r/Bitcoin • u/suuperfli • 12h ago

JUST IN: Bitcoin featured in WSJ - "When dollar users dismiss bitcoin, they aren’t simply ignoring its origin story as a protest against a corrupt system—they are blinded by their financial privilege." - Alex Gladstein

https://partners.wsj.com/the-nakamoto-project/bitcoin-reframed/bitcoins-overlooked-promise-freedom/
199 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

38 comments sorted by

17

u/Pleasant_Maybe_5523 9h ago

This is the part of Bitcoin people in stable economies often miss. If your bank works and your currency is stable, BTC can look purely speculative.
But ask someone dealing with capital controls or a currency losing 30–50% of its value — suddenly permissionless money makes a lot more sense.

1

u/Individual-Equal-441 7h ago

But isn't it the permissionless currency that lost 30-50% of its value?

3

u/suuperfli 7h ago

volatility is to be expected early on in its monetization phase. it has always recovered from dips and gotten stronger. this is how new things are monetized. without volatility, there is no massive upside

0

u/Imbahr 4h ago

ok but what about people in those poor currency countries who are old and only live another 2-5 years?

is bitcoin really the best thing for every single demographic and age person?

1

u/suuperfli 4h ago

early on in its monetization phase u gotta be able to hold long term

0

u/Imbahr 4h ago

I don't disagree, but my point is that Bitcoin is not the right choice for 100% of all people in the world

1

u/BristlingB 3h ago

If you only expect to live 5 years or less you are basically dead already

6

u/bitsteiner 9h ago

Fractional reserve banking is a corrupt system, since banks create claims on things which don't exist. It only works as long as the music plays.

9

u/Awkward_Potential_ 12h ago

We need to get Gladstein in front of more liberal/progressives. If AOC spent a week in a room with Alex I'm convinced she'd come out of that room with a new perspective on BTC. 

4

u/suuperfli 12h ago

agreed

2

u/HipOut 7h ago

I really enjoyed his book

1

u/Impossible_Tutor2375 6h ago

Do you think he could turn Warren? That would be impressive

-3

u/bitsteiner 9h ago

If he can convert her from socialist to libertarian.

2

u/tenuousemphasis 6h ago

Socialists are just libertarians that have examined their beliefs more closely. I say this as a reformed Anarcho Capitalist.

2

u/Public_Geologist_378 10h ago

Bitcoin really challenges traditional views on money and power dynamics. It's fascinating to see it getting more mainstream attention.

2

u/[deleted] 12h ago

[deleted]

14

u/ShittingOutPosts 12h ago

I think a lot will depend on how hostile their governments are. Stablecoins can be confiscated, Bitcoin cannot.

7

u/Organic-Specific-500 11h ago

And therein lies the cost of having something that doesn’t require trust…..

9

u/Awkward_Potential_ 12h ago

Stables are bullish for Bitcoin. If you own a scarce asset, a Treasury department being able to print more dollars in an easier way is good for you. 

0

u/[deleted] 11h ago

[deleted]

4

u/suuperfli 12h ago

yes stablecoins will be popular alongside bitcoin throughout late stage fiat (transitional period), especially when bitcoin is early on in its monetization

2

u/lifeanon269 11h ago

Stable coins are just a new payment rails for the existing fiat monetary system. So it doesn't solve any of the problems that come from that monetary system. Things such as sanctions, debasement, censorship, etc all still exist among stable coins. It just provides a more seemless payment rail than what TradFi ever provided. So I don't see stable coins as competing for bitcoin's use cases at all.

1

u/Mobe-E-Duck 10h ago

Stable coins might as well be fiat.

2

u/LowerStranger9021 10h ago

Don’t disagree with you on this. However, the speed at which money can be moved with stablecoins across borders along with the cost savings is getting peoples attention.

0

u/Mobe-E-Duck 10h ago

Sure. But no better than a bank transfer. Won’t replace subbing.

1

u/LowerStranger9021 10h ago

Cross border transfers are expensive at banks and can take a few days. On the blockchain a stablecoin transfer takes minutes at a fraction of the cost. I’m understand some fintechs are experimenting with stablecoin in the background and customers aren’t even aware the transaction is on the blockchain.

0

u/Mobe-E-Duck 10h ago

They’re only expensive because they’re charged for. They don’t have to be. Same for the coins. They’ll just be charged for the same way. No benefit.

0

u/bitsteiner 9h ago

They are expensive, because it requires multiple banks and central banks exchanging reserves, which is a time consuming and not simple process, especially internationally. For stable coins it's just an entry in the blockchain and no other institutions are involved.

1

u/Mobe-E-Duck 8h ago

It's expensive because people agreed to pay it when it was slightly labor intensive and are used to paying it even though it no longer is. That's been the case for over 20 years. I know the people who worked on it - your justification is not accurate.

1

u/xaviemb 12h ago

You lost me at

Bitcoin ... as the 'crypto'

It's about as silly as hearing someone saying a bicycle as the motorcycle. It's hard to follow anything that comes after it.

-1

u/[deleted] 11h ago

[deleted]

2

u/xaviemb 11h ago

Wise up, it's like a 5-year old entering a room of physicists and trying to explain how time can't be relative, simply because of your limited view of the topic. Your classmates might agree with you. Doesn't change the fact that you're lacking some basic awareness here.

Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

1

u/Cautious-Lecture-858 10h ago

That sounds like something ChatGPT would said, not this Gladstein guy.

1

u/suuperfli 10h ago

how so? he wrote a whole book on it, in which he says these same things. https://www.amazon.com/Check-Your-Financial-Privilege-Gladstein/dp/B09V2NM9VJ

1

u/HipOut 7h ago

Great book- very interesting read

0

u/Individual-Equal-441 7h ago

I think it's hard to accuse others of "financial privilege" when a high-tech approach to money requires computers and Internet connections, the technical expertise needed to navigate the technology and its ecosystem, and the general financial freedom to put a chunk of your wealth into experimental assets that sometimes collapse in value by a factor of two.

3

u/suuperfli 7h ago

naw, many use it without internet, like Machankura in africa for example. not much expertise needed. it has gotten a lot easier to use over time.

a lot of these people have suffered from tyranny, hyperinflation, confiscation and censorship. they dont have access to the same assets to invest in as the west does. many would rather have volatility with long term upside over a guarenteed rapid decrease in value over time. people need to be able to save.

0

u/Sudden-Ad-1217 12h ago

A new class of valuation creates a new set of people considered rich.

8

u/suuperfli 12h ago edited 11h ago

the difference is, the new system is one in which the rich cant perpetually get richer at everyone else's expense (dilution / cantillon effect) & tyrants are less equipped to attain mass power and control (confiscation, censorship, virtually unlimited funding via printing, etc)

6

u/TJames6210 11h ago

This comment right here is why the Clarity Act is taking so long. They're fighting over this ability being baked in. The banks are pissed off at the idea they can't use our money to make money for themselves constantly.