dvdc
David Caseria

sovereign.app

CEO sovereign.app | Empowering Financially Sovereign Families

Public Key

npub1dvdcmtp5llrp63jdlmhspe9gffsyu9ew7cu3ld3f9y7k79nxzjxqf4d4rm

NIP-05 Address

dvdc@sovereign.app

NIP-57 Address

dvdc@svrgn.app

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsxkxud4s60l3sagexlamcquj5y5czwzuh0vwglkc5jj0t0zenpfrqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduq3kamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwdacx2mnzv9kxzmnrv5hxzurspw2j4n

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

relay.openbalance.app

christpill.nostr1.com

Author Public Key

npub1dvdcmtp5llrp63jdlmhspe9gffsyu9ew7cu3ld3f9y7k79nxzjxqf4d4rm

Show more details

Last Notes

2024-11-09 12:09:38

Some people don’t know how to win.

2024-11-06 01:40:59

Thank God https://image.nostr.build/49769edcedd40efca5464637f5b71c8aac05061b0147c5962b75bd46a2b08a94.jpg

2024-10-26 16:37:22

- reply

Apologies for the issue! DM me with details, and I’ll try to help you recover the sats.

2024-10-26 12:59:24

Does your Bitcoin wallet greet you like a true Bitcoiner?
https://m.primal.net/LioJ.jpg

2024-10-18 07:07:40

- reply

Any institutions that have access to children (churches, public schools, Boy Scouts, etc) will draw predators. Like any human organization, the Church is full of sinners, and likely, all will not be saved, but if you take salvation and God’s revelation seriously, the Church still is what it says it is despite these scandalizers.

2024-10-14 18:01:12

- reply

GB-month is typically what AWS uses https://aws.amazon.com/ebs/pricing/

2024-10-08 19:54:35

- reply

Welcome to Democracy

2024-10-08 14:23:51

Not everyone can self-custody. When you run the numbers, only a few people will be able to hold the keys to their own Bitcoin.
https://sovereign.app/blog/only-1-million-people-will-hold-bitcoin

2024-10-06 16:08:43

- reply

I did tell you. Again, this isn't a “god of the gaps” argument. You clearly didn't listen to or read any of the content I provided. There can be good theistic and atheistic dialogue, but you're not representing your side well. Now, respond to my arguments, or you will lose my attention.

2024-10-06 15:29:15

“The fundamental building block of society is not the individual but the family.” https://youtu.be/nwIRsAjlX78

2024-10-06 14:59:39

- reply

So you don't know why we exist, but you know it's not God?
What you're saying isn't entirely wrong, but you're asserting God doesn't exist without arguments.
I’ve tried to show you that our existence is contingent and infinite contingency is a contradiction; therefore, there must be something that is existence itself. In a goodwill, rational discussion, go after the arguments.
You don't have to assent to belief in God, but at least make good arguments against it.

2024-10-06 12:43:45

- reply

@npub1mhc…c226 do you need any help with payment requests? I think your PR is a good start.

2024-10-06 09:44:58

- reply

NWC for cashu would be 🔥

2024-10-06 00:20:41

- reply

Yes, exactly: the train's motion is caused by the locomotive. We are the train, and God is the locomotive. There needs to be a locomotive to move the train. The train cars by themselves can't move. Yet it is an error to look at the moving train cars linked together and ask what car is causing the locomotive to move.
Similarly, we don't cause our existence. We are contingent on our parents, on the oxygen we breathe, and on the food we eat. All those things are contingent on other things. There can't be infinite contingent things because nothing would have sufficient reason to exist; therefore, nothing would exist. But we do exist, so there must be something that exists necessarily, which does not depend on anything else for its existence. That's God.
By definition, God is not contingent on people creating gods. God would still exist if there were no people because he is sheer existence itself.
I tried to adapt St. Thomas Aquinas’s third-way argument to our context. Still, these classical arguments probably have better standalone explanations elsewhere than I can summarize here if you want to understand the rationale for believing in God.

2024-10-05 21:55:06

- reply

I'm not sure if you're trying to make an argument or if you're still confused by what I'm saying.
“What made god” is nonsensical. It’s like asking which car on the train pulls the locomotive. It misunderstands the subject.
I'm not making a gap in knowledge argument. I’m making a philosophical argument based on contingency.
If you're interested in better understanding the arguments, this is a good video: https://youtu.be/t2VbTvZfKXw

2024-10-05 18:43:49

- reply

I am partially agreeing with you, but you omitted or seem confused about the nature of God (”the Maker”).
> People have created gods everywhere there have been people.
Yes, some people create gods, that is, idols: pagan gods and goddesses, money, power, pleasure, fame, the self, the state, etc.
> The makers are people that have created thousands of gods.
The makers can't be the people because they were made. Who is the ultimate maker of the makers? That is what is meant by God: the uncreated creator or unmoved mover.

2024-10-05 15:18:48

- reply

Some people create gods, but God is uncreated

2024-10-05 14:50:32

“When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.”
https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2012/december/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20121221_auguri-curia.html

2024-10-05 10:16:53

- reply

Would the discovery process be the apocalypse (i.e., revelation or unveiling)?

2024-10-03 18:07:12

- reply

Only a few people will use self-custody lightning. Even fewer understand this.

2024-10-03 12:54:29

- reply

It’s still a draft: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/1369

2024-10-02 16:12:23

@npub1l2v…ajft ‘s NIP-61 will be a significant UX improvement to zapping

2024-09-27 22:41:52

- reply

I'll add it to my list to investigate, but the app requires a lot of key operations since all the events are encrypted from derived keys (via ECDH). The app is already a little slower than I would like to make NWS requests, so I would guess remote signing would make the performance unacceptable.

2024-09-27 19:05:02

- reply

The benefit of using your existing nsec is the app can import your contact list and, if you run a mint, allow your followers to join it.
If you'd like to test out the app, you can create another nsec first, then decide to transfer over your sats later if you want to move to your existing identity.
The cashu proofs are encrypted with your nsec. The app further protects your privacy and security by deriving a dedicated wallet nsec from your personal nsec so it’s deterministically generated for ease of backup but not associated with your identity npub. Additionally, you can use a password in the derivation scheme to add another layer of security or plausible deniability.

2024-09-27 15:19:39

- reply

Very grateful to @npub12rv…85vg @npub1qjg…lgjw and @npub1l2v…ajft for all the work they've done to get us here! Excited to build more! 🚀

2024-09-27 14:05:40

Cashu 🤝 Nostr
Onboard friends and family to your mint in less than 60 seconds through the power of Nostr. It's the easiest way to use Bitcoin. https://sovereign.app https://video.nostr.build/17841c8cc3597467e869ba40aa48eeb73607e606e5dfc14455296e8f875357aa.mp4

2024-09-24 13:36:33

I am continually reminded how wicked and weak most of the boomer generation is. The worst part of their legacy by far is the millennials they raised.

2024-09-23 17:22:30

- reply

Interesting. But isn't this also applicable to all technologies, not just AI?

2024-09-21 23:12:03

- reply

I'm sorry, but that's a stretch. Not defending the Church was 100% in the right in this situation, but that's a bit of an exaggeration.
https://youtu.be/U152bD5W7AU

2024-09-19 23:17:27

“How the universe works is, in my mind, one of the biggest questions that humans can ask.” - @npub12rv…85vg
https://btcpp.substack.com/p/bitcoin-news-edition-theoretical

2024-09-14 02:29:07

- reply

Did God organize a religion?

2024-09-10 13:51:41

- reply

With the community leaders running a cashu mint

2024-09-09 00:08:27

- reply

The ancients knew this https://image.nostr.build/bfcdcf0ed8c03c204ac13691728866d74ca550379520390a5f533ae3a7304eef.jpg

2024-09-07 10:27:41

- reply

If you're willing to, I’m interested to hear more about being harmed by Catholic guilt as a child. I'm also happy to have a private conversation. Please reach out, brother; the Church wants you back. 🙂
Also, I'm not sure if this will help build a personal relationship with Jesus, but you may find it interesting: #note1cmz…u8us

2024-09-06 21:55:22

- reply

On the contrary, I'm open to arguments against my views, but I prefer to contemplate good ones.
Aside from the fact that there are candidates for the Holy Grail—not that one is bound to believe there is—the premise that because we don't have it, we don't know what happened at the Last Supper is not a serious argument.
The author seems to be baiting a weak religious argument to talk about their theory on drugs. That's not that interesting.

2024-09-06 21:44:05

- reply

If the Eucharist is a bridge too far, try praying the rosary daily.
I'm unsure of your theology, but even the most ardent Protestant can pray the rosary by saying only the first half of the Hail Mary.

2024-09-06 21:37:48

- reply

I read the description, and it made no sense, so that doesn't portend an enticing read

2024-09-06 21:18:52

- reply

That author sounds like he has no idea what he's talking about.

2024-09-06 20:02:53

- reply

The Eucharist.
I have a lot of love for non-Catholic Christians, but being a Christian or going to church without the Eucharist is like watching a movie and skipping the climax. You're missing the whole point.

2024-09-05 19:28:42

- reply

This is interesting. Have you thought about a legal system (or an arbitration system) based on Nostr?

2024-09-05 19:05:12

- reply

It just uses HTTP. There is a .nostr domain resolver though.

2024-09-05 17:35:07

Is anyone working on Nostr polls?

2024-09-05 15:54:31

- reply

This book has a lot of good essays about the paradox: https://bookstore.wordonfire.org/products/vibrant-paradoxes

2024-09-05 15:15:13

- reply

Right, but “you” don't need a million sats

2024-09-05 15:12:08

- reply

Not with e-cash 🙂

2024-09-04 00:32:53

Come for the notes, stay for the identity

2024-09-02 21:55:13

Why free speech is essential to protect: #note1vjv…v7qy

2024-09-02 14:56:54

- reply

You only do that in the shower? 😅

2024-09-02 00:00:25

- reply

Wen Premier League?

2024-09-01 20:04:38

- reply

Be careful with #2. A husband is called to die for his wife if necessary (Ephesians 5:25), so his self-preservation can't be above his family. For this reason, I have my priorities arranged as God, then family, and lastly, self. However, to live out the servant leadership we are called to for others, you first have to rightly order yourself; in that sense, the self is higher.

2024-08-31 18:47:46

- reply

Life priorities:
1. Faith
2. Family
3. Health
4. Work
5. Hobby

2024-08-30 21:52:24

- reply

Maybe that factors into people's decisions, but the data suggest it's mainly a personal opinion rather than economic: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2024/07/25/the-experiences-of-u-s-adults-who-dont-have-children/.
Given that most people's opinions are shaped by their culture, we should do as much as we can to promote a culture of strong families. But it's also fair to say the government is a terrible allocator of resources.

2024-08-30 20:55:28

- reply

💯 completely agree

2024-08-30 20:14:00

- reply

I'm not sure if I follow the logic. So if couple A starts a family and receives a tax credit, the state gets less money, which causes it to raise taxes on everyone. Now, couple B is taxed more with no kids, so they don't start a family? But you're saying they would’ve otherwise if there were no subsidies because taxes would be lower? But hypothetically, if they did start a family and receive the subsidy, wouldn't they be in the same position as if there were no subsidy with lower taxes?
It seems to me if everyone has a family, the outcome will be the same, so I don't see the disincentive. Obviously, there can be a big difference between people who choose to have a family and those who don't, but isn't that the point?
I'm not arguing from a position that the government can create an effective tax policy. However, I think people generally underestimate how dire the birth rate situation is. Even if we had the perfect policy to turn it around, I'm not sure if we have enough time, so anything is better than nothing, it seems—just my 2 sats.

2024-08-30 18:47:35

- reply

How do tax incentives discourage having children?

2024-08-29 18:40:42

- reply

Is it possible to have zaps go towards dev funding?

2024-08-29 10:10:12

- reply

Generally no. As a father, I have dominion over my family. Still, if my kids were to do something illegal in public or to someone from a different family, the local authorities would have dominion over justice.
However, for justice (and many other things like education/moral formation) within my family, I can exclude a father from another family from intervening in our affairs or, more importantly, excluding the state from teaching things I disapprove of. So, in that sense, I have a monopoly in my position of authority in the family.
This nuance is articulated as subsidiarity in the Catholic tradition: the principle that decisions should be made at the most local level possible, with higher authorities intervening only when necessary. The concept goes back to at least the 13th century with St. Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica, but Pope Pius XI used it specifically in his papal encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, which is an important document in the history of Catholic Social Teaching.

2024-08-28 21:03:04

- reply

The just use of corrosion in authority is if it is used to will the good of the other for his own sake: what Christians call love or charity. That is to say, the “common good.”

2024-08-28 19:57:53

- reply

https://biblehub.com/2_samuel/23-3.htm#lexicon
To understand the true meaning of scripture, it's best to go to the source and study the etymology of the words.
In this case, it seems to mean to have dominion over justice, which traditionally means giving each his due.

2024-08-28 09:31:51

- reply

A good analogy is getting a loan. When a lender makes a loan with the faith that the borrower will pay him back, it is not that he is blindly handing money out because we can't objectively agree that the money will be paid back. Instead, the lender's limited reason points to trust that the borrower will repay the money. Faith in the action is not below reason by being contrary to it, but it is above reason: the lender can't know the future, but he commits to an action based on his reason from the past.

2024-08-28 00:58:22

- reply

The most popular religion explicitly teaches the opposite: “But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Matthew 5:39)
I'm glad you agree religious people aren't the only ones that can be disagreeable. It's undeniable the atheistic communist governments have resorted to extreme violence against their political opponents.
I could respond to much of what you said about religion, faith, and reason; however, many well-established sources exist for good arguments. Pope St. John Paul II’s encyclical Fides et Ratio (Faith and Reason) is a good starting point.
I want to focus on “independently verifiable objective truth” because you made an excellent point, except, in its essence, religion is a description of truth.
Now, I think understanding truth requires deeper thought. Take the question: does the universe have a beginning? Some people take both sides of that question, neither of which is independently verifiable because (a) we can't go back in time to see if the universe began, and (b) if it's infinite even if we could go back in time, we would never know if there is no beginning or we just haven't gone back far enough. So what do we do? Say, because it's not independently verifiable, we can't know anything about the creation of the universe from our reason. Some modern skeptics take that position, saying we can only trust our senses to derive objective truth. But why should we trust only our senses and not our reason? We know our senses are deceived all the time. So how do we find the truth?
(Aside: I'll make one point about faith and reason. Properly understood faith is not infrarational like you and many others suggest. Instead, authentic faith is suprarational. Faith never contradicts natural reason; it points our reason towards things beyond our limited understanding of reality.)
Your commitment to truth is admirable, and even though you may disagree, it is actually at the heart of Christianity: “What is truth?” (John 18:38). I hope that in your pursuit of truth, you take the time to read the preceding passage in the Gospel of John and contemplate what it means to seek the truth.

2024-08-27 14:59:19

- reply

I don't know why you think I'm not serious. My first question is a philosophical question. I'm curious if you actually believe the goal you state. If you want to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number, we should definitely give 9 million people great lives instead of 10 million mediocre ones.
For the second question, I'm curious about what this video is leaving out: https://youtu.be/1FE0HgS01do

2024-08-27 13:01:17

- reply

When trying to maximize the greatest good for the greatest number, how can you justify leaving 10 million people with mediocre lives when you can give 9 million great lives?
Can you share some of the religious genocides? I'd like to learn about them.

2024-08-26 17:47:36

- reply

Prioritizing the greatest good for the greatest number of people is the path to genocide.
Is it better to kill 1 million people to help 9 million have great lives or let 10 million have mediocre lives?
Believing in God and that humans are made in his image requires respecting the individual's dignity. Yet, our purpose is toward communion with God and each other. Both extremes of individualism and collectivism fail to see this distinction.

2024-08-26 12:36:47

- reply

But we aren't lone individuals. We were made unique in God's image: unified in our ends but granted freedom to pursue them.
Identifying with a subordinate racial or cultural group introduces competition, but there is no competition in the group of the children of God.
We are born into a family with unbreakable bonds; God willing, we die surrounded by the new family we create. These bonds allow us to become who we are meant to be.

2024-08-26 00:11:52

- reply

One idea is to have a tag reference the root public key. The client verifies the event is authentically published by querying for the attested public keys from the event published by the root key

2024-08-25 23:39:42

Evangelizing is planting seeds, not bearing the fruit.

2024-08-24 15:15:18

- reply

What are your thoughts on a chain of trust structure for nsecs? A user would have a root nsec stored on a hardware device. When a Nostr app wants to authenticate a user, it can request a signed event from the root nsec to attest for the newly generated client-specific nsec. The root nsec stays secure and can revoke the client nsec later, and the client doesn't need to deal with any remote signing.

2024-08-20 21:00:21

- reply

What is epoch?

2024-08-20 20:35:03

- reply

The tax code never taxes the rich; it taxes before you can become rich.

2024-08-20 20:32:28

- reply

Assuming it's base64 encoded, what is the data structure and internal encoding?

2024-08-19 17:17:52

- reply

And maybe couples track the woman's cycle to know when it's optimal to try to conceive

2024-08-19 14:43:48

- reply

Another way I've heard it described is that once you view harm as more than physical (e.g., discrimination), there is nothing stopping liberalism from becoming what it is today.
This is also a good explainer: https://youtu.be/ot8Eul-nDU4

2024-08-19 10:32:35

- reply

Good point. It probably makes more sense to keep this focused on your original idea

2024-08-19 00:54:08

- reply

It's also a common misquotation of the Bible. The actual quote is, “For the love of money is the root of all evils.” (1 Timothy 6:10).
*Love* of money is the key phrase.

2024-08-19 00:48:24

- reply

Pope St. John Paul II had a name for this almost 30 years ago: “culture of death.”
https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae.html

2024-08-18 23:50:43

- reply

I'm a little confused about the intended use case for kind 30078 events. Is it meant for end-user applications? If so, would it be better to have a dedicated event kind for this instead?
What do you think about events for each operation: mint, melt, and swap? It would publicly announce the mint's liabilities and determine when a proof was claimed. I'm unsure if that's ideal or if it's expanding the scope too much. I'm also unsure how best to handle proof of assets and liabilities for a mint, but it may be best to figure out a comprehensive solution.
@npub12rv…85vg do you have any thoughts?

2024-08-18 22:25:46

- reply

A WebSocket stream would quickly get out of hand on the server for a large mint. The Nostr integration is interesting as it effectively outsources the horizontal scaling of the WebSocket stream idea to relays. I can help if you want to collaborate.

2024-08-18 17:07:51

- reply

You're conflating childless people in general with those in authority, as my original post states, and taking issue with a qualifying statement, not the original argument.

2024-08-18 16:55:42

- reply

2024-08-18 16:36:12

- reply

1. A person without children has no personal authority (like a parent has over a child) yet tries to wield it publicly.
2. Raising children changes your perspective on reality, both of yourself and your relationships with others.
3. You experience how growth happens and how to plan and prepare for the future.
This is not to say childless people can't contribute positively, but someone raising children has objectively experienced more about life in this world and opportunities to practice virtue.

2024-08-17 21:36:04

- reply

And anyone exercising authority over people (either in companies or governments) who don't have children should be viewed with a healthy degree of skepticism.

2024-08-13 19:59:16

- reply

Have you looked into NIP-60 yet? Your idea sounds more general purpose, but we are working on a cashu-specific one: https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/1369

2024-08-13 10:00:44

- reply

No one will have all the answers for how to live together while we're still in this world. The best we can do is understand that social hierarchies are natural and order society toward the common good.

2024-08-13 00:55:04

- reply

The follow-up book, Regime Change, offers some alternatives: https://www.amazon.com/Regime-Change-Toward-Postliberal-Future/dp/0593086902
Maybe our liberal culture will accept some form of pluralism. Still, I think it will be hard for people in a liberal framework to accept less liberalism, so I don't know how realistic an alternative this is.
A post-liberal alternative is, in many ways, a pre-liberal political system dating back to ideas from Plato’s Republic. Liberals trying to equalize the few and many is, at best, a fiction and, at worst, a nefarious, systematic way for the few to exploit the many by shunning responsibility in the name of liberty. Post-liberalism tries to reassert that difference constructively: the “aristo” use their place of privilege to serve the common good for the many.
You're right. Much work must be done to make post-liberal thought practical, but I think it starts from a stronger philosophical foundation than liberalism.

2024-08-13 00:06:17

- reply

Yes, but I'm not convinced that liberalism can be saved. Liberalism's chief virtue is tolerance, which aims to ‘liberate’ people from any sources of intolerance (i.e., authority outside the state, cultural norms, family structures, religion, etc.). Pluralistic liberalism is a contradiction because liberalism demands totality.
We see society at the logical conclusion of liberalism, which is inherently unstable because of the egalitarian veil it tries to put over the differences between the few and the many. I think the post-liberals make better analyses of current affairs and arguments for where we should go via classical mixed constitutions between the few and the many.

2024-08-09 16:54:17

- reply

The actual number is 100%. L1 can only handle 0.5% of credit card transactions.

2024-08-08 16:28:04

- reply

Everyone is made with a God-shaped heart. If you don't let God fill it, the government will.

2024-08-08 16:25:06

- reply

Flutter. If you need anything Flutter/Dart doesn't support well natively, you can drop in some rust code: https://github.com/fzyzcjy/flutter_rust_bridge
I'm using CDK in my Flutter app.

2024-08-08 10:54:57

- reply

There will always be a difference between what *can* be done and what *should* be done.
Saying something should be done (i.e., “do what is best for Bitcoin”) implies an objective purpose for Bitcoin. Saying something can be done acknowledges agency in how the protocol is used.
It is clear from the original creator and reason that Bitcoin is meant to be decentralized sound money. It also has a known limitation (the block size) that means most of the population will never be able to interact directly with it. If what someone is doing isn't for the purpose of allowing the most people to hold sound money (so it remains decentralized), then it shouldn't be done even if the protocol allows it to be done.

2024-08-03 15:57:52

- reply

If you are interested in political philosophy, Regime Change: Toward a Postliberal Future by Patrick Deneen https://www.amazon.com/Regime-Change-Toward-Postliberal-Future/dp/0593086902

2024-08-03 14:23:05

- reply

What genre/topics?

2024-07-25 12:10:27

- reply

I just realized the “nuts and bolts” pun 😂

2024-07-14 13:59:51

- reply

https://youtu.be/LkgU2UJvq78

2024-07-13 17:34:24

- reply

What risk does e-cash have that custodial LSPs don't?
E-cash mints are custodial LSPs with more privacy.

2024-06-24 01:30:11

- reply

What tax regime would be detrimental to Bitcoin and not any other asset? I can't think of one. Bitcoin in self-custody (or family-custody) significantly raises the effort necessary for the government to seize your property way beyond anything else you can hold to store value

2024-06-23 21:06:36

- reply

If Bitcoin becomes the standard, what do governments use to buy it? The point is we've stopped accepting their currency.
Also, most Bitcoin has already been mined, and governments don't hold much of it.

2024-06-23 16:31:41

Catholics Should be Bitcoiners
Catholics face many challenges living the faith together in an increasingly secular age. However, Catholic communities can uphold their faith in the modern world with a simple action: adopt Bitcoin.
Freedom Money
Pope St. John Paul II famously told his American audience, “Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought.” Bitcoin gained early notoriety for its permissionless nature to enable criminals. However, just because a man can undermine his freedom does not diminish its inalienability. As a man can freely speak so others may come to know the truth, he can also use speech for harm. Similarly, the freedom to transact is necessary to provide for the common good, even if a man can use money for personal destruction. Bitcoin enables the freedom needed for the expression of public morality. As Pope Benedict XVI wrote, "It is good for people to realize that purchasing is always a moral — and not simply economic — act. Hence the consumer has a specific social responsibility, which goes hand-in-hand with the social responsibility of the enterprise." (Caritas in Veritate 66) As a large portion of the population is unbanked because of their social status and governments de-bank political opponents, protecting the freedom to transact is more crucial than ever to maintain the right to support what we ought.
Sound Monetary Policy
Regarding wealth concentration in 1931, Pope Pius XI wrote, “This dictatorship is being most forcibly exercised by those who, since they hold the money and completely control it, control credit also and rule the lending of money. Hence they regulate the flow, so to speak, of the life-blood whereby the entire economic system lives, and have so firmly in their grasp the soul, as it were, of economic life that no one can breathe against their will.” (Quadragesimo Anno 106) The Federal Reserve, which creates US Dollars by fiat, is the single controller of the world economy because it controls the ‘life-blood’ of the world reserve currency. This arbitrary power undermines a family’s ability to save for the future and rewards cronies of the central bank by the Cantillon effect, cementing an unjust economic order.
Contrary to the Federal Reserve, whose monetary policy is at the whims of politicians, the creator of Bitcoin established an immutable and predictable monetary policy at its inception to issue all 21 million Bitcoins. Although Bitcoin may experience volatility, its sound monetary policy enables families to securely store their resources, safeguard their future, and empower them to contribute to the common good. Before Bitcoin, no one could resist the unjust exercise of power demonstrated by the central bank of the most powerful nation. However, now we can resist and are obligated to do so.
Practical Distributism
G. K. Chesterton once quipped, “Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists.” After the Industrial Revolution, while affirming the market economy, the Church has always warned against the centralizing forces of unbridled capitalism. It has sought to create a new economic framework: Distributism. “Economic development must remain under man's determination and must not be left to the judgment of a few men or groups possessing too much economic power or of the political community alone or of certain more powerful nations.” (Gaudium et Spes 65) In Bitcoin, monetary policy is decentralized to the point that any changes need unanimous consent, which means it is practically impossible to change. A prosperous nation-state has no more power than an individual running a Bitcoin server. Decentralized money is the first step toward a Distributist future from which distributed economic activity can flow. With further technological advancements, the Bitcoin network will be able to support dense local economic activity and allow a community to organize around the common good while removing the unjust influence of the central bank.
Lastly, Pope St. John Paul II left us invaluable wisdom about the post-World World II attempt to create a just economic order: “In general, such attempts endeavour to preserve free market mechanisms, ensuring, by means of a stable currency and the harmony of social relations, the conditions for steady and healthy economic growth in which people through their own work can build a better future for themselves and their families.” (Centesimus Annus 19) Let us heed his wisdom and adopt Bitcoin to create a more just future for families and communities.

2024-06-12 10:17:47

- reply

Protestant: “a member of any of several church denominations denying the universal authority of the Pope and affirming the Reformation principles of justification by faith alone, the priesthood of all believers, and the primacy of the Bible as the only source of revealed truth.”
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/protestant
Protestantism is, by definition, a *protest* against the Catholic faith. I suggest you do a little more research into your faith, and then we can have a more fruitful discussion.

2024-06-12 00:55:12

- reply

Because there aren't any “Christians” who claim no one has authority over them because they're under the guidance of the Holy Spirit who aren't a “mouthpiece of the satanic pedo death cult”? I can't believe Protestants can't bother to see what has happened to Christianity outside the Church.
It's shocking how weak the arguments are against Catholicism and how intransigent its opponents are. I've yet to see a Biblical reference or evidence to refute my claims, only opinions written authoritatively. I'm all for conversations between different denominations to figure out the truth, but many like this lack essential goodwill.