This is the craziest thing I've ever read:
[my emphasis added in italics, otherwise copy-pasted from the paper. note that mathematical symbols do not copy-paste. however the rest is verbatim copied from the paper]
  • Now add bitcoin and again consider a government that targets a permanent primary deficit that is a constant fraction of aggregate consumption. Government policy is now a continuous function of the price of government stock and the price of bitcoin. It is easy to ensure that policy is consistent with a targeted steady state primary deficit. But we can now prove that, no matter what continuous Markov policy the government uses to rule out a zero price of its stock, there is always another steady state. In that steady state r􀀀g = 0 and the market values of government stock and bitcoin are both strictly positive. The fact that r 􀀀g = 0 means that the government must again be balancing its budget. So the presence of a private-sector security that, just like government stock, is a claim to no real resources introduces a new balanced budget trap. The economy will have at least two steady states. In addition, there are equilibrium trajectories that start near the balanced budget trap and converge to the targeted steady state.
  • The fact that we restrict attention to Markov policies that are continuous in prices is crucial for this result. Without the continuity assumption, the government could adopt a policy that uniquely implements a targeted permanent primary deficit whenever the price of bitcoin is zero, and switch, abruptly, to a primary surplus policy whenever the price of bitcoin is positive. That switch would turn government stock into a Lucas tree and force r 􀀀 g > 0, which is inconsistent with bitcoin trading at a positive price. This rules out any equilibrium in which the price of bitcoin is positive. Another way to put this is: discontinuous Markov strategies can mimic the trigger strategy proposed by Brunnermeier, Merkel, and Sannikov [2023].
[In other words, our models work when Bitcoin is worthless. Wow OK got it.]
  • Given a need to finance government purchases equal to a certain fraction of aggregate consumption, the policy that maximizes utility in our economy (and also its growth rate) is for the government to charge very large consumption taxes. This implies very large permanent primary surpluses and a unique equilibrium, and it turns government stock into a very large Lucas tree that eliminates almost all idiosyncratic risk. But large consumption taxes may not be feasible, and then a permanent primary deficit may be the best the government can do, provided the equilibrium does indeed deliver the targeted steady state. To achieve this, the government could simply make bitcoin illegal.
[Read this again. And then a 2nd, then a 3rd time. To achieve the models we in the government want, we need very large consumption taxes: in order to ensure that government 'stock' is risk-free. However short of those large consumption taxes, a permanent primary deficit is the best course of action. But this means or necessitates making Bitcoin illegal. Outrageous]
  • Our final result says that, short of full prohibition, the government could use a continuous Markov policy and combine it with a tax on bitcoin.
[When government says "full prohibition" they mean a full, outright ban. We call that a clue.]
  • Let r 􀀀 g < 0 be the difference between the real interest rate and the growth rate of the economy in the steady state that allows the government to run its targeted permanent primary deficit. We show that a flow tax on every unit of bitcoin equal to or in excess of 􀀀(r􀀀g) times the price of bitcoin rules out all equilibria in which bitcoin trades at a positive price.
[Which means we'll just tax Bitcoin more and more till it's worthless. Our models only work when Bitcoin is worthless.]
  • The underlying reason is that 􀀀(r􀀀g) times the market value of bitcoin is precisely the steady state flow of income that a private sector entity can earn when it issues new bitcoin in the same way as the government issues new stock to finance a primary deficit.
[What the Fuck are they talking about? Government deficits cannot be unlimited forever.]
  • These results suggest that a legal prohibition of bitcoin or a tax on bitcoin are forms of financial repression that may be useful when the ability of the government to use consumption taxes is limited.
[This needs to go before congress because it is outright, outrageously unconstitutional. Financial repression being useful? What?]
  • 4.4.2 An Open Market Operation An even simpler way to uniquely implement S  < 0 at L is for the government to buy up all of the supply of bitcoin.
  • For any s0􀀀 > 0, the government can print the amount of stock it will take to buy up all bitcoin.
[Print money, buy bitcoin. Wow great plan]
  • From t = 0 onwards, we then have an economy without bitcoin, and we already know that the government can uniquely implement its targeted primary deficit in that case.
[In other words we'll ban Bitcoin and then get the economy that 'we' want because we can't balance the budget or tax citizens enough to make it all work!]
  • If we interpret this continuation equilibrium to mean that not only st > 0 but also pt = 0 for all t - 0, then it is optimal for consumers to sell all of their bitcoin holdings in the ex ante trading period.
[What if we don't want to sell you ******* idiots. This is outrageous. Ex ante trading period WHAT]
  • So any combination of s0􀀀 > 0 and p0􀀀   0 will be part of an equilibrium, and subsequently the government will be able to uniquely implement its desired steady state.
[It's desired steady state? This is supposed to be a free-market economy.]
[Last sentence in this paragraph]
  • Of course, any other type of useless pieces of paper still lying around could now take on the same role as bitcoin.
[In other words, AFTER WE'VE BANNED IT OR TAXED IT TO DEATH, the peasants CAN GO PLAY WITH THEIR TOYS.
OUT-FUCKING-RAGEOUS. Bitcoin is banned or 'bought in the trading period' after which it's worthless... then "useless pieces of paper lying around can replace it" BECAUSE it allows us to continue INFINITE DEFICITS.
This kind of shit should go before congress this is NOT how I want tax-dollars spent.]
  • 6 Conclusion When there are laws against private-sector bubble assets, it is easy for the government to design policies that uniquely implement a permanent primary deficit, assuming there is enough idiosyncratic risk to make such deficits possible in the first place. An outright ban is not necessary if the government can tax private-sector bubble assets at the rate 􀀀(r 􀀀 g) > 0.
[You interpret this how you want.]
Share this with your friends and family.
tl;dr We can only pretend that fiat is working if there is no alternative.
reply
i know exactly. bitcoin breaks their models of infinite deficits so bitcoin is taxed (best case) as much as necessary to 'fix the model'
or possibly banned or 'bought back' because it would be 'best for consumers'. i can barely believe this paper exists.
reply
Yeah, it is very wild. Thanks for the great write up. Have you looked at the recent ECB paper about bitcoin?
reply
yes i skimmed over it. i'll look it over again... but this paper goes much further. if it were from a random think tank then oh well whatever... but it's from a US central bank sometimes this is how these things "justify" policy
reply
This should be all over nostr, twitter, stacker news, and reddit (not necessarily this post of course but absolutely this paper)
reply
no, is pure garbage
reply
yes, it's garbage sir. and it's an outright attack. read it at the source yourself. fortunately a few news outlets have picked it up
reply
They're starting to realize just how fucked they are. We have to brace ourselves, because they won't go down easily.
As you pointed out, one of their "solutions", buying up all the bitcoin supply, isn't possible since we aren't going to sell to them.
Similarly, a de facto ban will not work and bitcoin's purchasing power will never go to zero. It's a global currency, dipshits. It'll still have positive purchasing power, even if all law-abiding Americans stop using it.
reply
They can make it uncomfortable to use in any above board way but like drug prohibition this is just going to create a ginormous black market. The question for me is would the US do something like invade another 'sovereign' to inject such discomfort.
reply
They likely will do both of those things.
What they're starting to pick up on is that it's either us or them (and there's no way to completely get rid of us).
It's like playing out the rest of a chess match after the end is already decided.
reply
231 sats \ 5 replies \ @000w2 21 Oct
"But this result fails if there are also useless pieces of paper (bitcoin for short) that can be traded."
These bitcoins seem pretty useful if they can stop infinite debt slavery just by existing.
reply
"here are no markets that allow consumers to share this risk. But there is government stock that is risk-free. And there is a supply of useless pieces of paper (perhaps old dollar bills, or maybe non-fungible tokens) for which we will use the shorthand bitcoin.9 10"
"The shorthand bitcoin" eh
Your taxes dollars at work 💩🔥
I have a quick question. Why aren't the authors cleaning french fry machines at macdonalds?
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @000w2 21 Oct
Why aren't the authors cleaning french fry machines at macdonalds?
Rent seeking parasites don't really understand the concept of work.
reply
basically the paper is saying... there or in another paragraph that the only 'risk free' asset for 'risk averse' consumers should be government debt. bitcoin cannot exist as the 'other' risk free asset as it breaks all their models.
as to your question... because they can type up what the government wants them to
reply
Government debt is no risk-free, it bears the risk of debasement. Bitcoin is risk-free, because it doesn't have that risk.
reply
Nothing is risk free.
Bitcoin just doesn't lie about it.
It can't lie... it's a network protocol 🤪
reply
Thanks for posting this lunacy.
reply
i almost cannot believe it. it's like a bad joke at a FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
reply
The Federal Reserve IS a joke
reply
This is bullshit crap from government. It won't prevail at least here. I remember when they taxed 30% on profits for virtual assets, people made a commitment that they aren't going to sell Bitcoins anyway so the government be lame to find who to tax for Bitcoin.
I believe in total annihilation of the governments as they are right now. They have got their part to do by earning revenue through national assets not by taxing my money. My money is my own and they aren't gonna take it away from me.
reply
this, in my opinion, goes way beyond capital gains taxes
reply
Beyond everything right! I wanna know why a politicians get salary from the taxes and then he gets a lifetime pension here in India.
reply
Well this is in the US. What the US does for better or worse tends to set the regulatory example across the entire world.
reply
Thanks! I now remember. Indian constitution is a copy from all constitutions accross all the democracies. I forgot that this has been copied from USA.
reply
Sounds like a place waltz is from. Not surprised.
reply
im told there were very detailed papers by esteemed economists proving the superiority of the soviet economic system just before it collapsed
for the past twenty years people were praising china's unique economy and its special qualities. now look at it collapsing
this is in the same vein, ie useless. no matter how much jargon and how many formulas they include
this is not economics. its theatre
reply
Let them eat fiat
reply
Bookmarked. Yet another paper to look into. Dang, they're coming in way too fast.
reply
The "then they fight you" phase has not even started yet. This is how desperate they are and how dirty they're ready to fight. They're the underdog and they know it. Meanwhile Bitcoin keeps doing its thing and just says: "Come at me bro".
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @cascdr 21 Oct
Pretty crazy to see the mask come off like this. What does everyone think would happen if there was a black market of bitcoin? There would be the short term hit to salability but it might be like the War on Drugs.
reply
noone outside of these government clowns wants that to happen
reply
Fiat money is a state imposed but in the modern largely digitised money economy largely private bank operated monetary monopoly. Bitcoin provides some competition- which is healthy. But as fiat - especially the USD is such a powerful source of power and wealth for government and bankers, they will not and do not like Bitcoin. The strictly managed Bitcoin market with a few selected CEXes, KYC and more recently ETFs prepare the ground perfectly for a ban on private custody ala Order 6102B.
reply
Before I read this paper... I would have been kinda skeptical to be honest. NOT because I am overly trusting (I'm not) but because trying to ban Bitcoin helps no-one.
However this paper is crazy.
reply
The paper admits that Bitcoin presents an attractive alternative to USD to enough people that it undermines the monopoly the dollar has previously enjoyed. They do not like the idea of competition when it is applied to their fiat debt slavery/seigniorage. So they propose banning that competition. This should not be a surprise- they are the most powerful monopoly on the planet.
reply
The next bear market will likely have America bans bitcoin FUD
reply
This is some exquisite garbage. I want to open a store front to display this along with the ECB paper from the other day.
reply
i read through most of the ECB paper. it was really salty and said 'hey maybe it goes up forever after all' and we 'the authors' don't like it.
this paper is advocating out loud for an outright ban in order to perpetuate 'infinite deficits' because their models break if bitcoin has 'positive price'. incredible
reply
I'm curious as to what makes Bitcoin so special for their models. Why wasn't gold their boogie man?
reply
Above my pay-grade.
I don't know.
My guesses - the price of gold has been manipulated? Bitcoin is digital and far more easily moved, bought, and sold? And Bitcoin is practical for the great use-case... as 'money' especially in the form of micropayments and internet-native 402 payments.
Purchase everything online and pay for everything online, found countless businesses based in cyberspace and pay everything in Bitcoin - I think that is a very real future and the central banks of the world don't particularly like it.
The volatility aside, why would anyone want to earn paper money, when they can earn Bitcoin instead especially now that they can practically use it for micropayments and pay daily expenses
reply
("Futre headline, Save the US Dollar act Passes")
Prescient eh?
We are dedinitely entering the then they fight you period.
reply
the gloves are off it's incredible
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @000w2 21 Oct
They know fiat is at the end stage. The only way to draw it out and maintain their current privileged position in the system is if people continue to provide their life energy exclusively for fiat tokens with no alternative.
reply
yes apparently
reply
I personally don't give a shit about any papers coming from any gov or politicians. ARE PURE GARBAGE FOR ME.
reply
Let's see if you gonna rebut when the government of your country of residence comes up with such a paper. It's easier said than done. It's also easier hide than fight.
reply
Please show me where is the paper where I signed and consent that any gov have any authority over me the living man.
I will give you 1BTC if you can show me that.
government of your country of residence
There is no such thing. Is not my government, is not my residency. If you want to put yourself in the state cage, so be it, but don't assume that I will do the same.
reply
42 sats \ 1 reply \ @javier 21 Oct
I demand my 1 BTC right now.
reply
buahahaha this paper is the only one existed, none of any gov could provide such thing.
reply
Keep daydreaming! You can say it but you can't do it. Just ask yourself if you can travel around the world freely.
reply
Watch me. And please dump all your sats right now. Are worthless for you.
reply
You're an ignorant wise man. That's all.
reply
@remindme in 1 year
reply
You don't care if they ban Bitcoin private custody?
reply
Please explain how can you ban something that you can't control?
reply
Sure- you make it unlawful to hold or trade Bitcoin privately. The vast majority of hodlers have been KYCed. An increasing ratio of the market is already held by complicit institutions. A ban on private custody, probably with payment for sats at current market price would mop up most of this threat to USD fiat debt hegemony. Most of the western world is militarily and monetarily subservient to the US so would follow Uncle Sams lead. You dont have to get every last sat but if you get a good most of them the thing is effectively captured and controlled. Ala Order 6102.
reply
The majority of the world will defintely not follow Uncle Sams lead. Ban on gold only happened in USA. The most they can do is Europe following them, but Europe is more and more irrelevant and it is in the process of being destroyed. If they ban Bitcoin from USA or Europe we move to another country and let them devaluate their shit-fiat-coin until they are completely irrelevant. Bitcoin would only suffer a 2 year devaluation like it happened with the China ban. After that, it will be unstoppable.
reply
Are you saying Japan, S.Korea, Australasia, Canada, the EU and Britain are not monetarily and militarily subservient tribute states to the US? These are the nations where perhaps over 90% of the available Bitcoin is held, 90% of that already KYCed and or held under institutional custody.
reply
100 sats \ 1 reply \ @javier 22 Oct
Are you saying that if those countries ban Bitcoin it would not be the start of their destruction? Already major Bitcoin hodlers moved to more tolerant and less taxed countries to avoid the state. If that happens, the movement to LatAm, Asia, and even Africa will be massive, and would only impoverish USA even more.
reply
Its complex. As China grows the number of nation states explicitly operating under its monetary hegemony- ie N.Korea, Iran, Russia already are and other non 'liberal western democracies' join them there will be some more neutral territories where Bitcoin may continue to operate. But if a US originating ban occurs the number of territories where a free market in Bitcoin can exist could become increasingly small. The EU, Britain, Canada, Australiasia and Japan and S.Korea would probably be the last to accept trade payments in CBDC Yuan and would continue to support USD hegemony, and a very likely part of such a contest would be the imposition of increasing restrictions on Bitcoin- especially private custody. If a US based ban could capture 80% plus of the Bitcoin market cap not much is left for those in the middle ground between China and 'the west'. IMO the downfall of the west is increasingly the capture of our governments by rentseeking fiat bankers- so Bitcoin could reverse that, but it seems an outside chance at best.
If you stop being a fucking statist and use for a bit your brain you will realize that just by NOT funding those CORPORATIONS (that are nation states) you will remove all your problems.
Is so fucking simple: stop being an obedient shitizen.
reply
Do not agree.
Suspect you would be a quivering shivering whimpering wreck if placed into a situation where the nation state is weak or non-existant and left to fend for yourself.
Human are weaklings on their own- have you watched 'Alone'?
Humans have gained their dominance by being in groups.
We may not sometimes like nation state over reach either and can and should protest it- Bitcoin is a classic and elegant example of this- but do not delude myself that the nation state is not the primary mechanism which determines the global allocation of wealth and resources. Go live in a third world nation if you do not understand.
Can also stand on my record of fighting the nation state in the face of its excesses while all around me stood by and said - 'yes what they are doing is bad, you cannot do that' well I did and I exposed them but I accept there are many with many bold words of protest but few with the action to confront the nation state when push comes to shove.
The vast majority of hodlers have been KYCed.
So what? If they never go back to fiat, what is the problem? Please explain how you would take my sats from a private wallet? From this one for example:
Please take them if you can
reply
Most people will cave to the threat of prosecution and the fact that if they dont surrender their sats will be illegal to trade and therefore considerably devalued.
They don't need to capture all sats and all hodlers- they dont care if you hodl on as long as they effectively end the open market- again, see Order 6102 for effective historical precedent.
reply
You are forgetting one thing. While governments are doing all this, they are also making sure fiat money is an increasingly unattractive option to hold, and at an accelerating pace.
So there are two forces at play. One is as you describe where government pressures people to turn over their bitcoin, and you're right, some people will. The other is the force of survival that people have in the face of debasing money.
There are many examples in history where people risk life and limb to smuggle their wealth out of bad situations. You seem to think this survival instinct has disappeared from humanity. It is alive and well and Bitcoin makes it easier than ever compared to what refugees throughout history have done. Don't underestimate the motivation debasing money gives to people.
reply
Good point. Hope enough people are prepared to stand up and fight for the right to hold Bitcoin privately. Perhaps there will be. It's yet to be decided but IMO we have to be prepared and realistic about the probability they will seek to shut Bitcoin down. Saying it will never happen just means if/when it does you will not be prepared for it - and that suits them just fine! BE PREPARED!!!
I agree with you. People will not give up, Bitcoin is so special.
However... an unmovable wall (government debt) is (finally?) coming into contact with an unstoppable force - Bitcoin.
And I'm not exactly sure what that will look like. Beyond the ECB and FED papers of late we're familiar with. Some sort of... unresolved conflict.
Please sell all your sats right now! Are worthless for you now. What are you waiting for?
reply
Why would I? Gained custody of my liquid wealth as soon as I found it was possible and remain hopeful enough other people see the value of such a decentralised censorship and debasement resistant monetary system- but never thought it was a sure thing-amazed how far it has come already- its something worth being part of whether it fails or succeeds imo. Fuck the rentseeking fiat debt parasites that own the government.
deleted by author
reply
Sell all your sats right now. They will confiscate them from you anyways. I will be gladly take them all.
reply
I trade only in BTC, I do not use anymore fiat. Please stop me doing that.
When people will understand that all that a gov is saying is only bla bla bla and they need YOUR FUCKING CONSENT in order to do something?
So don't fucking consent, is that hard?
reply
Who will you trade with? Most people are sheeple.
reply
With my close community and friends. Did you built that community around you? Or are you waiting for a sign from your lovely government to give you permission? Sheeple are only those that are afraid of gov to use their sats and read these bullshit so called laws. They are NPCs... that doesn't count.
As I said so many times:
reply
No I do not have such a supportive community around me though I have tried to some extent to build one. Most people I know are sheeple with regard to the monetary system - they believe what they have been told by bankers and government regarding fiat money and the few who have bought Bitcoin have done so primarily for the hope of fiat denominated gain. My guess would be that over 90% of Bitcoiners are not in it for the revolution and could be easily bought out. Hope I'm wrong.