# Lyn Alden vs Jeff Snider!
## Snider believes:
- Bitcoin is not perfect, as good money needs to be elastic to meet supply and demand
- Black markets and quasi money will be created in a system with fixed inelastic money
- The economic system does not adjust through prices, it adjusts through activity
- If you go through a deflationary period with inelastic money entrepreneurs will have to fire all their workers (because they don't have the funds to pay them)
- If you remove elasticity, it will be at the cost of economic growth, as debt is a factor, historically speaking, in creating economic prosperity for society ("imagine having a 2008 without all the economic growth of the 80's & 90's," he states)
## Alden believes:
- Bitcoin is good money as divisibility is the tradeoff for elasticity
- By having a hard and quickly verifiable deflationary money, less debt is injected in the system and it causes less problems during deflationary cycles
- Only highly indebted individuals or companies would suffer in a deflationary period
- Banks are incentivized to push inflation in a highly indebted system at a cost to society
----
Overall, Snider asks "the age old question", do you want a system that minimizes the downside of deflationary periods at the cost of attainable economic growth, by limiting the amount of debt? **Is it worth limiting the downfall at the cost of future growth?**
----
I've pondered this before and believe growth may be slower under a โฟ standard, but it would be more deliberate and less wasteful. Thoughts?
๐๐ซ๐งก
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoCfYifNswg
#Bitcoin
#plebchain
#inflationvsdeflation
DecentWisdom / ๐ฉโ๐ข๐ ๐ข๐ซ๐ฑ ๐ผโ๐ฆ๐ฐ๐ก๐ฌ๐ช
npub1ewโฆ4d533
2023-06-11 06:40:42
Author Public Key
npub1ew78j5cv5lf3es399jsayycxwpgsltf38tl46n49ds6qktw0hggsx4d533Published at
2023-06-11 06:40:42Event JSON
{
"id": "e4d01d477486d913789330b6a066bcd3fe7893d12305d704a809d8a579f2321c",
"pubkey": "cbbc79530ca7d31cc2252ca1d2130670510fad313aff5d4ea56c340b2dcfba11",
"created_at": 1686465642,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"Bitcoin"
],
[
"t",
"bitcoin"
],
[
"t",
"plebchain"
],
[
"t",
"plebchain"
],
[
"t",
"inflationvsdeflation"
],
[
"t",
"inflationvsdeflation"
],
[
"r",
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoCfYifNswg"
]
],
"content": "# Lyn Alden vs Jeff Snider!\n\n## Snider believes:\n- Bitcoin is not perfect, as good money needs to be elastic to meet supply and demand\n- Black markets and quasi money will be created in a system with fixed inelastic money\n- The economic system does not adjust through prices, it adjusts through activity\n- If you go through a deflationary period with inelastic money entrepreneurs will have to fire all their workers (because they don't have the funds to pay them)\n- If you remove elasticity, it will be at the cost of economic growth, as debt is a factor, historically speaking, in creating economic prosperity for society (\"imagine having a 2008 without all the economic growth of the 80's \u0026 90's,\" he states)\n\n## Alden believes:\n- Bitcoin is good money as divisibility is the tradeoff for elasticity\n- By having a hard and quickly verifiable deflationary money, less debt is injected in the system and it causes less problems during deflationary cycles\n- Only highly indebted individuals or companies would suffer in a deflationary period \n- Banks are incentivized to push inflation in a highly indebted system at a cost to society \n\n----\nOverall, Snider asks \"the age old question\", do you want a system that minimizes the downside of deflationary periods at the cost of attainable economic growth, by limiting the amount of debt? **Is it worth limiting the downfall at the cost of future growth?**\n----\n\nI've pondered this before and believe growth may be slower under a โฟ standard, but it would be more deliberate and less wasteful. Thoughts?\n\n๐๐ซ๐งก\n\nhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoCfYifNswg\n\n#Bitcoin \n#plebchain \n#inflationvsdeflation ",
"sig": "4dddce1fc5432ff537367f9c21d2d135636d4f8406cfc1735135597fd97ae6e5715d95facd1c0e976d00487f7e3b476b122af5c594b7ff889222db1d457fff20"
}