yes that is correct, inflation is nothing new but the current economic scenario is partially different from what we have experienced in the past. I would like to point out that the inflation we are experiencing is caused by 2 economic shocks:
- the pandemic from Covid 19 that halted the economy which like a spring was compressed and then restarted, resulting in the triggering of demand exceeding supply (Demand Inflation);
- the reduction in the supply of energy commodities due to the war between Russia and Ukraine (Cost Inflation);
- the higher cost of labor due to excess employment. Again, this is often referred to as an equilibrium unemployment rate (Cost Inflation).
- The excess money circulating in the economic system due to state subsidies.
All of this put together is a fire that must be controlled and allowed to rage, at least according to the dominant macroeconomic doctrine advocated by the FED and IMF (I'm just quoting Blanchard's macroeconomics textbook to you, be warned it is hard to digest).
We are in the hands of a few people who hold the world's wealth; the elite must maintain their status. Do you really think they are not behind the collapse of crypto? I will do a follow-up post on the latest attack perpetrated, the one towards Luna that brought the whole project down (which by the way, let's face it, had its vulnerabilities and the responsibilities of the Terra Foundation, as well as the merchants, are not few)
I agree with you, in fact I wrote in Edicted's post something like this.
The comment was this:
The other day talking in the Splinterlands Discord chat institutions came in the discussion somehow (some guy was defending that Bitcoin wouldn't go lower because there are institutional investors ), I said that institutions investing in Bitcoin is one of the things that I'm most afraid of. Certainly I was expecting a recovery from the 0.50 $ per Hive though.
My argument is that institutions and govs have been against Bitcoin since the beginning. They have been quite vocal about it so the fact that they are in doesn't necessarily mean that they are interested in its success.
This article of yours seems to point a possible attack to Bitcoin, we're guessing it for sure but does make sense to me that possibility.
Some collateral damages of this are El Salvador and his gov backstabbed for their "gamble" of investing in Bitcoin. I wonder if some of the govs that have invested in Bitcoin haven't done it as a way to leverage the inflation with crypto while they're keep printing money and blaming crypto for the dip. While is obviously the traditional economy and a very convenient war for some what is provoking this. Sharks win-win and win again.
I know it's way too long haha, just wanted to share it with you because I see we're on the same page in the issue.
On the attack on Luna I see more the hand of some traders/institutional investors who saw easy money--and so they did. Institutional people in my opinion have no interest in attacking BTC too deeply, for them it is a tool to make easy money (relatively small and maneuverable market). Different case is governments who have every interest in sinking or regulating cryptocurrencies, an example is the clash between IMF and El Salvador, which is now a country on the verge of bankruptcy. IMF would be willing to lend money in exchange for the government's step back on BTC. Why? But let's face facts! Since there is no currency conversion all currency exchanges are based solely on trust, there is no underlying. The few who hold monetary policy in their hands can decide the welfare of millions and maneuver inflation and unemployment, which result in joy and tragedy. The entire capitalist system is based on economic cycles of growth and destruction. I am not advocating this, but the Austrian school of economics. Numerous insights start from here but I will not elaborate further. I am glad you enjoyed my post. See you soon.