Bitcoin, 購買力保存者

By Bitcoin 雜誌 - 1 年前 - 閱讀時間：13 分鐘
12 年 2022 月 2 日，星期二 00:XNUMX AM

Bitcoin, 購買力保存者

When fiat money’s music finally stops, the inflationary pressure must go somewhere — and to bitcoin, the hardest asset, it will go.

This is an opinion editorial by Dan, cohost of the Blue Collar Bitcoin 播客。

給讀者的初步說明: 這篇文章最初是作為一篇文章寫的，後來被 分 into three parts. Each section covers distinctive concepts, but the overarching thesis relies on the three sections in totality. Part 1 worked to highlight why the current fiat system produces economic imbalance. Part 2 and Part 3 work to demonstrate how Bitcoin may serve as a solution.

系列內容

第 1 部分：菲亞特管道

簡介

破管

儲備貨幣並發症

坎蒂隆難題

第 2 部分：購買力保護者

第 3 部分：貨幣去複雜化

財務簡化者

債務抑制因素

“加密貨幣”警告

結論

當今金融體系中存在的前所未有的債務水平從長遠來看意味著一件事： 貨幣貶值。 如今，“通貨膨脹”這個詞經常被輕率地提及。 很少有人理解它的實際意義、真正原因或真正含義。 對於許多人來說，通貨膨脹只不過是他們在購買葡萄酒和雞尾酒時抱怨的加油站或雜貨店的價格。 “這是拜登、奧巴馬或普京的錯！” 當我們放眼長遠思考時，通貨膨脹是一個巨大的——我認為無法解決的——法定數學問題，隨著幾十年的過去，它變得越來越難調和。 在當今的經濟中，生產率落後於債務，以至於任何和所有的恢復方法都需要鬥爭。 跟踪債務進展的一個關鍵指標是債務除以 國內生產總值（GDP） （債務/GDP）。 消化下面的圖表，該圖表具體反映了總債務和公共聯邦債務與 GDP 的關係。

如果我們關注聯邦債務（藍線），我們會發現在短短 50 年內，我們的債務/GDP 已從低於 40% 上升到 企業排放佔全球 135% 在 COVID-19 大流行期間——上世紀的最高水平。 還值得注意的是，當前的困境甚至比這張圖表更加戲劇性，這些數字表明，因為這並不反映巨大的 無資金準備的權利負債 （即社會保障、醫療保險和醫療補助）預計將永久存在。

What does this excessive debt mean? To make sense of it, let’s distill these realities down to the individual. Suppose someone racks up exorbitant liabilities: two mortgages well outside their price range, three cars they can’t afford and a boat they never use. Even if their income is sizable, eventually their debt load reaches a level they cannot sustain. Maybe they procrastinate by tallying up credit cards or taking out a loan with a local credit union to merely service the minimum payments on their existing debt. But if these habits persist, the camel’s back inevitably breaks — they foreclose on the homes; SeaRay sends someone to take back the boat out of their driveway; their Tesla gets repossessed; they go bankrupt. No matter how much she or he felt like they “needed” or “deserved” all those items, the math finally bit them in the ass. If you were to create a chart to encapsulate this person’s quandary, you would see two lines diverging in opposite directions. The gap between the line representing their debt and the line representing their income (or productivity) would widen until they reached insolvency. The chart would look something like this:

是的，這張圖表是真實的。 這是聯合國的精華 各州總債務 （紅色）超過國內生產總值或生產率（藍色）。 我第一次看到這個圖表 發佈在Twitter上 由著名穩健貨幣倡導者和科技投資者勞倫斯·萊帕德 (Lawrence Lepard) 提出。 他在其上方添加了以下文字。

“Blue line generates income to pay interest on red line. See the problem? It's just math.”

The math is catching up to sovereign nation states too, but the way the chickens come home to roost looks quite different for central governments than for the individual in the paragraph above, particularly in countries with reserve currency status. You see, when a government has its paws on both the supply of money and the price of money (i.e. interest rates) as they do in today’s fiat monetary system, they can attempt to default in a much softer fashion. This sort of soft default necessarily leads to growth in money supply, because when central banks have access to newly created reserves (a money printer, if you will) it’s incredibly unlikely debt service payments will be missed or neglected. Rather, debt will be monetized, meaning the government will borrow newly fabricated money1 from the central bank rather than raising authentic capital through increasing taxes or selling bonds to real buyers in the economy (actual domestic or international investors). In this way, money is artificially manufactured to service liabilities. 林恩·奧爾登 (Lyn Alden) 提出了債務水平和債務貨幣化 在上下文中：

“When a country starts getting to about 100% debt-to-GDP, the situation becomes nearly unrecoverable ... a 赫希曼資本的研究 指出，自 51 年以來，在 130 個政府債務超過 GDP 1800% 的案例中，有 50 個政府出現違約。 到目前為止，唯一的例外是日本 世界上最大的債權國。 赫希曼·卡（Hirschman Ca）“默認”pital included nominal default and major inflations where the bondholders failed to be paid back by a wide margin on an inflation-adjusted basis … There’s no example I can find of a large country with more than 100% government debt-to-GDP where the central bank doesn’t own a significant chunk of that debt.”2

法定央行和財政部過度的貨幣權力首先是造成槓桿（債務）過度積累的一個重要因素。 對貨幣的集中控制使政策制定者能夠以看似永久的方式推遲經濟痛苦，一再緩解短期問題。 但即使意圖很純粹，這個遊戲也不可能永遠持續下去。 歷史證明，光有良好的意願是不夠的，還需要更多的努力。 如果激勵措施不當，就會出現不穩定。

遺憾的是，隨著債務水平變得更加不可持續，有害的貨幣貶值和通貨膨脹的威脅急劇增加。 在 2020 年代，我們開始感受到這種短視的法定實驗的破壞性影響。 那些行使貨幣權力的人確實有能力緩解緊迫的經濟痛苦，但從長遠來看，我認為這將加劇總體經濟破壞，特別是對於社會中的弱勢群體而言。 隨著越來越多的貨幣單位進入系統以緩解不適，現有單位的購買力相對於沒有這種貨幣插入時會發生的情況有所損失。 系統中的壓力最終會累積到一定程度，以至於必須從某個地方逃逸——逃逸閥就是貶值的貨幣。 職業債券交易員格雷格·福斯 (Greg Foss) 這樣說:

“In a debt/GDP spiral, the fiat currency is the error term. That is pure mathematics. It is a spiral to which there is no mathematical escape.”3

由於幾個關鍵原因，這種通脹形勢對中下階層成員來說尤其麻煩。 首先，正如我們上面所討論的，這一人群持有的資產往往較少，無論是資產總額還是佔其淨資產的百分比。 隨著貨幣的融化，股票和房地產等資產往往會隨著貨幣供應量的增加（至少有所上升）。 相反，薪水和工資的增長可能會跑輸通脹，而那些自由現金較少的人很快就會開始停滯不前。 （這在 部分1.) 其次，中下階層成員總體上明顯缺乏財務知識和靈活性。 在通貨膨脹環境中，知識和獲取途徑就是力量，通常需要採取行動來維持購買力。 上層階級的成員更有可能擁有稅收和投資知識，以及選擇金融工具的機會，以便在船沉沒時跳上救生筏。 第三，許多平均工資收入者更依賴固定福利計劃、社會保障或傳統退休策略。 這些工具完全屬於通貨膨脹行刑隊的範圍。 在貶值期間，以不斷膨脹的法定貨幣明確計價的資產最容易受到攻擊。 許多普通人的財務未來嚴重依賴以下之一：

The lesson here is that the everyday worker and investor is in desperate need of a useful and accessible tool that excludes the error term in the fiat debt equation. I am here to argue that nothing serves this purpose more marvelously than bitcoin. Although much remains unknown about this protocol’s pseudonymous founder, Satoshi Nakamoto, his motivation for unleashing this tool was no mystery. In the 成因塊中，第一 Bitcoin block ever mined on January 3, 2009, Satoshi highlighted his disdain for centralized monetary manipulation and control by embedding a recent London Times cover story:

“《泰晤士報》 03年2009月XNUMX日即將進行第二次銀行救助。”

The motivations behind Bitcoin’s creation were certainly multifaceted, but it seems evident that one of, if not the, primary problem Satoshi set out to solve was that of unchangeable monetary policy. As I write this today, some thirteen years since the release of this first block, this goal has been unceasingly achieved. Bitcoin stands alone as the first-ever manifestation of enduring digital scarcity and monetary immutability — a protocol enforcing a dependable supply schedule by way of a decentralized mint, powered by harnessing real world energy via Bitcoin mining and verified by a globally-distributed, radically-decentralized network of nodes. Roughly 19 million BTC exist today and no more than 21 million will ever exist. Bitcoin is conclusive monetary reliability — the antithesis of, and alternative to debasing fiat currency. 從來沒有像它這樣的東西存在過，我相信它的出現對於大多數人類來說是及時的。

Bitcoin is a profound gift to the world’s financially marginalized. With a small amount of knowledge and a smartphone, members of the middle and lower class, as well as those in the developing world and the billions who remain unbanked, now have a reliable placeholder for their hard earned capital. Greg Foss often describes bitcoin as “portfolio insurance,” or as I’ll call it here, hard work insurance. Buying bitcoin is a working man’s exit from a fiat monetary network that guarantees depletion of his capital into one that mathematically and cryptographically assures his supply stake. It’s the 最難 這是人類有史以來見過的貨幣，與人類歷史上一些最軟的貨幣競爭。 我鼓勵讀者留意 Saifedean Ammous 在他的開創性著作《 Bitcoin 標準“

"History shows it is not possible to insulate yourself from the consequences of others holding money that is harder than yours."

On a zoomed out timeframe, Bitcoin is built to preserve buying power. However, those who choose to participate earlier in its adoption curve serve to the benefit the most. Few understand the implications of what transpires when exponentially growing network effects meet a monetary protocol with absolute supply inelasticity (hint: it might continue to look something like the chart below).

Bitcoin has the makings of an innovation whose time has come. The apparent impenetrability of its monetary architecture contrasted with today’s economic plumbing in tremendous disrepair indicates that incentives are aligned for the fuse to meet the dynamite. Bitcoin is arguably the soundest monetary technology ever discovered and its advent aligns with the end of a 長期債務週期 when hard assets will plausibly be in highest demand. It’s poised to catch much of the air escaping the balloons of a number of overly monetized4 asset classes, including low- to negative-yielding debt, real estate, gold, art and collectibles, offshore banking and equity.

It’s here where I can sympathize with the eye rolls or chuckles from the portion of the readership who point out that, in our current environment (July 2022), the price of Bitcoin has plummeted amidst high CPI 印刷品（高通脹）。 但我建議我們要小心並縮小範圍。 今天的 投降 was pure euphoria a little over two years ago. Bitcoin 有 被宣告“死亡” 多年來，一次又一次，只為這只負鼠重新變得更大、更健康。 在相當短的時間內，類似的 BTC 價格點可能代表著在其不斷升級的價值獲取過程中的極度貪婪和隨後的極度恐懼。

History shows us that technologies with strong network effects and profound utility — a category I believe Bitcoin fits in — have a way of gaining enormous adoption right underneath humanity’s nose without most fully recognizing it.

以下摘錄自 Vijay Boyapati 的著名著作 “Bullish Case for Bitcoin“ essay5 explains this well, particularly in relation to monetary technologies:

“當貨幣商品的購買力隨著採用的增加而增加時，市場對“便宜”和“昂貴”的預期也會相應變化。 同樣，當貨幣商品的價格暴跌時，預期可能會轉變為普遍認為先前的價格“非理性”或過度膨脹。 。 。 。 事實是，“便宜”和“昂貴”的概念對於貨幣商品來說本質上毫無意義。 貨幣商品的價格並不反映其現金流或它的有用程度，而是衡量它在貨幣的各種角色中被廣泛採用的程度。”

If Bitcoin does one day accrue enormous value the way I’ve suggested it might, its upward trajectory will be anything but smooth. First consider that the economy as a whole is likely to be increasingly unstable moving forward — systemically fragile markets underpinned by credit have a propensity to be volatile to the downside in the long run against hard assets. Promises built on promises can quickly fall like dominoes, and in the last few decades we’ve experienced increasingly regular and significant deflationary episodes (often followed by stunning recoveries assisted by fiscal and monetary intervention). Amidst an overall backdrop of inflation, there will be fits of dollar strengthening — we are experiencing one currently. Now add in the fact that, at this stage, bitcoin is nascent; it’s poorly understood; its supply is completely unresponsive (inelastic); and, in the minds of most big financial players, it’s optional and speculative.

當我寫這篇文章時， Bitcoin is nearly 70% down from an all-time high of $69,000, and in all likelihood, it will be extremely volatile for some time. However, the key distinction is that BTC has been, and in my view will continue to be, volatile to the upside in relation to soft assets (those with a subjective and expanding supply schedules; i.e. fiat). When talking about forms of money, the words “sound” and “stable” are far from synonymous. I can’t think of a better example of this dynamic at work than gold versus the German papiermark during the 魏瑪共和國的惡性通貨膨脹。 觀察下面的圖表，看看這段時期黃金的波動有多大。

迪倫·勒克萊爾有 說過 與上圖相關的內容如下：

“你經常會看到德國魏瑪的黃金紙幣價格圖表呈拋物線走勢。 該圖表沒有顯示惡性通貨膨脹期間發生的急劇下降和波動。 利用槓桿進行投機多次被消滅。”

Despite the papiermark inflating completely away in relation to gold over the long run, there were periods where the mark significantly outpaced gold. My base case is that bitcoin will continue to do something akin to this in relation to the world’s contemporary basket of fiat currencies.

Ultimately, the proposition of bitcoin bulls is that the addressable market of this asset is mind numbing. Staking a claim on even a small portion of this network may allow members of the middle and lower classes to power on the sump pump and keep the basement dry. My plan is to accumulate BTC, batten down the hatches and hold on tight with low time preference. I’ll close this part with the words of Dr. Jeff Ross, former interventional radiologist turned hedge fund manager:

“Checking and savings accounts are where your money goes to die; bonds are return-free risk. We have a chance now to exchange our dollar for the greatest sound money, the greatest savings technology, that has ever existed.”6

In 部分3, we’ll explore two more key ways in which bitcoin works to rectify existing economic imbalances.

腳註

1. Although this is often labeled as “money printing,” the actual mechanics behind money creation are complex. If you would like a brief explanation of how this occurs, Ryan Deedy, CFA (an editor of this piece) explained the mechanics succinctly in a correspondence we had: “The Fed is not allowed to buy USTs directly from the government, which is why they have to go through commercial banks/investment banks to carry out the transaction. [...] To execute this, the Fed creates reserves (a liability for the Fed, and an asset for commercial banks). The commercial bank then uses those new reserves to buy the USTs from the government. Once purchased, the Treasury's General Account (TGA) at the Fed increases by the associated amount, and the USTs are transferred to the Fed, which will appear on its balance sheet as an asset.”

2.來自 “國債重要嗎” 通過林·奧爾登

3. 來自“Why Every Fixed Income Investor Needs to Consider Bitcoin as Portfolio Insurance” 作者：格雷格·福斯

4. When I say “overly monetized,” I’m referring to capital flowing into investments that might otherwise be saved in a store of value or other form of money if a more adequate and accessible solution existed for retaining buying power.

5.現在一個 書 同一個標題。

6. 期間說 宏觀經濟小組 at Bitcoin 2022 研討會

這是 Dan 的客座帖子。 表達的意見完全是他們自己的，不一定反映 BTC Inc 或 Bitcoin 雜誌.

原始來源： Bitcoin 雜誌