Also has a Nobel Prize (something he downplays).
Decent substack too.
Paul Krugman. Former Professor of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Submitted 3 weeks ago by sixeyo@lemmy.world to videos@lemmy.world
Comments
WFloyd@lemmy.world [bot] 3 weeks ago
Hugin@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Sort of. There isn’t a Nobel prize for economics. He has a Sveriges Riksbank that’s given at the same ceremony.
WFloyd@lemmy.world [bot] 2 weeks ago
You’re right, it’s really “The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel”
JoMiran@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
I love the idea of cryptocurrency and blockchain validated transactions, but the reality of it is very different.
sobchak@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
I don’t like chargebacks being impossible. I think countries being able to manipulate their currency to balance inflation and unemployment has advantages too; if we’re going to keep doing this capitalism thing at least.
Zyansheep@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
Land value taxes funding direct stimulus via UBI are a wayyy better way to control inflation and unemployment imo than interest rates and monetary inflation…
no chargebacks is a problem tho. that and everyone’s past transaction history being public record and not just available to well-accoutable investigative authorities. first mover advantage with crypto is also kinda terrible…
unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth 3 weeks ago
His arguments aren't exactly solid. They are:
- It isn't widely used. Well, just because something isn't popular doesn't mean it's bad. See Linux, Tor, ...
- It is only being used for speculation and criminal activity. That's simply guilt by association. I've actually seen places that have stickers that say they accept Monero, for instance. I doubt they would have put up those stickers if there weren't people who actually used that as a form of payment.
- Everyone who disagrees with this is in a cult. I don't think I have to elaborate on this one.
We badly need a payment solution that offers privacy. Even cash is getting less and less private with automated serial number readers. If Crypto offers a perspective to fix that problem, I'm all for it, at least as a concept (minus a lot of the crap that's being done with crypto nowadays).
AlpacaChariot@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
How does crypto increase privacy? Isn’t the whole ledger public, so if someone manages to identify your wallet they can see all your past transactions?
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yeah, it seems like crypto offers less privacy to me, unless that crypto exchange/wallet/idk thingy that would pay businesses for you in exchange for crypto is legit.
Zyansheep@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
Most cryptos are public. Monero specifically though cryptographically obfuscates sender, receiver, and amount.
Serinus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
stickers that say they accept Monero
If you’re holding the speculative asset you have incentive to promote the use of that asset.
How many people do you think actually pay with monero?
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Even Monero is so huge at this point that one person shilling hard won’t make any significant difference in their own net worth.
zeca@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
- He didnt say its bad for not being widely used. You can use linux alone, on your own. The point of a currency is to be exchanged, so a currency that is not adopted by people is os very limited use.
- People put up a lot of stupid stickers all the time. People often invest in bad ideas.
- The cult things is not about anyone who disagrees, its about those with aggressive and exagerated reactions.
driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 3 weeks ago
I doubt they would have put up those stickers if there weren’t people who actually used that as a form of payment.
You arw overestimating people and businesses owners here.
guy@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
He’s wrong about the cult part though. The people screaming are criminals, idealists, speculants and deranged people
Zombie@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
The word cult is derived from the Latin term cultus, which means ‘worship’.[1] In modern English the term cult is generally a pejorative, carrying derogatory connotations.[2] The term is variously applied to abusive or coercive groups of many categories, including gangs, organized crime, and terrorist organizations.[3]
Sociological classifications of religious movements may identify a cult as a social group with socially deviant or novel beliefs and practices,[5] although this is often unclear.[6][7] Other researchers present a less-organized picture of cults, saying that they arise spontaneously around novel beliefs and practices.[8]
In its pejorative sense, the term is often used for new religious movements and other social groups defined by their unusual religious, spiritual, or philosophical beliefs and rituals,[11] or their group belief in a particular person, object, or goal. This sense of the term is weakly defined, having divergent definitions both in popular culture and in academia, where it has been an ongoing source of contention among scholars across several fields of study.[12][13] According to Susannah Crockford, “[t]he word ‘cult’ is a shapeshifter, semantically morphing with the intentions of whoever uses it. As an analytical term, it resists rigorous definition.” She argues that the least subjective definition of cult refers to a religion or religion-like group “self-consciously building a new form of society”, but that the rest of society rejects as unacceptable.[14]
🤷♂️ It seems to fit?
Although the article does then continue with:
The term cult has been criticized as lacking “scholarly rigour”; Benjamin E. Zeller stated “[l]abelling any group with which one disagrees and considers deviant as a cult may be a common occurrence, but it is not scholarship”.[15] Religious scholar Catherine Wessinger argued the term was dehumanizing of the people within the group, as well as their children; following the Waco siege, it was argued by some scholars that the defining of the Branch Davidians as a cult by the media, government and former members is a significant factor as to what led to the deaths.[16] However, it has also been viewed as empowering for ex-members of groups who have had traumatic experiences.[15] The term was noted to carry “considerable cultural legitimacy”.[17]
HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
He should’ve taken an economics course.
Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
He has won a nobel prize for his work in economics.
cannedtuna@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Prime “don’t you know who I am?” material right there
HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
That’s a shame
“What problem does this technology solve? What does it do that other, much cheaper and easier-to-use technologies can’t do just as well or better? I still haven’t heard a clear answer."
Bitcoin (not crypto) solves the problem of centralization and control of money. It is a harder form of money than gold. You can send a billion dollars for pennies across the world in 10 minutes. It is completely transparent. It can provide access to finance to people who are traditionally excluded. It cannot be censored.
If he hasn’t heard a clear answer, it’s because he’s willfully ignorant at this point. And again, crypto is 99.9% BS. Bitcoin was not the first crypto, and it won’t be the last crypto, but it is the only one of its kind and if north of a trillion dollars doesn’t convince you of that, including institutional money, then nothing will and I invite you to invest in the stock market instead and hope inflation doesn’t steal your retirement away.
deafboy@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
In such case, the Nobel commitee shoud probably set higher standards.
just_another_person@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Lolz dafuq. Gotta be kidding me with this comment, and I hope it’s a joke.
HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Not at all.
Predictions for the price of Bitcoin in 2030? Give me a number. And then don’t forget it.
lol_idk@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
I’m downvoting you just to reinforce the idea that no one here gets sarcasm
Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
They’re not being sarcastic, unfortunately they have gone on to double down. Rare hivemind W on this one.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Krugman is firmly Keynesian school. Where are they teaching whichever school of economics is Bitcoin maximalism?
Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Youtube.
ItCantBeThatEasy@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
“The growth of the Internet will slow drastically … By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s.” - Paul Krugman
To be fair he has done a lot for economics, but he is far from infallible.
vestigeofgreen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
I think Krugman has generally focused on labor productivity when talking about technology and the economy. He made that prediction in the 90s, when the productivity paradox was a topic.
He has a recent-ish oped (direct nyt link) where he admits he was wrong but then brings up labor productivity again, waggles his eyebrows, and gives you a smouldering look. He sounded convincing to me, but I don’t have the background knowledge to know if he’s cherry picking his numbers.
sobchak@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
I think Krugman is a legit intellectual and doesn’t intentionally cherry pick numbers. I followed his blog and such starting when I was a teenager (during the 2008 crisis), and I think he helped me understand what was going on, using fairly rigorous math and data (for a “science” communicator). Few other economic communicators made sense to me at the time. The Austrian school was being pushed heavily by the right and tech-bros, and didn’t seem based on anything but vibes.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yeah I’ve had a few low profile disagreements/disputes with krugman (used to be an economist) and I’ve even been right once. He can be fun to talk with
NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Just to be clear, you’re saying he was right more often than you?
EightBitBlood@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Agreed.
Here’s a way to use crypto to buy from pretty much any major online merchant anonymously without them tracking your user data:
paywithmoon.com/merchants
Its a card that acts as an intermediary for crypto.
It let’s you buy from these merchants without giving away your private data or buying habits.
This is a valuable use for crypto for many people. This is a site that let’s them use their crypto basically anywhere without getting spied on.
This fundamentally disproves his first core statments about crypto not having a use case and not being usable at most merchants.
Basically, he immediately reveals he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
webadict@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I mean… I doubt the veracity of these claims.
Like, you could pay with cash and get the same level of benefit. While the serial numbers are tracked, movement of money is pretty random once it hits a customer’s hands, and that level of randomness might as well make anonymous.
Additionally, good luck getting crypto through anything that isn’t centralized, which removes the supposed benefit of the technology. If you want to get crypto anonymously, you’ll have to buy it from people instead of exchanges.
Plus, crypto comes with the inherent downside of premiums to exchange currency. You might as well just tax yourself 5% extra, but that’s probably generous considering how awfully volatile crypto can be.
And the fact that this uses fucking VISA should be a huge red flag for privacy, lmao. Congrats on not amalgamating your customer profile by purchasing our VISA^TM^ brand prepaid credit cards. They still made money off you.
Overall, you’d be better off asking someone a city over to buy what you want off the internet and paying them cash.
Crypto is, at best, a stupid hobby that got out of control, and, at worst, a huge scam people are desperate to find a legitimate use for and still can’t.
BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I saw him sort of maintain that message recently. His counterpoint was that it hasn’t made much material difference in average lives.
I’m not sure I followed, I mean, would the current level of globalization be possible with faxes?
On the other hand, the internet is for ads, so maybe.
bus_factor@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
So are fax machines. The bulk of the faxes received by corporate fax machines in the 90s were ads.
count_dongulus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
His head is so far up his own ass he can’t bear to consider admitting he was totally, absolutely, inconceiveably wrong.
driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 3 weeks ago
Compared eith other technologies like the toilet or ehe washing machine, the Internet had not make the life of people materially better not even close to the same level.
logicbomb@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I would suggest that in that example, he is predicting the future, while in the video, he is speaking about what can already be observed.
From my perspective, the idea that the internet growth would have slowed drastically by 2005 was obviously a shit prediction no matter when he made it. But it’s just a prediction about the future.
I think observations about things that can already be observed will always be more accurate than predictions about the future.