Simply don't go back into debt. Just wait the day when you can pay directly with your sats that land (IF you really need it).

NEVER GO BACK TO DEBT., especially in fiat debt. Taking a loan with your BTC as collateral is also super dumb. You will get rekt. Please watch again that short video I sent you yesterday from El Concursante and think again.

DEBT IS A FIAT MINDSET.

I take advantage of the fiat system itself, which degrades over time

No, you are not taking any advantage, you became part of the PROBLEM.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @adlai 8h

DEBT IS A FIAT MINDSET.

May I sharpen your prejudices, dear maximalist?

Admittedly, your trolling is much more amusing when your coarse vocabulary and blunted interpretations all conspire to accelerate your loquacious unstacking, however there are occasionally subtler points that might be worth considering; for example, could some wiser future generation consider coins held in a baroque timelock mechanism as debt, held by the verifying nodes and owed to the allowed spenders?

Suddenly, debt is no longer a dirty word, if it is allowed to have a healthier definition outside of the undrainable swamp.

7 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 8h

go away dumb shitGPT...

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @CliffBadger 8h

Any acquisition of fiat means someone further up the river took out a loan to allocate money in your direction. We're always leveraging the old system, whether you print the cash directly for yourself or someone else prints it to pay you.

1000 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 8h

your brain is rotten to the core from fiat brainwashing. YNGMI

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @guerratotal OP 10h

te convertiste en parte del PROBLEMA

That's actually what I've been thinking about since yesterday, I didn't have that thought until yesterday, it's been good to see the debate, it's opened my eyes and thoughts a little more.

30 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 10h

it's all about changing your mentality (from fiat to bitcoin). Then you will see the world totally different and more simple. Some people still can't do that and that's why they are still trapped like little mouse in a wheel.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 9h

For an ethical question you have an ethical answer from revl.hodl