davelab6
commented
8 months ago https://youtu.be/B2DDOyqRltg in 17m Saylor explains that q2 2020 made him a Bitcoiner for the exact same reasons it made Stevenson a YouTuber: wage class vs asset class.
Open davelab6 opened 8 months ago
davelab6
commented
8 months ago https://youtu.be/B2DDOyqRltg in 17m Saylor explains that q2 2020 made him a Bitcoiner for the exact same reasons it made Stevenson a YouTuber: wage class vs asset class.
In the final act of The Trading Game, Management are totally inept at getting him back into earning profits for the bank. Gary notes how school had already cast his steely resolve for such situations. He leaves it implicit that it was like the trading game that he won his bank internship, where he assessed the other players adversarially with much more rigor and perception than they brought to bare. I suppose management were unable to frame-up the debate and actually deal with the situation, due to their own class positions, they can't fathom the 'moral injury' that he sustained from earning so much money so quickly, and so have nothing to offer him. He does explain that Caleb was empty, in that way. Perhaps the most inept thing is, like how my Gatto like analysis of English grammar schools failed to stick with him and it seems he got more access to upper middle class culture from the immigrant kids than the actual school, how the bank management were meant to induct him into the class values of the UHNW community and completely failed.
Yet, the same fixed frame of reference lies at the heart of my critique of his critique: The book ends with everyone laughing at him 'winning', and him setting out to play a game he thinks he can't win. And the reason I think he can't win is because he is using the same thinking as the problem is within;
I can't find it now, but I am sure he has quoted someone saying "once the problem is fully understood then the solution presents itself," something like that -on wealtheconomics.org he has this splash image:I would counter that with the non-Einstein quote that "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used to create them." That is, his wealthinequality.org proposal boils down to intensifying the circulation of capital, rather than obsoleting it by increasing freedom - free time vs waged time vs sleep time - monotonically.
I also wonder that, with bitcoin back up at a new all time high of $70k and GS nocoining it on his youtube channel, the case that hyperbitcoinization will lead to the same terminal deflation as in the 1930s and thus the free time result, might be another interesting way to frame-up the debate. The book mentioned bitcoin only once in passing, perhaps there was a small screed about it that got cut during editing.