Oh look, another Cashie spouting off with no references, citations, or any kind of in-depth description.
Its just "wrong". Suuuuuuure Cashie, sure.
For the smarter among you, here's the video the Cashie doesn't understand:
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yes, that's the video. It makes my point (for anyone who has the most basic knowledge of Keynes' theories). I thought this was obvious.
If it wasn't: Mr. Song is conflating currency debasement as a means to spur spending (Keynes) with currency being useful in commerce.
Roger has (to my knowledge) never supported "forcing" people to spend. He just wants people to have that option.
A crypto with only SOV and no MOE is not going to work. People will just move their funds to cryptos that have both qualities.
Again, Cashies seem to have trouble isolating important concepts.
In the video, Jimmy immediately defines why he is posting it:
(In the same point, talking about Roger Ver)
This is precisely what he's talking about - Roger espouses this notion that you NEED to spend, or else it isn't worth anything.
That is a KEYNESIAN strategy -- centered around spending to boost economic growth.
But again, I'm arguing with a Cashie that doesn't care what Roger says, as long as it aligns with the view that Bitcoin is "bad" and your alt-fork is somehow the answer.
It isn't, and from every metric I can see -- a majority agree with me.
No. He espouses the notion that you need to be able to spend. At least that is my take on his opinion.
Once again, network effect in a vacuum has no value.