The current fiat system (and the Governments that control it) are completely enslaved to the welfare (pension) and healthcare demands of baby boomers.
These demands will only multiply as the populations age, until eventually consuming the host. You can already see this in countries like Italy, which are now in demographic death spirals.
If we can craft a new financial system without spending 15%+ of our GDP and rising on Pensions[1], even with some inefficiency its still worth it.
> The current fiat system (and the Governments that control it) are completely enslaved to the welfare (pension) and healthcare demands of baby boomers.
If we can craft a new financial system without spending 15%+ of our GDP and rising on Pensions, even with some inefficiency its still worth it.
Avoiding sales taxes, platform commissions, and income taxes is a major advantage.
So you think the problem solved by crypto is no longer paying taxes or contributing any part of our incomes to the collective good? I guess you think that child mortality isn't something we should worry about? Or looking after the weak and sick, in general. Why pay for schools, or sanitation, or public transport, at all? And the rules that govern human behavior - we can just rid ourselves of the police in this libertarian-anarcho system where the rich do as they please, and the rest predate upon each other.
It only solves one problem, proof of work (or now I guess proof of stake).
It doesn't solve the political issue(s), for this reason most everything going on is harmful nonsense...
It could have been a part of a larger puzzle, but it's not and the people (seriously) involved with it are mostly scumbags and scammers, by the sound of it.
The legit businesses were a start but it never became a true payment contender, meanwhile those in power ran interference with competing payment systems (think apple or google pay, absolute nonsense I absolutely do not want) or propoganda "yeah this is illegal and fake and all worth nothing", which just hurt adoption.
Sounds like there is hope with Ethereum for it to actually be useful but Bitcoin is just a speculation heatsink at present. "In the future" it might work but there is a likely chance it will be gone in the future...
>taxes now become a voluntary contribution to whatever charity
yes
>And you don't see any scale issues with that?
No. I see it vastly superior as private competition ensures people can donate to charities they find most effective, rather than monopolized government with little incentive for efficiency.
This means people will mostly give their money to the loudest charities that spend the most on marketing, not on their actual effectiveness. Boring yet important projects will get almost nothing with this model. Don't make the economist mistake of assuming that people are perfectly rational actors.
The idea that privately-managed charity could adequately address even one of the numerous structural-level problems in our society is tremendously naive.
Well if mentalpiracy says achieving a huge goal privately is naive, it must be so.
But I think that discounts the massive achievements and structural changes around us that private enterprise has contributed to. It seems naive to believe humans can't solve large problems, or at least improve their lot, without men with guns forcing them to pay up for it.
I didn't say "income tax" or "federal tax". I asked for examples of economies that don't collect taxes but have been effective. Survival is one important aspect of "being effective". So, an example that has survived to the present day would be more relevant.
The reason why charities underfund public goods is because of the well-known free-rider problem. It's the same reason why cryptocurrencies need to collect transaction fees and reward miners and cannot rely on charitable miners. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-rider_problem
The OP I responded to said income and sales tax. You're just copping out by saying that I've fulfilled the criteria laid out was somehow wrong. But even without taxes, a charity can exist.
I guess you think all dead men were failures, if survival to present day is your criteria.
The "frees-rider" problem applies to government programs, too.
But you're right, we can't just depend on charity. We need for profit enterprise too.
We tried private ambulances and that is an ongoing disaster, what you are describing is a personal army or guard, look at history to see the plethora of problems with those...
Not that Police are perfect, far from it, but I'd rather a force I can sue in court and protects me from my enemies even if I'm broke than a private militia.
You could have Police-As-Contractors I guess but unless that comes with some legal innovations that just adds another layer of bureacracy.
50% of healthcare costs are incurred in the final 5 years of life, and in much of the world private healthcare is accepted and efficient.
I'd rather euthanize myself at age 80 and pay much lower taxes throughout my adult life than die at age 85 in a gold-plated Government hospital.
Sanitation and public transport can be directly charged to end-users based on usage. Education can be funded with land value taxes.
Federal Government bureaucracy just exists to support itself. Healthcare agencies have been turned against the population to promote lockdowns and big pharma, and intelligence agencies spy against their own citizens.
> in much of the world private healthcare is accepted and efficient.
It is accepted in many parts of the world, unfortunately, but in what part of the world is it "efficient"? Can you give an example? Is "basic medicine costing $500 (see insulin) to the few that can afford it and the rest dying because they can't access it" what you define as efficient?
> I'd rather euthanize myself at age 80 and pay much lower taxes throughout my adult life than die at age 85 in a gold-plated Government hospital.
I'd rather not. I doubt many people would be okay with that. I like living and being healthy. You can still feel free to do that in either situation.
> Sanitation and public transport can be directly charged to end-users based on usage.
So the rich should get clean streets and running water while the poor walk on their own shit? Should we charge per poop? As for public transportation, you think it would work if I didn't pay taxes for it and it cost $80 for someone to take it because they can't afford the $20 Uber ride?
> Federal Government bureaucracy just exists to support itself.
This is objectively not true. Many techies (not just crypto people) tend to forget why societal structures were invented in the first place. No one's saying inefficiencies don't exist but disregarding all of society seems to be specifically tailored to get a rise out of people.
I don't know how I can explain to you that we all need to care about each other, otherwise we'll all go extinct.
> I'd rather not. I doubt many people would be okay with that. I like living and being healthy. You can still feel free to do that in either situation.
Part of GP’s point is that you’re not healthy & free for those extra five years when the costs truly spike.
>I'd rather euthanize myself at age 80 and pay much lower taxes throughout my adult life than die at age 85 in a gold-plated Government hospital.
Only it wouldn't probbably work that way, more probably it would be something more like:
Dear Citizen, this is the Government.
Our actuaries determined that you can only live up to 70 years with the tax you paid, so you are kindly requested to present yourself on the morning of the day before your 70th birthday at 9:00 o'clock at [redacted] so that we can proceed to your termination.
We assure you that the procedure will be quick and painless.
Sure, but the claim is that crypto magically allows you to avoid all taxes. It doesn't. How much the government chooses to tax you is entirely unrelated.
These demands will only multiply as the populations age, until eventually consuming the host. You can already see this in countries like Italy, which are now in demographic death spirals.
If we can craft a new financial system without spending 15%+ of our GDP and rising on Pensions[1], even with some inefficiency its still worth it.
https://data.oecd.org/socialexp/pension-spending.htm
Avoiding sales taxes, platform commissions, and income taxes is a major advantage.
The issue with Crypto right now is waste from Proof of Stake, and fraud/security risks. We need to resolve this before expanding.