By Bitcoin 雜誌 - 2 年前 - 閱讀時間：8 分鐘
Consumers: A Hidden Derogatory Term Unveiled by Bitcoin’s Economic Clarity
“消費者”一詞濫用了人口的經濟行為。 Bitcoin 使其參與者能夠理性地行動。
Identity is a topic of interest in 2021. Taking steps beyond the self-esteem efforts in the 1980s, the self-categorization movement efforts now seek to find empowerment in political agendas based on race, subculture, religion, gender, and/or sexual orientation. The aim, whether merited or not, is to “secure the political freedom of a specific constituency marginalized within its larger context,” according to the 斯坦福哲學百科全書. This political freedom acquired is often the result of political coercion, or compellance: an attempt to get another political actor to change their behavior through explicit or implicit force/violence. These movements, while seemingly altruistic, almost always result in expected government expenditure in the form of programs, reparations, or taxation to these alleged marginalized groups. Because governments always operate over budget, using an inflationary currency, it is certain that the people who will cover the bill for the government neglect of a segment of the constituency in all of these cases, will be consumers.
Consumers: The Forgotten Exploited Group
在所有社會群體中，消費者越來越被邊緣化，但似乎沒有人關心或註意到。 這是一個所有人都參與的角色，它代表了世界人口的大部分，或者至少是集中決策者理解它的方式。 這個詞源於 15 世紀的定義，即“揮霍或浪費的人”。 在經濟學中，18 世紀的定義是“用盡商品或物品的人，通過使用商品來破壞商品的交換價值的人”。 它也被認為與“使物品具有可交換價值”的“生產者”一詞相反。 這些術語構成了我們當前經濟結構的框架。它們顯然是有毒的。我不認為是揮霍、浪費或破壞價值的人。如果你正在閱讀這篇文章，你可能生活在一種追求結果的生活方式中這種分類。
The latent impact of those words cannot be fully quantified in one short essay. The danger of accepting demeaning terminology can have far-reaching effects that take hundreds of years to rectify. Look no further than the use of the word “negro” that spawned an entire family of words that dehumanized black people for centuries such as negrophobe, negrophile, negrification, negress, and negroid. Rather than suffer the history of the infamous “N-word” that evolved from negro in this essay, here is a 網站 清晰有效地總結了它。 當現任政府的總統使用這個詞時，所有人都應該感到極度恐懼。 與其說是聽到這個詞令人擔憂，不如說是主流媒體的 合理化 rather than education about why negro is bad in the first place.
Maybe this subversive social oppression is acceptable because words like “consumer” are also used in the same way to marginalize the general population. It is a role that the fiat-based economy very much needs and wants. A high velocity of money is considered a strong economic indicator in a Keynesian belief structure. This means that a dollar earned should be a dollar quickly spent. A dollar spent before it has been earned is an even more desirable economic state of being for the incumbent system. Local banks acting as conspirators within the system disincentivize staking your cash by offering negative real yield; even when there is no end to the money supply.
If a consumer only squanders, wastes, and destroys value, is there any acknowledgement to the action of saving? Saving seems to be antithetical to what a consumer’s nature is defined as. Growing up in America, when I was given money, I was encouraged (even threatened) by parents to not “spend it all in one place” and put most of it in a toy bank of some sort. We were taught by parents, both good and bad, to save. It is universally accepted as a good thing, whereas spending on the first cheap toy you see was a disappointment to your parents and later yourself.
By partaking in saving money, you actively decide to defer consumption for a later, more desirable date and quality item. It is an edifying action that sadly, most people in this world system do not have the privilege to exercise. Were our parents wrong? Is the government actually better at raising and guiding children by incentivizing us to spend? To quote the Apostle Paul, “May it never be!”
Savings, Not Spending
As Guy Swann points out in Bitcoin 聽得見 - #48, “Savings is the sole source of economic prosperity and growth.” You cannot progress as a civilization, culture, or individual unless you have stored resources to spend time and energy on something else other than foundational survival. Guy used the example of an individual that uses a pole to catch fish at a rate of two per day. If he simply eats those two fish every day, he will only ever be able to spend his time fishing. However, if he can consume one fish for a period of time and store up perhaps ten fish, he could cease fishing for ten days to build a net. That net could then be used to catch fish at a rate of ten per day. That person no longer needs to live as a fisherman, but can pursue other ventures that could satisfy other needs. He could not do that without savings. One could argue that he could just borrow fish from person B, but person B still needed to go through the process of fishing efficiently enough so he could loan it out. Multiply this by 1000 and you still need enough saved resources to cover the needs of 1000 more participants to prevent starvation (panic, recession, depression). Prosperity and growth is a function of saved resources. Contrary to the message the economic incumbents would have you believe, borrowing and spending without the durable and consumable resources available is a formula for depression and stagnation.
但他們並不是完全的騙子，因為即使是撒旦在曠野禁食時引誘基督時也引用了聖經（馬太福音 4:1-11）。 該系統確實為那些最接近眾所周知的印鈔機的人創造了繁榮和增長。 政府可以不受限制地參與經濟活動。 他們的政策不斷為效率低下、失敗的機構和公司注入生命線，這有利於社會像徵性“支柱”的生存。 這一行動不斷阻止自由市場力量允許新公司、投資者或企業家滿足經濟需求。 更重要的是，這些操縱性的政府行為會造成通貨膨脹，從而使個人失去生活、學習和生存所需的關鍵購買力。 再多的額外操縱政策也無法解決這個問題，現在已經有幾十年了。 系統的基礎必須改變。
Bitcoin 激勵合理的決策
而 Bitcoin與其他人一樣消費的人，與現行製度相反，在這個教派中儲蓄具有內在的樂趣。 在基於免費和開源軟件的系統中，參與者既可以是最終用戶，也可以是管理者。 Bitcoin的不變協議，如供應上限和區塊大小，使您購買、出售或持有與您互動的一切事物的經濟決策基於物理和數學，而不是政治影響。 這些類型的因素使人們對存儲價值的地方充滿信心。 如前所述，儲蓄是我們成長時期所鼓勵的美德。 儲蓄為未來提供了選擇，但前提是您選擇的儲蓄地點以高效和有效的方式發揮作用。
Behaving as one who saves is practicing “low-time preference.” This is a characteristic that places value on the future greater than the value of the present. The Bible was written to encourage characteristics of low time preference from a temporal and eternal perspective.
“好人給子孫留下產業，罪人的財富卻為義人積蓄。” -箴言 13:22
Again, in Proverbs, one can also find chastisement for one that chooses to live in debt, comparing it to something as obvious as night and day.
“The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender.” -Proverbs 22:7
的錢 bitcoin 激發對交易必要性的批判性思考。 自發和愚蠢的交流暴露出其無與倫比的品質。 隨著時間的推移和經驗的積累，不良購買變得不那麼頻繁，從而增加儲蓄並提高必須創造以推動需求的商品質量。 如果商品的質量沒有上升到與貨幣的質量相匹配，那麼需求就會隨著價格下降。
儲蓄者的世界 bitcoin 讓生產者和服務提供者對其經濟產品的質量負責，從而帶來一個充滿創新和希望的世界。 法定紙幣本質上是放射性的。 它鼓勵理性的行為者為幾乎任何事情放棄法令，因為， 伏爾泰 說到紙，它“最終會回到它的內在價值——零”。 這種經濟體系導致停滯，並抑制人類文明的發展。 可悲的是，成為第一個交換比進行良好交換更重要。
Words Of Power
在 Bitcoin-基於世界，儲蓄是存在的合法選擇。 儲蓄將鼓勵所有行業的創新和創造力，而不僅僅是技術。 如果簡單的儲蓄行為可以激發人類的巨大潛力，為什麼我們要讓人們接受根植於“浪費”和“破壞”的“消費者”一詞？ 我懷疑改變“消費者”用法的趨勢會從這裡開始，有可能在這裡確定一些替代方案，以便社會能夠以更準確的方式走向人們喜歡的東西 Bitcoin人類正在為世界前進而努力。
向許多人的個人主權概念致敬 Bitcoin一些人高度重視，曾經的消費者可能是“獨立”。為了捕捉一個更中性的術語，不表示任何積極或消極的東西，曾經的消費者可能是“原子的”，因為人們是最小的可衡量的經濟行為者。假設 bitcoin 真正像手機或互聯網一樣被廣泛採用，完全排除消費者青睞“Bitcoin呃。”名字是強大的。 他們講述了一個故事，有時會影響這些名字的所有者一生的生活方式。 Varsity、名人堂成員、全明星都是運動員佩戴的榮譽稱號，其他人也理所當然地授予他們榮譽。 在一個基於物理學的世界中，說有毒名稱不會以同等但相反的方式產生影響是無知的。 “消費者”是壞的，會導致人們延續更多的壞想法和行為，比如忽視 Bitcoin對世界的影響。 Bitcoin讀者們僅僅通過持有和希望就擺脫了這種描述。 我們有責任幫助朋友和家人擺脫這種法定術語，進入經濟自由狀態。
Have you signed #DOMI yet? Check out 貨幣獨立宣言.org and lend your support for a document that unifies us against the incumbent system.
這是 Ulric Pattillo 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