Don’t fear the ADA Whales

[ADALove]

@jb455 I could write a whole book on the many false dichotomies in your post. You keep making all-or-nothing statements and framing my position as government manipulation when you have no idea what my position actually is because you keep filtering and distorting my words through the narrow lens of puritanical libertarian dogma. I know your intentions are good, but it’s frustrating to communicate with people who inject their ideology and unconscious biases into my words.

Dogma and ideology distort the human brain’s ability to perceive and understand the objective meaning of words, symbols, and events. This makes it virtually impossible to communicate with fundamentalists in any domain without writing entire books to systematically deconstruct every brick of dogma until they consciously see how the dogma has divorced them from the reality of the real world.

The real world is messy and subverts libertarianism (and the Austrian School in particular) because the geopolitical and social underpinnings of human civilization have virtually nothing to do with the mechanics of free markets or supply-and-demand. “The market” is just one lens through which to classify and perceive human affairs, but that lens has many shortcomings, especially in the age of A.I. where markets are no longer the dominant explanatory principle for describing the incentives and outcomes of human interaction. This is much deeper than any “ism” or academic theory of free markets, but puritanical libertarians refuse to acknowledge this reality.

The world and the universe of economic ideas is much bigger than libertarianism. Based on all your comments, it appears you do not have real-world experience on Wall Street, in developing country project finance, and many other aspects of our geopolitical system and global economy to see how many (not all) academic libertarian theories breakdown in the real world. That’s not an insult, it’s simply the reality of what everybody already understands after they see the way capitalism works from inside “the sausage factory.”

With the potential of trust-less systems like Cardano, for the first time in human history, humanity has a chance to take a different path. That path is not pure libertarianism and it’s not communism or socialism. It’s not an “ism” at all.

Anyway, at this point, let’s agree to disagree because it would require a whole book to explain why I disagree with all the false dichotomies in your post, but neither of us has time for that.

[Bullish]

This was one of the best discussions I have read in quite some time. Kudos to both of you, high quality writing and very valuable insights. This was an absolute pleasure to read!

[jb455]

@ADALove

@jb455 I could write a whole book on the many false dichotomies in your post. You keep making all-or-nothing statements and framing my position as government manipulation when you have no idea what my position actually is because you keep filtering and distorting my words through the narrow lens of puritanical libertarian dogma. I know your intentions are good, but it’s frustrating to communicate with people who inject their ideology and unconscious biases into my words.

No no no no no… I am not letting you do this… My general posts here on this forum, and my reply to Michael94588 in this thread was not directed to you. I make many general statements when debating non-specific issue because of time purpose- but what we are currently debating is not the case.

What I am pointing out and asking you, is very very specific.

YOU, with your own words said

@ADALove

You cited an example of a silver market scam that was only thwarted because the COMEX changed the position accumulation rules at the last minute to prevent the Hunt Brothers from getting away with their scam. That was a centralized exchange imposing an arbitrary rule while a scheme was being perpetrated, which happened to stop the Hunt Brothers at virtually the last minute, but many people lost huge amounts of money along the way as their positions were destroyed by the wild volatility caused by the Hunt Brothers’ market manipulation.

YOU are saying that a scam and scheme was stopped by the good nature of the Comex and Government agencies

The Hunt Brothers bought silver on the open market in a orderly fashion, they didnt steal it, they didnt defraud or cheat anyone, they engaged in voluntary trade and played by the rules of the exchange they dealt with. There was two people to this transaction, a buyer and a seller that both wanted to do this.

So what are you saying?

That they cant buy silver because you dont like why they did it? and what does this even mean?

Are you saying because you have an opinion about their incentives? That if you dont like their incentives, that you have the right to use force, upon both the buyer and the seller? and who should decide all of this? Do we have like a @adalove committee that decides when things are in line with your opinion?

When is this a scam? is it because you think they were buying silver squeezing the supply in the market, to then turn around and sell at higher prices? is it now a scam and we must prevent this? are you making that argument?

or should one person only be able to own a limited amount of silver? is that the issue?

I want you to actually put forward one argument for why you said what you did, you still haven’t done that. Where is the perceived scam…

The reason the Hunt Brothers did buy silver is of course a Irony in all of this… Which makes this rather funny… Since you are involved in Crypto and you are doing the exact same thing as the hunt brothers, just on a collective level… and quit using that you know Laura hunt and you have been in NYC… I mean thats good for you… Enjoy… But It doesn’t give you more authority on this topic, your arguments and logic have to be able to stand alone.

The truth is the truth, it has no owner, and it doesn’t care about anyone’s opinion… You can only discover the truth, you cant invent it.

In reality It shouldn’t matter what the Hunt Brothers wanted to use the silver for, except for if they wanted to harm someone, what if they wanted to make a big statue of themselves with it. Its completely irrelevant. As long as they are not violating the rights of any other person. On another point The hunt brothers didn’t even buy that much silver, it is a very small market, and they were not the sole cause of the price rise.

If you do not want to back up what you said in a broader discussion… At least just give the conclusion…

If you or some other committee/third party dont like why someone is buying silver for X reason, is it OK for them to squash it with force?

Should such a party exist? just tell me if you are for, or against this… Because that will state where you are coming from… If you say yes, then we dont need to argue anything… As your argument is that “force” on “voluntary” parties is appropriate, the reason for it, is kinda irrelevant… Because there will be a unlimited supply of reasons if we open this box, each person with their own.

And dont broaden this out… We are not talking about fraud, cheating, force, or physical harm to any person, pollution bla bla bla or any complicated issue here… None of this is involved in voluntary trade that is as simple as buying and selling a piece of silver… Everybody involved and the market participants understands the simplicity of this… This is not some complicated financial instrument… Its just a piece silver…

[mrmojorisin]

@jb455

America was build upon free markets

Not entirely true mate. Enslaved humans had a lot to do with building America.

[jb455]

@mrmojorisin

@jb455

America was build upon free markets

Not entirely true mate. Enslaved humans had a lot to do with building America.

It did certainty not, that is propaganda.

We can go into a lot of history but the only proof you need is that the north was much wealthier than the south. Case closed.

The reason America become the wealthiest nation on earth in a very short time span, was not due to slavery.

Slaves are highly inefficient in the market, first a slave is not free… They still need to be fed, taken care, etc etc… Of course compared to today, things like food and shelter etc. count for nothing, but back then, it was basically what low salaries afforded you… Were they free, they work at these farms, for salery but properly even be more productive… It was probably a bad trade for everyone involved… lastly slave is not highly motivated nor productive… and can only be used for very simple and primitive labor work like farming… Many nations have had slaves, and there were lots black slave owners in Africa… Africa didn’t become wealthy did it? The slave factor is simply irrelevant…

All the factories, all the ideas, all the businesses, the industrial revolution, all the skyscrapers you have in new york, “none” of this was build by slaves - I am sure you can find straw-man examples, but as a whole, it wasn’t.

Slavery was very wrong, and is a horrible fact of American history… But it would simply be factualy wrong to label this as why America prospered compared to the rest of the world… Even if I agree that slavery might have had a marginal impact very very early on, its trivial in the scheme of things.

Had these slaves been free people, they would have benefited America much more.

[Michael94588]

A true free market implies no government intervention needed. The market dictates the price without interference. It’s not what you read in your text book. The statement is simple because the facts are simple. Do you believe it was the decision making of Main Street mom and pop shops that brought the economy to its knees. Oh yea, they ordered too many rakes and shovels and that risk caused the market to collapse. Unlearn what you’ve been learning and the answer becomes clearly visible.

[jb455]

@Michael94588

A true free market implies no government intervention needed. The market dictates the price without interference. It’s not what you read in your text book. The statement is simple because the facts are simple. Do you believe it was the decision making of Main Street mom and pop shops that brought the economy to its knees. Oh yea, they ordered too many rakes and shovels and that risk caused the market to collapse. Unlearn what you’ve been learning and the answer becomes clearly visible.

Mainstream participated very well in the housing bubble… everyone was out flipping houses in 2007, it wasn’t just a few people lol.

[Michael94588]

It’s propaganda. There is no free market at least not yet. Free market my behind. Tell that to the native Americans who were massacred during the California gold rush. They didn’t get paid for their land, they paid with their lives because they were seen as a nuisance. Is that your idea of being built from a free market?

[jb455]

@Michael94588

I so agree. It’s propoganda. Free market my ass. Tell that to the native Americans who were massacred during the California gold rush. They didn’t get paid for their land, they paid with their lives because they were seen as a nuisance. Is that your idea of being built from a free market?

I dont see your connections here.

What happened there was not voluntarism and there was certainty a breech of rights. Free markets does not equal no government. I am not a anarchist.

Markets are a inherent part of nature, its not a human invention, even animals trade.

Any interference directly in a market reduces its efficiency which is why we want to keep it as little as possible. Human rights and the ability to contract (which requires a government for this to properly work) aid the market, they increase efficiency, there is no doubt about it.

In fact, government is a market solution, and it is better than many other alternatives, it being small gangs, and kingdoms etc… The market came before government, there was a demand for such a entity, and so it was created.

[anon20038177]

I believe it was the decision of Mainstreet, they were suckered into fraud that brought the market to it’s knees, I resisted the urge to own a home that I could have bought for $49,000 with every business person in my town saying it would be a good idea, I watched it jump to 64,000 then to 89,000, 109,000,129,000, 149,000 to its final price of 164,000 when the bubble popped, everyone was involved in that bubble.

[Michael94588]

What planet are you from? It was deregulation and speculation by banks on high risk sub-prime mortgages that was the most major underlying issue. The U.S. Govt came in and bailed Wall Street out, or at least a couple of “too big to fail” companies. In a true free market these would be left to collapse and the market would correct accordingly despite the millions of people being affected and the turmoil it would cause. The turmoil would result in a shift of consumer behavior as well as business.the upheaval would have necessary for a complete correction however elites did not want to risk this because many of them would have lost everything. An event of this size potentially could have resulted in a revolution and as such the Govt had to step in.

[Michael94588]

Main street wouldn’t have been able to buy that home without first qualifying. Someone had to approve the loan. Let me guess, Guido at the restaurant was handing out loans with awesome terms. Not.

[jb455]

@Michael94588

What planet are you from? It was deregulation and speculation by banks on high risk sub-prime mortgages that was the most major underlying issue. The U.S. Govt came in and bailed Wall Street out, or at least a couple of “too big to fail” companies. In a true free market these would be left to collapse and the market would correct accordingly despite the millions of people being affected and the turmoil it would cause. The turmoil would result in a shift of consumer behavior as well as business.the upheaval would have necessary for a complete correction however elites did not want to risk this because many of them would have lost everything. An event of this size potentially could have resulted in a revolution and as such the Govt had to step in.

Nope that is the common story… But it certainty wasn’t…

I dont have time to go into this whole issue but the two main drivers for this was banks have something that is called a government backed guarantee on deposits - that is the first major moral hazzard… The second is the FED… Without these two, the 2008 housing boom wouldn’t have happened…

When government takes risk out of the equation the market cant function.

Here is a speech from Peter Schiff before the bubble burst… If you want a quickie introduction to some of the main issues…

Peter Schiff Mortgage Bankers Speech Nov/13/06

REMEMBER… This was BEFORE the crash.

[anon20038177]

A $200,000 loan at the time was not difficult to get, it might as well have come from Guido, they were giving loans out on personal statement’s of additional income, everyone was doing it saying they were selling crap on the side, the wife babysat, online sales, etc. etc.

[Michael94588]

Animals do not trade. They have symbiotic relationships. You’re extending a very liberal expression of the term trade. Water trades life with me to be expelled out of my with foreign matter to replenish the Earth. I get it.

[jb455]

@Michael94588

Animals do not trade. They have symbiotic relationships. You’re extending a very liberal expression of the term trade. Water trades life with me to be expelled out of my with foreign matter to replenish the Earth. I get it.

No there are animals that engage in trade… One of them are Orangutans and Chimps. Of course it is less sophisticated than humans, but it is trade… and when there is trade, there is a supply and a demand met.

[Michael94588]

That’s really irrelevant because it was there, they took advantage of it because it was an opportunity to make money, and they thought wrong.

[Michael94588]

I have a job that pays my bills. If I didn’t have it though, I wouldn’t be able to invest in real estate or Cardano therefore by extension, my job is the reason for any collapse. Nope.

[Michael94588]

You’re listening to this guy “On December 13, 2007, in an interview on the Bloomberg TV show “Open Exchange,” Schiff added that he felt that the crisis would extend to the credit card lending industry, and he called consumer credit “a cancer on the free-market economy.” Schiff said that interest rates would rise, that the dollar would “collapse,” and that all classes of dollar-denominated assets would fall in value relative to non-US assets. He predicted “a huge crisis” and “the blow-up of credit card finance” in 2008, with the result that consumer credit card spending limits would be “slashed” by card issuers. He added that Americans would no longer be able to make purchases using their credit card lines. Eight years later in 2016, this prediction is still unrealized. Referring to the housing market, Schiff went on to criticize the policy of the Bush administration to “vilify and threaten the lenders” for reckless borrowing.[29]

In a March 2009 speech, Schiff said that it would be impossible for the US public debt to China to be repaid unless the US dollar’s value is substantially diluted through inflation. In September 2009, with gold below $1,000 per ounce, Schiff said that he foresaw gold at over $5000 per ounce in the next couple years and that the stock market rally which began that year was a “rally in a bear market.”[30] As of 2016, the price of an ounce of gold has always been less than $2,200 and typically under $1,500.”?

[jb455]

It took me 2 minutes to search on youtube…

This is a experiment proves they can comprehend the idea, and there are many others out there, just go search… Including cases where actual trading occurs in the wild.