Money Is Political, Not Technical

[Sadlife]

True in this era lthe one who stands atop gets to decide what we use as currency but in the past the popular trend was barter payment means paying with food or other resources then later gold and silver where introduce as new method for payment as its way easy to pay with money. My point is, the people gets to decide what to use not the individual a consensus of a group.

[Xising]

This truth really struck home as I read this piece by Dr. Steven Englander, a big thinker and expert in currencies and macro-investing who has worked in the Fed, Citi, Lehman Bros., the OECD, etc.

At the center of his conclusion that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have no real value proposition is that the top Western currencies have no store-of-value problem.  True, the US is not Zimbabwe, or Venezuela, but is a bright person like himself not aware that a dollar or pound is worth a small fraction of itself decades to a century ago?  Somone else could be forgiven for the oversight, but surely someone of the stature of Dr. Englander should know better.  At least when he writes a long and thoughtful piece like this.

Which brings me to, really, my pet peeve.  We all talk about the technical features of this money or that.  Electronic vs. physical.  Inflationary or deflationary.  Even transactional speed and cost.  But truly, the only things that really matter are political.  (That is, after a money satisfies the basic requirements, which is not a problem here.)

And I'm not even talking about how money affects the distribution of benefits to different political constituents, whether it benefits debtors vs. creditors, etc., etc.  That is a good topic for another time.  I'm talking about something deeper.  Money is political in the truest, most precise, and widest sense of the word.  And the political dividing line is not between left and right, but between the top politicians and bankers, and everyone else.

Money determines how much goes to the elites and their allies, and how much goes to everyone else.  In the service of the political goal of maximizing benefits for the former, all things tend to get distorted.  Not only is the economy twisted into producing too many luxuries for the beneficiaries by providing unstable employment to the rest (because, after all, luxuries are bought, or not, at the whims of the lucky.)  All the mainstream commentary we hear, somehow, only reflects what the elites want us to think.

According to what we now have to call mouth-pieces of the elites, somehow, people always chase bubbles, and always get hurt, because they're irrational, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.  Central-bank money creation is *never* a driving factor.  No, never.

We're living in a lie, and the earlier we wake up to it, the better.  What officials and mainstream media and academics tell us must sometimes be dismissed with: it's just politics.

I agree. I mean, especially these days, wealth and money is controlled by a select few who holds power either from a societal or political point of view. That power can really affect how money flows either in one area or even in one country itself. The opportunities available to those in power in terms of business are far more open and easier to achieve as compared to those people who don't have much, or even those rich people but don't have the connections that could help them achieve their objectives. The sad reality of that is also the very reason why the rich people keep on getting rich and the poor either are nailed to where they are or even go in more worse situations.

[dmamigo]

Of course, money is not only the economy, but also politics to a large extent. Who owns cash flows, and in fact the real power in the state. It has always been this way, it continues like this now. After all, people are not only striving for power in order to get only power. Power in the state is the distribution of taxes collected, the distribution of money. Therefore, politics, power and money are inseparable.

Well said, I completely agree with the last sentence you wrote, be it fiat or cryptocurrency, politics will have an impact over it. Cryptocurrencies also can be technical, but Fiat is more technical than cryptos along with the political thing taken into consideration for both of them.
Crypto market is still new and not adopted worldwide, so, for now, Political is more than Technical in case of cryptocurrencies.

[wingsthegreat21]

For me this Politics and its people are just a disaster to a society or community that probably run by money itself and basically politicians are that bad because they manipulate people around them and even economics as well that results for any kinds of dirty movements. Since this is the time of cryptocurrency it might be a hard time for our currency to make its way to mainstream because of the hindrance that politics could bring such as different kinds of corruptions in a government.

[patarfweefwee]

I'd have to agree, money in itself is a benefit or a reward that could be used to leverage people into doing something. But i still believe that true unadulterated power is way better and money will just be a consequence of that power. And when i say power, I don't mean strength, but how much you can sway other people to do what you want.

[Ozero]

Printing money has always been a priority of the state, that is, people in power. Therefore, money. power and politics are inseparable. He who has money has power, and vice versa. Therefore, money is not only a reflection of the state of the state’s economy, it is a powerful political tool.

[mornabo]

Printing money has always been a priority of the state, that is, people in power. Therefore, money. power and politics are inseparable. He who has money has power, and vice versa. Therefore, money is not only a reflection of the state of the state’s economy, it is a powerful political tool.

You could say that, when you want to lobby politics with someone, of course you have to bring the financial benefit clause to them.
money has become a tool to facilitate the interests of some people you know

[gowobonyok]

from the beginning it was like this, and corruption was always unavoidable because of the existence of money and the status of the ruler. I think crypto is time to be legalized.

[BobK71]

I still do not understand why the sudden moves in countries happen while it is obvious it has been cooking for a long time. I mean we can see many countries going very low and very badly for a long time before they fall of a cliff. Politics have a big part in this, if you are run by a president that declines to get off and runs the country for decades until he dies or something than there is a big chance people are not investing in your country with the fear that you may actually do something crazy that a dictator would do and get their money or something.

The economy goes bad for days, weeks, months and years and everyone clear as a day see that it is going horrible and one day BAM! the market collapses and noone is shocked about it neither. Why does that happen if we have known it for years?

Remember, political power is a big part of financial asset values.  Why is the US stock market still so high when everyone knows it's only propped up by companies buying back their stocks and central bank signalling, rather than real profit growth?  Elite power is being used to control 'markets,' and ordinary investors either go with the flow (and thus further adding to the power of the elites,) or  'fight city hall' (good luck with that strategy!)

This is just an example.  Monetary and financial 'markets' are like this everywhere.  The nature of propping up 'markets' successfully is that the elites have the incentives to undermine the stability of their own system, by further abusing their power when they can.  When that has gone beyond their power to save their system, and when a critical mass of investors become aware of that, things collapse quickly and catastrophically.

It is a no-win situation for ordinary people, even if they understand what is going on.  The only hope for real progress, over the long term, lies in being aware and demanding fundamental change to the ability to use public power to manipulate asset values.

[BitcoinTurk]

Definitely, politics is now money. In particular, the US, Turkey, Russia and the political events of the currencies of countries such as China can easily specify that very seriously affected. In the case of a new political crisis in the coming years, I think this political crisis will be reflected on us as an economic crisis. If the politicians do not make common treaties with each other and continue to make decisions against each other's wishes, there will be very serious changes in the currencies of the countries I mentioned in the second sentence. Unfortunately, the world economy and the economies of the country are changing according to politics.

[whirlcoin]

This truth really struck home as I read this piece by Dr. Steven Englander, a big thinker and expert in currencies and macro-investing who has worked in the Fed, Citi, Lehman Bros., the OECD, etc.

At the center of his conclusion that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have no real value proposition is that the top Western currencies have no store-of-value problem.  True, the US is not Zimbabwe, or Venezuela, but is a bright person like himself not aware that a dollar or pound is worth a small fraction of itself decades to a century ago?  Somone else could be forgiven for the oversight, but surely someone of the stature of Dr. Englander should know better.  At least when he writes a long and thoughtful piece like this.

Which brings me to, really, my pet peeve.  We all talk about the technical features of this money or that.  Electronic vs. physical.  Inflationary or deflationary.  Even transactional speed and cost.  But truly, the only things that really matter are political.  (That is, after a money satisfies the basic requirements, which is not a problem here.)

And I'm not even talking about how money affects the distribution of benefits to different political constituents, whether it benefits debtors vs. creditors, etc., etc.  That is a good topic for another time.  I'm talking about something deeper.  Money is political in the truest, most precise, and widest sense of the word.  And the political dividing line is not between left and right, but between the top politicians and bankers, and everyone else.

Money determines how much goes to the elites and their allies, and how much goes to everyone else.  In the service of the political goal of maximizing benefits for the former, all things tend to get distorted.  Not only is the economy twisted into producing too many luxuries for the beneficiaries by providing unstable employment to the rest (because, after all, luxuries are bought, or not, at the whims of the lucky.)  All the mainstream commentary we hear, somehow, only reflects what the elites want us to think.

According to what we now have to call mouth-pieces of the elites, somehow, people always chase bubbles, and always get hurt, because they're irrational, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.  Central-bank money creation is *never* a driving factor.  No, never.

We're living in a lie, and the earlier we wake up to it, the better.  What officials and mainstream media and academics tell us must sometimes be dismissed with: it's just politics.

yes I agree that the money is always build it up for the good reasons to make the life of people more easier but nowadays it will be going to like the government control and especially the political things will come pain together with money and make the changes useful for them so I think it will not good at any type of situation.

[Bonsaiav]

Until now, I have never seen the presence of sensitivity as said by Dr. Steven Englander, especially in financial matters. I think it's common knowledge that most of the world's political elites have a lot of control over the world economy with their money, for example by cooperating with banks which of course they can control according to what they want. This thing certainly makes it easier for them to launch their actions, such as disrupting global market prices, making the exchange rate of a country's currencies weaker with the various bank interest rates they have set, etc. But we are disappointed, the government, which also serves as the state organizer, seems to have no sense of concern for the crisis that they often create, even each government elite seems indifferent to this problem. Meanwhile, bitcoin whose positive benefits can be felt by the wider community, they reject it outright without being studied first.

[richminded]

from the beginning it was like this, and corruption was always unavoidable because of the existence of money and the status of the ruler. I think crypto is time to be legalized.

Cryptocurrency will not lessen the corrupt people, they will find a way to get money as easy as possible. We are greed to money, let’s admit this one but its too sad that other people can’t control their emotion and do bad things to other people. We can always earn clean money if you want to, emotion is not a great excuse.

[Xampeuu]

from the beginning it was like this, and corruption was always unavoidable because of the existence of money and the status of the ruler. I think crypto is time to be legalized.

Cryptocurrency will not lessen the corrupt people, they will find a way to get money as easy as possible. We are greed to money, let’s admit this one but its too sad that other people can’t control their emotion and do bad things to other people. We can always earn clean money if you want to, emotion is not a great excuse.

every technological development certainly can be used positively or negatively, it depends on the user. therefore it is necessary to have a regulating policy, so that negative actions can be reduced

[Ucy]

I kind of agree with you. The guy who said Bitcoin has no value probably doesn't understand what value is. I remember the news of some home and car owners selling their homes and cars for Bitcoin. If Bitcoin has little or no value, people wouldn't be selling their cherished belongings for Bitcoin,  Solid developers wouldn't be   developing Bitcoin nor building applications on it,  Miners wouldn't be mining and holding Bitcoin.
The society never really improved with the invention of paper money despite what the elites and their researchers would want us to believe.  People had decentralized money system back then, ate well, were never greedy, never stole, had lots of lands/domestic animals, lived longer life, were happier ..
They only difference between the old days and now is the improvement in technologies People erroneously believe that access to better technologies is equals wealth.

[zhekinsp]

from the beginning it was like this, and corruption was always unavoidable because of the existence of money and the status of the ruler. I think crypto is time to be legalized.

It can make the corruption more easy so it is not the best option to avoid corruption on any country and also the people are involving in corruption has the power to change the system so don't expect them to make changes.

[mersal]

The the money is always based on the system that we are going to live in a good life so if it was normally in our society there is no problem with that but the political situation also made up the difficult is for the people to get involved in it that's why the value of money is going under the control of Political situation also.

[akram143]

This truth really struck home as I read this piece by Dr. Steven Englander, a big thinker and expert in currencies and macro-investing who has worked in the Fed, Citi, Lehman Bros., the OECD, etc.

At the center of his conclusion that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have no real value proposition is that the top Western currencies have no store-of-value problem.  True, the US is not Zimbabwe, or Venezuela, but is a bright person like himself not aware that a dollar or pound is worth a small fraction of itself decades to a century ago?  Somone else could be forgiven for the oversight, but surely someone of the stature of Dr. Englander should know better.  At least when he writes a long and thoughtful piece like this.

Which brings me to, really, my pet peeve.  We all talk about the technical features of this money or that.  Electronic vs. physical.  Inflationary or deflationary.  Even transactional speed and cost.  But truly, the only things that really matter are political.  (That is, after a money satisfies the basic requirements, which is not a problem here.)

And I'm not even talking about how money affects the distribution of benefits to different political constituents, whether it benefits debtors vs. creditors, etc., etc.  That is a good topic for another time.  I'm talking about something deeper.  Money is political in the truest, most precise, and widest sense of the word.  And the political dividing line is not between left and right, but between the top politicians and bankers, and everyone else.

Money determines how much goes to the elites and their allies, and how much goes to everyone else.  In the service of the political goal of maximizing benefits for the former, all things tend to get distorted.  Not only is the economy twisted into producing too many luxuries for the beneficiaries by providing unstable employment to the rest (because, after all, luxuries are bought, or not, at the whims of the lucky.)  All the mainstream commentary we hear, somehow, only reflects what the elites want us to think.

According to what we now have to call mouth-pieces of the elites, somehow, people always chase bubbles, and always get hurt, because they're irrational, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.  Central-bank money creation is *never* a driving factor.  No, never.

We're living in a lie, and the earlier we wake up to it, the better.  What officials and mainstream media and academics tell us must sometimes be dismissed with: it's just politics.

I agree you are all the statement the money is in this situation are difficult to young by everyone but some are the people who are in this situation to be had some hours they can easily access everything but the people who are instantly will not do everything like they want to do in their basic life let's wait in to be political in this time.

[Mahanton]

from the beginning it was like this, and corruption was always unavoidable because of the existence of money and the status of the ruler. I think crypto is time to be legalized.

Cryptocurrency will not lessen the corrupt people, they will find a way to get money as easy as possible. We are greed to money, let’s admit this one but its too sad that other people can’t control their emotion and do bad things to other people. We can always earn clean money if you want to, emotion is not a great excuse.

Its always been part of human nature to be greedy when it comes to money but some people already comes to a point where they do already praise money too much.
Making things just to earn even on illegal ways wouldn't really matter as long they took advantage compare or among other people. Money is indeed political ever since.

[idham29]

Printing money has always been a priority of the state, that is, people in power. Therefore, money. power and politics are inseparable. He who has money has power, and vice versa. Therefore, money is not only a reflection of the state of the state’s economy, it is a powerful political tool.

For leaders of a country the policy regarding the financial sector will be calculated in terms of politics, because it does not want to create an unstable society because of an incorrect analysis of existing purchasing power.
Therefore financial policy is very sensitive and needs to be careful in its implementation so that political stability is maintained, because the wheels of development can be maintained if security is stable.