Thread - Nostr Hypermedia

How could something agreed upon be theft? If you know the inflation rate for ever, you agree on a possible (but not necessary) loss of value. It makes fiat inflation really different from Monero inflation. Another innovative way to manage this with a predefined inflation rate is to use two units, one being the currency as usual, the other being the currency corrected from inflation. I only saw that in this "relative theory of money", only in French at the moment:

Sommaire — Théorie Relative de la Monnaie v2.718

It's being experimented with an actual cryptocurrency:

Duniter | Home

Duniter is a blockchain software powering the Ğ1 libre currency.

↑ Parent

Replies (2)

BitcoinIsFuture 2 months ago

So you are saying its not a theft of your value, its loss of your value. Isn't that linguistic gymnastics?

3 replies ↓

🧙🏼‍♂️Homemdosaco 2 months ago

I actually see tail emissions as an ever decreasing percent fee on increased security provided by every extra block. A fee for a service. As it is, miner funding in the future is somewhat fragile, and hodlers get something for nothing. I also understand that opening this pandora box is risky. But I see most arguments against tail emissions to come from a kind of (justifiable) revolted place against fiat and central bank policy.

1 replies ↓