GN Nostriches 🌙✨💤

Perfect. I just responded to someone with the question too: https://primal.net/e/ I will read yours fully tomorrow. A bit late for me now. ✨🌙

It's late at night and I don't have energy tonight for answering so I got this from ChatGPT instead (see below). Also, listen to a bunch of Jeff Booth interviews. 🧡🧡 Here's my AI assisted response: This is a very thoughtful question — you’re touching the core tension between **fixed money supply** and **growing economic output**. Let’s break it down clearly. --- ## 1️⃣ How could a fixed-supply asset (like Bitcoin) work in a growing economy? Bitcoin has a **hard cap of 21 million coins**. If it became the global standard: * The **money supply would be fixed** * The **economy (goods, services, productivity) would continue growing** ### What would happen? If output grows but money supply doesn’t, then: > Prices fall over time (deflation) Example: * Today: 1 BTC = 1 house * In 20 years: 1 BTC = 5 houses (because productivity increased) So instead of inflation (prices rising), you'd get **increasing purchasing power** of money. This is not mathematically impossible. It’s how gold-standard economies partially functioned in the 19th century. --- ## 2️⃣ The real economic tension The main issue isn’t "there isn’t enough money." Money is divisible. Bitcoin can be divided into: * 100 million satoshis per BTC * Potentially even smaller units in software So supply divisibility is not the problem. The deeper concerns are: ### 🔹 A) Debt becomes harder In a deflationary system: * Debts become more expensive over time * Borrowing is riskier * Credit-based expansion slows Modern economies are built heavily on debt expansion. --- ### 🔹 B) Hoarding incentive If money increases in value over time: * Saving is rewarded * Spending is delayed * Risk-taking may reduce Some economists argue this slows innovation. Others argue it forces smarter capital allocation. --- ## 3️⃣ Your idea: money reflecting natural resources You said: > "We should have an asset that reflects the actual state of natural resources — which enable production." That’s a powerful concept. Let's analyze it. ### What you're proposing sounds like: * A **resource-backed currency** * Or a **production-capacity indexed currency** Something like: * Energy-backed money * Carbon-capacity backed money * Land/resource basket standard * GDP-indexed token * Commodity basket currency --- ## 4️⃣ The difficulty with resource-backed money It sounds intuitive — but here are the structural challenges: ### 🔸 1) Resources change constantly * New discoveries * Technological efficiency improvements * Substitutions (e.g., solar replaces oil) What exactly would you peg it to? --- ### 🔸 2) Measuring “real resource capacity” is hard Natural resources: * Are geographically distributed * Have extraction costs * Are politically controlled * May be environmentally constrained You’d need: * A global authority * Real-time measurement * Agreement on valuation That introduces governance and trust issues. --- ### 🔸 3) Production ≠ resources alone Production depends on: * Technology * Human capital * Institutions * Energy efficiency * Knowledge Japan has few natural resources but massive production. Congo has huge resources but low production. So resource-backing doesn’t directly equal economic output. --- ## 5️⃣ Deeper philosophical divide Your question really touches this: ### Should money reflect: A) Scarcity? (Bitcoin model) B) Production capacity? (Growth-indexed model) C) Resource base? (Commodity model) D) Political policy? (Fiat model) Each system optimizes different values. --- ## 6️⃣ Can a fixed asset work in a growing world? Yes — but the economy would look different: * More savings-driven * Less debt-leveraged * Slower credit expansion * Possibly lower boom/bust cycles * Stronger purchasing power over time It would likely be: * Less inflationary * More volatile during adjustment phase * Structurally deflationary The real issue isn’t “not enough money.” It’s whether society can operate without: * Continuous credit expansion * Monetary stimulus * Inflation as a political tool --- ## 7️⃣ Your intuition is very interesting You’re thinking in thermodynamic terms: > Production depends on physical constraints (energy, materials). That aligns with: * Energy economics * Ecological economics * Biophysical economics Some economists (like Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen or Herman Daly) argue exactly this: > Money should reflect energy and entropy constraints. --- ## 8️⃣ Big insight Bitcoin reflects **digital scarcity**. Natural-resource money reflects **physical scarcity**. Fiat reflects **political authority**. Each anchors value differently. The real question becomes: > Do we want money to represent scarcity, production capacity, or governance power? There is no purely technical answer — it's philosophical and political.

If you believe in the long-term thesis of Bitcoin as a decentralized, scarce and superior form of sound money, then using a government controlled fiat currency to define its value is an illogical, short-term and flawed metric. Better to measure by what Bitcoin can purchase directly (goods, services, real estate) rather than its conversion rate to a manipulated currency. Over time, as the purchasing power of fiat decreases, the number of goods and services one can buy with BTC increases. Bitcoin's price in fiat is volatile, its intrinsic value as a secure, censorship-resistant and decentralized network remains constant. The volatility is a result of it being measured against a fiat currency that is constantly shifting in value due to inflation.

My husband showed me this. He knows how much I like clouds. :) Pretty amazing and it was taken over Western Australia.

🙋‍♀️🙏

Thanks Had forgotten all about this one. 🤣😂🤭👏🧡🫂 https://youtu.be/ZtYU87QNjPw King Arthur: Old woman! Dennis: Man. King Arthur: Man, sorry. What knight lives in that castle over there? Dennis: I’m 37. King Arthur: What? Dennis: I’m 37. I’m not old. King Arthur: Well I can’t just call you “man”. Dennis: Well you could say “Dennis”. King Arthur: I didn’t know you were called Dennis. Dennis: Well you didn’t bother to find out, did you? King Arthur: I did say sorry about the “old woman”, but from behind you looked… Dennis: What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior. King Arthur: Well, I am king. Dennis: Oh, king eh? Very nice. And how’d you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society. If there’s ever gonna be any progress… Peasant Woman: Dennis! There’s some lovely filth down here… Oh! How do you do? [Dennis joins the Peasant Woman in the nearby filth patch] King Arthur: How do you do, good lady? I am Arthur, king of the Britons. Whose castle is that? Peasant Woman: King of the who? King Arthur: The Britons. Peasant Woman: Who’re the “Britons”? King Arthur: Well, we all are. We’re all Britons, and I am your king. Peasant Woman: Didn’t know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective. Dennis: You’re fooling yourself. We’re living in a dictatorship! A self-perpetuating autocracy, in which the working classes… Peasant Woman: Oh, there you go, bringing class into it again. Dennis: Well, that’s what it’s all about! If only people would– King Arthur: Please, please, good people, I am in haste. Who lives in that castle? Peasant Woman: No one lives there. King Arthur: Then who is your lord? Peasant Woman: We don’t have a lord. King Arthur: What? Dennis: I told you, we’re an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as sort of executive officer for the week… King Arthur: Yes… Dennis: …but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting… King Arthur: Yes I see… Dennis: …by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs… King Arthur: Be quiet! Dennis: …but by a two thirds majority in the case of more… King Arthur: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet! Peasant Woman: “Order”, eh? Who does he think he is? King Arthur: I am your king. Peasant Woman: Well, I didn’t vote for you. King Arthur: You don’t vote for kings. Peasant Woman: Well, how’d you become king, then? [Angelic music plays…] King Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king. Dennis: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. Arthur: Be quiet! Dennis: You can’t expect to wield supreme executive power just ’cause some watery tart threw a sword at you! Arthur: Shut up! Dennis: I mean, if I went around saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they’d put me away! Arthur: [grabs Dennis] Shut up! Will you shut up?! Dennis: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system! Arthur: [shakes Dennis] Shut up! Dennis: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I’m being repressed! Arthur: Bloody Peasant! Dennis: Ooh, what a giveaway! Did you hear that? Did you hear that, eh? That’s what I’m on about! Did you see him repressing me? You saw it, didn’t you? Source: https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/04/18/strange-women-lying-in-ponds-distributing-swords-is-no-basis-for-a-system-of-government/

😂🤣👍

🤣😂🤭

Ouch! Cross fingers (and fill sandbags). 🤞

Thank you 🧡🧡🧡

I can relate to that. 👍🤭

Of course! 👍👏