>>13670522That's the owner of Twitter. If there's anyone on this board closer to finance than I am, I'd love their input. From history, hyperinflaiton doesn't occur: it's inflicted. This feels like the big problem with the thesis. Jack is a big Defi guy, like most of silicon valley. He would have to be approaching this as the herald from 300. He's warning the average reader this is coming, you can either make peace with it or suffer. Only the US really has the capacity to back up the financial powers that could inflict hyperinflation on an economy of your size. One of the big concerns I've always had about DeFi, what incentive is there for the barely-online special forces psychopath, in their thousands, not to just kill you and your family in the most terrifying way possible? Defi's about the death of the pension scheme. Global digital mafias you can't begin to even know how to fight back against because they're creating false identities and misdirections 24/7. The computer guys love it because git gud means they get to vicariously kill til they can kill no more, and then because they got as far as diamond league, seize control of some poor helpless white girls and become master of their orifices. Phat lewt for dalits. And of course it won't go like that. They'll end up devalued just like everyone else. This was always the problem with pol. The plan of action was always going to primarily involve the box the user's addicted to. And like every other revolutionary scheme, they'll have to get funding from the same people they want to do away with, while bargaining with themselves that they'll seize the reins at an appropriate moment. And of course they won't. Finishing the game was always disappointing. Millions upon millions dead, the rough beast howling and braying in its Bethlehem manger, and a Bush scion mugging for the camera.
