MariusFebruary on Nostr: I don't want to take credit for the question; it is Godfrey Bloom's whom I was ...
I don't want to take credit for the question; it is Godfrey Bloom's whom I was citing.
I believe that in the long run, you can only give away for free what you can produce at virtually zero cost. FIAT, for example. However, if you do, it will very quickly lose its value.
Interestingly, you thought of UBI when reading his quote when, I believe, he had quite the opposite in mind. I think he intended to make an analogy that would help people understand how ridiculous and helpless it is to believe printing more money would make real-world problems disappear.
Let me share a related thought. I was recently reading "Principles of Economics" by saifedean (npub1gdu…6nak). In the book, he spares no effort to describe real-life examples that make it easy for the reader to understand.
While reading his fascinating book, I asked myself how many readers would adjust their economic beliefs and behavior after reading. Would a convinced Keynesian buy the book? Would she make it past page 20? Or is it mainly the people already sold on or at least open to Austrian economic theories that invest the time to read the book to page 394? In other words: Do we still reach a critical mass of influential people? Do we still have a productive debate?
I don't know.
I believe that in the long run, you can only give away for free what you can produce at virtually zero cost. FIAT, for example. However, if you do, it will very quickly lose its value.
Interestingly, you thought of UBI when reading his quote when, I believe, he had quite the opposite in mind. I think he intended to make an analogy that would help people understand how ridiculous and helpless it is to believe printing more money would make real-world problems disappear.
Let me share a related thought. I was recently reading "Principles of Economics" by saifedean (npub1gdu…6nak). In the book, he spares no effort to describe real-life examples that make it easy for the reader to understand.
While reading his fascinating book, I asked myself how many readers would adjust their economic beliefs and behavior after reading. Would a convinced Keynesian buy the book? Would she make it past page 20? Or is it mainly the people already sold on or at least open to Austrian economic theories that invest the time to read the book to page 394? In other words: Do we still reach a critical mass of influential people? Do we still have a productive debate?
I don't know.