저자: Latest Simplified · 외국인
다듬은 글
and you said on cnbc that you felt that the government kind of was doing too much to rescue some of these companies and you were saying things like you didn't care if the hedge funds got wiped out and um i just wondered you know so what would that look like if the government were to do what you recommended and you know what you were saying were things like oh they wouldn't get to somewhere in the hamptons and who would care if they got wiped out but you know i also wondered like that sort of applies to well you tell me maybe it doesn't apply to people like you but but would you be willing to be wiped out um yeah i mean i've never really been defined um by my money i think i was a i was i was an evolutionary person with the same values i may have been a little more douchey when i was younger or harder to deal with but i was still the same person and i frankly felt that i had the same worth as a human being when i was growing up on welfare when i was in my 20s or 30s or now in my 40s i think that you know money is a projection that other people use um and i used it on myself for a while and now i use it less and so you know being in a position to actually realize that you know the the school teacher that makes sixty thousand dollars is just as important as i am is the truth um and so yeah you could take it all away i don't i don't really care it's be a fun ride no matter what i think i have a great set of memories that i've created for myself and the journey's been a blast and i hope to have another 50-year of those things you know what i what i was speaking about on cnbc was just my frustration about not wanting to acknowledge where the federal reserve and treasury were not acknowledging how the actual economy works the united states is an economy where the overwhelming majority of the gdp is generated by consumers and the way that you know consumers lift up the american economy is by spending money and when you take revenues away from the american consumer because they're unemployed or because they can't earn wages then they're going to spend less which means that the economy contracts and you have a recession so first principles thinking would tell you that you put money in the hands of consumers and you put enough money in in their hands such that the amount that they have exceeds what they need to live and then the excess spending they will spend and the reason why that's important is then it forces companies to then reopen faster hire people more you know invariably what you'll see is then they'll also have to pay them more because again these consumers have more money but that's actually all a good rebalancing of what's been happening for the last 40 years which is that the pendulum has swung you know in economic theory you say that the pendulum swings between labor and capital and in the last 40 years of trickle-down economics what we've really done is swung the pendulum so far towards capital that people who are the labor class don't really have the earning power that they actually had before and putting a lot more money into their hands where effectively you have to pay them more to come back to work isn't a bad thing it will recalibrate what is a very lopsided distribution of leverage and so getting power into the hands of labor and getting more money into the hands of labor actually sort of subverts and sort of puts an end to trickle-down economic theory and it kind of worked in the 80s but frankly in the 90s and 2000s and you know now it just it's it's a dated economic philosophy that doesn't map to how the world works and you've said that there's room for everyone to have an uncorrelated hedge in their portfolio and you say that bitcoin can service that you also have called it schmuck insurance um and i wondered do you think that the coronavirus pandemic is sort of like bitcoin's moment not really um i think that um when i talked about it being schmuck insurance um the place that i'm coming from is that uh we want something that frankly will protect our wealth however much that it is that we have in cases where the people in power really get over their ski tips and do something that we can all see is a bad idea but they're driven by short-term political incentives the reality is that you know governments used to be run by a very different kind of person um and in some countries today i would say that you know it harkens back to how it used to be so for example if you look at singapore you know the smartest people that that graduate um and you know some of the most capable individuals go into the bureaucracy and work for the singaporean government i don't think that we could all look at ourselves in the eye and honestly say that that's necessarily true in western democracies it's a kind of person that really excels in public relations or you know winning elections it's not necessarily people who excel at governance or legislation and so the reality is that you know we have people that are somewhat mismatched for the job and invariably whenever that happens irrespective whatever profession that is mistakes happen um you know i mean just to use a stark example it's kind of morbid but you know if you put a pilot who's not a great pilot who actually really wanted to be a school teacher in the cockpit of a plane that person is much more likely to make a mistake that has huge consequences than a person who lives and breeds wanting to be a pilot and that's also true of legislators and so the reality is that you know we have folks that um will focus on short-term window dressing type solutions again you can see it today um in in what the in what the fed and the treasury are doing you know we've massively increased the deficit and the debt um you know the united states is now the united states government is now responsible for more than 50 of the gdp which essentially makes us a you know quasi-communist country socialist country at a minimum except without any of the benefits so you know you still have sky-high health care and you know exorbitantly high useless education um so it's kind of like the worst form of socialism uh dummy socialism um and so you know when when when those kinds of things are happening and they're not getting fixed and they're only getting exacerbated i just think that if people have been hard-working with their head down um they should have an opportunity to make sure that they don't get wiped out if uh the government itself just continues to make a string of bad decisions that then have rising consequences and bitcoin to me is the only thing that i've seen so far that is really fundamentally uncorrelated to that decision-making process and to that decision-making body because at the end of the day any other asset class equities debt real estate commodities they're all tightly tightly coupled to a legislative framework and an interconnectedness in the financial markets that brings together many of the governments that are sort of behaving this way and so it's almost like a a bet against the ruling class in some ways and making sure that you have a small amount of insurance because these insurance again insurance is not something that pays off 50 cents to the dollar insurance is something that pays off you know 1 000 bucks to a buck you want these massive massive asymmetric payoffs um because you want to be sure that uh a small amount of insurance can basically make you whole um and that's why i just think that you know you should take one percent of your portfolio put it in bitcoin never look at it don't look at the price don't look at anything and hope that that one percent goes to zero then you have 99 um but in the case where that 99 goes to zero that one percent will probably be worth 120 and you'll feel like a genius but i guess what i'm confused about is you know if you feel that the government isn't handling the coronavirus response i mean uh in terms of you know uh handling the stimulus and dealing with the economic fallout in the best way then why is it that you feel that this wouldn't be the moment when that uncorrelated asset would be something that people could turn to um look the government has done you know uh depending on how technically you want to get six or seven forms of quantitative easing since the great financial crisis so we could have picked any one of those moments and said this is bitcoin's moment and what i'm trying to get across to you is that you know it's there there is no seminal event and i think that people waiting for a seminal event um probably create more speculation than is healthy for bitcoin um i think that you know this is a parade of terribles it's uh it's a bunch of small things that eventually add together bring down the entire you know way in which we think the financial infrastructure of the world works we will lose credibility in it there will not be a single thing laura that you will be able to point to this will be the sum of many many bad decisions um and it's the compounding of bad decisions and you know historians will try to pinpoint an event and i think it it'll be not worth the time i just think that this is in a it's a pattern and um you know when you see the pattern i think you just have to be prepared to hedge it be on the other side of it hope the pattern stops because quite honestly if your bitcoin bet pays off it will be catechismically destructive for the world um and that'll have enormous consequences to many people that we all know and care about who weren't hedged in bitcoin
Comments 0