Opposing Views: Money, Bitcoin & Role of the State

[@RealVisionFinance]

Thanks for tuning in! If you would like to see more full interviews like this one, let us know in the comments who you would like to see next. Enjoy the interview!

[@ukulayme2]

You can never have too many Mike Green bitcoin debates. Please keep them coming!

[@alanmrsic893]

Please get Michael Saylor⚡️as soon as possible :-)

[@alanmrsic893]

A 51% attack, also known as a majority attack, occurs when a single person or group of people gains control of over 50% of a blockchain's hashing power. That is usually achieved by renting mining hash power from a third party. Can you please include this topic the next time, aldo it might sound a bit silly :-)

[@alanmrsic893]

Quantum computers are posing a serious challenge to the security of the Bitcoin blockchain. Could you please elaborate on the increasing importance of this disruptive technology :-)

[@castorphan]

Quantum compute: it is in the interest of Bitcoin stakeholders and devs to uphold security and continuously implement core BIPs (Bitcoin improvement protocols or proposals). A tweak to the security features can prevent a quantum attack. 51% attack. At BTC current market capitalization, it would require something like 30something billion $ in mining rigs and silicon to mount an attack, by some estimates. Why would anyone spend that much on mining rigs, when that money on rigs can just be turned on to mine Bitcoin?

[@tradingespanol5384]

I started listening to this while working out. 4 minutes in, I decided to finish my work out, take a shower, make something to eat, and sit down to actually pay attention to this debate. Thank you Real Vision.

[@totalsubmition]

Working out is more important. A KZbin debate can wait. Was it leg day?

[@geoms6263]

@@totalsubmition brain training is far more important. He is +50 k

[@danielleking7505]

A really interesting debate. I think Mike's debating expertise are undeniable, however he was never put in a true position to have to defend himself. Robert's arguments were pretty strong but he never got off the back foot because the opportunity to challenge Mike on his own assertions never truly arose. Fantastic stuff Real Vision.

[@ZenMasterGee]

Mike was asked for an alternative but never answered. He chose in general to attack the way Robert was making his argument instead of trying to understand what Robert actually meant. Not very constructive and Very uncomfortable to watch :/

[@generalpopovich]

Very interesting debate between two very intelligent people. I believe Mike knows his stuff better, however he is mainly asserting that Robert's vision is only speculation because it hasn't been done before. That is true, but it also doesn't mean that it can't work. You can't defend the status quo by saying "it's all we know and anything else is speculation".

[@themountain3461]

@@ZenMasterGee exactly. That style of strawman debating tactics need to be shut down immediately. He is arguing in bad faith and all he can come up with is “we need better leadership”?? What a joke. It’s a cute variant of “communism is a great idea, we just haven’t done it right yet”

[@bigvic950]

Mike seems to be a denier of reality

[@bilw1960]

I'm guessing if Mike was tasked with making the case for Bitcoin, he'd be hard to beat in a debate.

[@Ryan-ip7li]

Who wants to see a Saylor vs Green debate??

[@masem.2671]

"We have terrible leadership. The path forward is better leadership." They said that in my father's generation and my grandfather's generation. And yet here we are.

[@zachtimmer1]

In the safest, most prosperous time in history, great point Mase.

[@sivi9741]

Yes because the leadership getting worst with time , not improving sadly .

[@Erikpdx]

We vote for it

[@chuck604]

Exactly. Robert argues that this is a system problem. Mike says that the system would work if the system worked differently.

[@OnBelayAndOK]

Perverse incentives select for perverse decisions - this was THE fundamental flaw in Mikes argument.

[@jessesewell7922]

The argument that the Fed openly and publicly discloses their activities is ridiculous. We only just recently learned through a FOIA request that was enforced by Federal Court Order the full extent of Fed money printing since 2008. The full extent of money printing in terms of both physical printed dollars and stimulus in the form of electronic dollars added to balance sheets was not known and the Fed went to great lengths to conceal the full extent of their money printing. In fact the FOIA request revealed the fact that the Fed lied about the extent of their activities.

[@Ironrodpower]

Yep! Mike must not know this??

[@Snide01]

AND WE STILL WILL NEVER KNOW THE TRUTH

[@andrewpeters8357]

Uh, Mike admitted that these disclosures were flawed; however, the fact of whether or not they are flawed doesn’t change Mike’s point: Robert was essentially recommending the Fed to engage in - additional - fraud.

[@DsynergyA]

This is one of the best pieces I've seen, I much prefer a proper debate of opposing ideas rather than everyone tip toeing around each others views. Great job!

[@ronaldarmstead2521]

I'm with Robert. In the end Mr Green advocates more of the same with different leaders. Something that won't happen. Thank you Real vision.

[@dingfeldersmurfalot4560]

A better outcome but using the very same incentives. Not likely.

[@joshuavanderplaats]

These kinds of discussions are so important.

[@frederickfrost6561]

This was a great interview and I appreciate the intelligence of both debaters. However Mr. Greens point that there is a lack of leadership and the current system is OK is completely absurd. There has been poor monetary policy from 1971 on and the idea that 50 years of leader ship were all incompetent is not a valid point. There needs to be some changes, including an asset that can be counted on to hold it’s value. Also Mr. greens arguments were mostly attacking Mr. Breedlove’s rather than asserting any concrete points of his own, just generalities. Like many individuals he uses statistics when they support his argument but when they do not the statistics are always wrong! This is not to criticize his fundamental knowledge which is sound and appreciated!

[@healthygrowth7760]

So a better idea than leaders and better investments is buying bitcoin ??? Hahahahahah

[@frederickfrost6561]

@@healthygrowth7760 Quality leadership would be buying a better investment: bitcoin.

[@themountain3461]

@@healthygrowth7760 yes, absolutely. If you actually bothered listening to this debate and to Robert Breedlove in general, you’d know his and most Bitcoiners’ position (fix the money, fix the world) which posits that as long as you have flawed money, you will attract the worst people to positions of power. And conversely, Bitcoin removes a lot of the tools that gives bad leaders room to make their terrible mistakes

[@luk1_285]

The premise of the debate was Bitcoin's role as money. So naturallly It's Mike's role to point flaws in Robert's views. Secondly, if you listen to jeff snider you'd understand that monetary policy no longer governs the current system. It's evident from all the fed's reports rigth from the time of Alan greenspan of their lack of ability to quantify money. I don't find it wrong to point to incomplete statisistics as wrong if I understand you correctly about Mike's viewpoint real wages' calculation. Current system is decentralised with the participants being banks across the world through off balance sheet activities.

[@luk1_285]

Current system is decentralised with the participants being banks and it is evident of how Russia was able to pay of it's dollar liabillities even when US "apparently" cut it's dollar funding

[@bmaggio]

Perfect quote by Robert Breedlove: "If you do this from through a Central Bank model, where one group can expand the currency supply that others are forced to use, you're just advocating for coercion at that point."

[@Snide01]

ABSOLUTELY

[@LANCECASTLE490]

🔥🔥🔥🔥💎

[@wsdmrtst]

Oh my goddess… every time I visit Ash’s moderated discussions I get so stressed but the two sides always seem to be adept in entering into debate without stomping off. Thank you for the food for thought. Very informative.

[@BTCanhonestledger]

I like Robert’s way of thinking. I think Mike is stuck in ‘the old ways’ which clearly need to change. If this was a debate and I had to choose a winner, I’d say it was Robert.

[@hansdieterii2966]

lol. you saw a different debate than me then.

[@greg.ocallaghan]

@@hansdieterii2966 he didn't see a different debate, he saw the same debate but because he's indoctrinated by the bitcoin cult because he lives in an economic system where bitcoin is his only hope for a better future he chooses to believe Robert "won". It's the ultimate sign of desperation, and sad really... That's how far people have gone.

[@Tiarka]

Wow, he’s not allowing him to get away with “just believe in BTC!!!” He really challenged him. This is a great interview.

[@MattArseno]

LOL

[@LexFez]

Brave of Robert to get in the ring with Mike. He doesn't pull any punches. Also nice to see zero respective interruptions.

[@David81515]

👏 agreed

[@luk1_285]

I think that's what's called editing.😁

[@dijayus4710]

Robert, you should do a series on your podcast with Mike. Maybe you guys would then have the time to fully flesh out and discuss your viewpoints.

[@MattArseno]

YES

[@damrunner1]

Thank you for a great discussion. Once upon a time this type of discourse allowed individuals to understand both sides of a topic and come to a better understanding of an idea or a problem. I wish the world still worked this way. Thanks again Gentlemen.

[@Thomas-re9ky]

Lyn Alden vs. Mike Green is all I really care to hear.

[@nickkacures2304]

Yes that would be epic but I think it would go down with more agreement on fundamental economic facts,Lyn Alden is well educated and has knowledge on how markets work as apposed to Mr.Breedloves feelings and untested theories!

[@tatepinto6285]

Just thinking the same

[@tatepinto6285]

Or Luke Groman.

[@aqualuxx]

Yes this needs to happen

[@nickkacures2304]

@@tatepinto6285 Luke Gromen would be awesome hopefully it could be a 3 hour debate

[@wesleywhitley8105]

Wat actually made me mad about this is that Mike didn't engage with the strategy at all and argued based off ethics and emotions rather than the actual strategy that was outlined

[@Sule89222]

He talked a lot but said nothing

[@primozini335]

When you have a flawed / failed argument you attach their character as a distraction.

[@Mrr1503]

Now let’s do Mike Green vs Michael Saylor!!

[@therecyclingguy256]

Not even 1 hour. This should have been held to a drawn out 4 hour long discussion; all points discussed. None of this abridged for time BS.....make it happen Real Vision

[@spaceworm123]

Totally agree

[@harmbomm2590]

that's the best debate I've seen in a long time! Though my views align more with Robert's, Mike's barrage of tough questions are thought provoking!

[@mikepeters5732]

This felt like a money vs. currency arguement. Mike’s points are correct in that value needs to move freely to support a growing economy. Inflation exists to promote spending of currency where I believe bitcoin incentivizes saving of value, which then can be exchanged for currency to spend and promote growth. They can coexist, IMO.

[@chuck604]

I've been hearing discussion lately about Bitcoin backed fiat. It could work.

[@castorphan]

Well summarized.

[@dijayus4710]

Yes, Bitcoin doesn’t have to be a currency. It seems more effective as a hard stable store of value on which currency can be built. Seems like Do Kwon might be on to something with the UST stablecoin exploring this possibility.

[@samyguindy8490]

I don't understand how you going to sit there and say this Mike guys right he's trying to propose the same system we got witches has fail us

[@X4V3RY]

@@chuck604yeah it could work. then governments will fight wars over bitcoin rather than gold and oil.

[@samyguindy8490]

Please let us see a Michael Saylor debate with the Mike guy

[@PoneJ]

Thank you for an excellent and civil debate! Amazing content and information.

[@John-rn5le]

Thanks for reminding me why I remember Mike to be arrogant and condescending. Didn’t learn anything from him other than he agrees our system is not working well. RB is a beast for ideas of what could be.

[@samyguindy8490]

Robert Breedlove is a super intelligent person I can listen to him for hours and hours

[@penndragon22]

I mean, he devolves into word salad and emotionalism when challenged, I don't quite get it.

[@samyguindy8490]

@@penndragon22 the Mike guy his solution doesn't work we've tried that already corruption goes ramp it the little guy loses

[@penndragon22]

​@@samyguindy8490 So apply that logic to the Bitcoin apparatus too then. You need energy, technology, geography, and are subject to political capture, military capture, coercion, etc.

[@54ng]

Mike is excellent at debating for the status quo. Robert is presenting the future.

[@paolotichelio7410]

Is there any literature out there that explains how a monetary system with no inflation and no interest is possible? I’d be interested in reading it.

[@ayoungdev1793]

Love it. These debates really help us to think about bitcoin and money from different perspectives.

[@CyanAblaze]

What a bloodbath. 20 minutes in and robert has to keep making assertions for mike to toss into the pressure cooker of history.

[@CyanAblaze]

On second though I think Robert has learned a lot since this air date. He would have some different thoughts today.

[@CyanAblaze]

Nevermind he mentioned Snider. Robert is a lost cause.

[@tirevee1799]

Wish this was longer

[@YSFmemories]

I've been in crypto since 2014, but Mike totally owned this debate. It was a massacre.

[@Phedrus4Quality]

Agreed. Breedlove is an ideologue in a bitcoin fanatical religion.

[@lenovoaldo6193]

Mike is a beast

[@mikeybinmike]

Mike is not someone that anyone should ever want to find on the other side of a debate. 20 pound brain on that guy.

[@samyguindy8490]

Anybody that agrees with Mike agrees with socialism. His money put Joe Biden in office along with other hedge fund managers he's telling you a fraud story. If his goal was to make Capital get in Americans hands and a make America better why didn't he not do it already these people are the ones to get our presidents elected with all their headphone money people got to wake up

[@samyguindy8490]

If somebody can tell me how Mike won this debate please explain cuz I see it the other way around the problem I see is that we haven't tried Robert Breedlove we haven't tried his solution so to say it's not going to work is ridiculous

[@zachtimmer1]

Mike’s understanding of the financial/monetary system and history in general is just too deep for these bitcoin maxis. This reminded me of his debate with pomp. Over before it began. When Robert talked about how bitcoin would help with desalination I knew it was over

[@deanchalmers3866]

When he debated Pomp his biggest point was re CHINA, well China is now out and the hashrate is stronger than ever.

[@joseluisvazquez5126]

Another way to see it: So people are going to think twice about asking for a loan on hard limited supply money... Exactly! That's the whole point. That is the way it should be. Saving is hard, spending is easy. Today saving is impossible, you are forced to invest. We need money that you can freely choose to spend, save or invest. Those are 3 different options. We also need loans to be repaid with sound money, not as if you are "shorting the currency". That means people will think twice before going into a debt, specially governments will have to reduce spending to match taxes and run surpluses from time to time, rather that forever deficits.

[@MattArseno]

Excellent comment: "Saving is hard, spending is easy. Today saving is impossible, you are forced to invest." This is an excellent summary. Never heard any frame it this way. I wish saving was rewarded more. I've found myself being more leveraged (in purchasing real estate) than I wanted because of the inflation, and because of current monetary policy. I wish it wasn't so. I would love to see a system where the incentives are stacked on the savings side. The cost? Slower (but more sustainable) growth.

[@joseluisvazquez5126]

​@@MattArseno Exactly! In fact I wonder if more than "slower" growth, it will be more "real" growth (and thus more sustainable) on a environment with the capacity of saving. I am guessing credit surges allow for faster experimentation of many entrepreneur ideas, but many are nonsense bubbles that run for too long now on fiat. Still, a Bitcoin standard would NOT mean no credit society. It will probably just mean LESS credit than now, which I believe would not be a bad thing. And more importantly, a Bitcoin standard allows for regular people to know when they are leveraged and how much. That is impossible with fiat money: - If you hold fiat in the bank, you might be leveraged without knowing... you may find out on the next bank run.Or if you are lucky, it is just being eating alive via inflation. - If you buy "assets" with your fiat, you are investing and exposed to the leverage in the companies or entities you are investing. - If you hold real state but you are still paying mortgage, what happens if your income or rent cash flow goes down, suddenly your debt might become bad.

[@bluefil7181]

Mike Green is a brilliant technocrat but after viewing this, I have to say that's all he is. His posture towards the topic of debate was one of attack, right from the beginning. Note that very clearly, he did not have any solutions, only criticisms. It's an undisputed FACT that fiat currencies have always been debased - not a single exception over thousands of years. His thesis, in effect, was that we will continue to do what we have already done throughout the course of human history but somehow this time it will be different - change the ineffective leadership of today and try the grand experiment again - but this time, we should expect a different result.

[@chuck604]

My thoughts exactly. Mike's a historian, and he has no room for novel ideas. It's easy to reject a new idea by labeling it an assumption and that it's never been done before therefore it can't/shouldn't be done.

[@ryanc3656]

Completely agree.

[@Erikpdx]

I knew within a couple minutes of listening to Breedlove his Ideas would get crushed because there's just nothing there that isn't fantasy. You can't seriously entertain his ideas

[@Erikpdx]

What makes you think slow debasement isn't a feature? It encourages growth and spending, Which means more economic activity. A deflating currency like bitcoin would destroy an economy. Why would anyone work if you could just hold the currency and it would go up in value?

[@finance5186]

@@Erikpdx destroy an economy as we know it, yeah. It’s a new system. Does it make sense to have an inflationary system that requires growth at all costs on a planet with finite resources? Bitcoin doesn’t solve everything and yes a deflationary system has its own issues, but saying it’s bad because it upends the current system is kind of the point.

[@joseluisvazquez5126]

According to Mike you need money printing to be able to repay any debt. That is fiat mindset right there. The quantity of money does not equate the wealth of the economy. The money can be fixed and the wealth can go up or down. Same as printing more money does not create more bread.

[@georgeklein6078]

In the case that fewer bitcoin are needed to buy something then that is another way to create wealth in an economy. Its called deflation. We had a great deflation with the introduction of technology like computers and will again with the introduction of robots. Printing money just concentrated that wealth in the hands of the few.

[@joseluisvazquez5126]

@@georgeklein6078 exactly!

[@goateecusbilly1823]

Yeah, deflation, like the great depression.

[@doctorlightCurtisTurchin]

Mike Green knows more than Robt Breedlove (who I respect). However RB is philosophical and MG is an ocean of facts.

[@Erikpdx]

Libertarianism is always philosophical because you have to leave reality aside

[@sivi9741]

@@Erikpdx nailed it

[@spaceworm123]

@@Erikpdx US was founded on Libertarianism. And isn't all political discussion based in philosphy?

[@Erikpdx]

@@spaceworm123 it's 2022. If you're fighting for 1776 policies because what could be better than going back to another time, you're living in a fantasy You can root your arguments in reality or fiction. Viable or not viable.

[@spaceworm123]

@@Erikpdx The enlightenment movement derived many principles from the Ancient Greeks. Would you have suggested they were "going back" to 2000 BC?

[@loudnewsnet7796]

Robert got shredded. No question. Once he was done reading his power point it was over.

[@samyguindy8490]

Please explain to me how he how he Mike won the debate nobody is try Robert Breedlove solution

[@loudnewsnet7796]

@@samyguindy8490 we must have watched different videos

[@samyguindy8490]

@@loudnewsnet7796 I asked you how he won the debate if that's what you're saying that he wanted

[@samyguindy8490]

How do you win a debate when one person's got a solution and the other person doesn't got a solution Mike doesn't have a solution and if he does explain to me because I didn't hear a solution he saying the system works and it doesn't

[@loudnewsnet7796]

@@samyguindy8490 it’s a debate. An invalidated solution isn’t a solution.

[@lyleharbertson]

Robert did a great job, but I think you need to invite Saifedean Ammous to debate Green. Mike injected an economic equation that according to him limits economic growth without expanding the money supply. As a non economist, I cannot refute his premise, but I be Ammous might be able to. Just say'n

[@MattArseno]

Agreed. Bring in Ammous. I just read the Bitcoin Standard, it's so well articulated. I'm looking to read Keynes just to validate his assertions for myself.

[@themountain3461]

Robert did a poor job. He didn’t get aggressive and go toe to toe with Mike, who used strawmen and constructed absurd flaws in Robert’s proposals while offering no solutions of his own. “We need better leaders” is a cute variation on “communism is a great idea, it just hasn’t been done right yet” and his argument rests on the bodies of hundreds of millions of people who died by the hands of the state and central planning

[@ThePathofWealth]

Mike treated this like an academic debate. His aim was to disrupt the opponent as much as possible. Not a very valuable discussion because the tactics rather than the actual ideas took center stage.

[@daniellobron4163]

Mike of course is completely wrong about his point about P * Q = M * V. The simple mechanism by which Q expands in a Bitcoin system is not through the increase of M and V but through a lowering of P, i.e. deflation. The Bitcoin world is a deflationary world where the price of goods decreases through entrepreneurial ingenuity. How Mike could overlook and not understand this is hilarious.

[@cryptosheets3162]

Bingo!

[@liyexiang666]

he did recognized that if u listen carefully. but he raise the point that, to some extent, price in a fiat monetary system has already dropped in a non-traditional sense, eg, more accessible electronics

[@Xari0n92]

jup and the intrest comes from yourself doing work as always. debt is taking your future buying power to the now. only in a btc system you need buying power to begin with not like the banks are now making buying power out of thin air. so if you wanna loan you need a bank with reserves

[@Paulrobe85]

Exactly! I was willing Robert to raise this but unfortunately we will have to wait until the next debate.

[@Erikpdx]

Deflation due to ingenuity is not limited to a world with bitcoin by any stretch, and that doesn't explain the deflationary nature of bitcoin by any stretch

[@georgeklein6078]

Mike Green needs to run for political office instead of use politics to attack Michael Breedlove. That's the only place where his arguments make sense. As a socialist political guy. He totally misses the fact that an un-elected group has been put in charge of taxation through inflation using the fractional lending and interest rate mechanism. He rages against the idea of a fixed amount of money (gold/bitcoin) backing a dollar because you can't expand it at will without bankrupting the country.

[@nicholassellers816]

Mike is a savage! Cool interview/debate of ideas. Keep this stuff coming!

[@uvizius1320]

will mike has been wrong about bitcoin the whole time. the price is evidence of this fact.

[@grantjumaga]

It was embarrassing watching Mike tear Robert a new one. That was seriously embarrassing from Robert - a complete lack of fundamentals on display there and about as disjointed as possible. Yikes

[@samyguindy8490]

I think we need to get Michael Saylor on here that would be an amazing bait Michael Saylor between this guy Mike

[@kurtnunn6116]

I have to applaud Robert Breedlove for engaging with Michael Green. Although I’m not enamored with Breedlove’s point of view he’s an important voice and representative of many of the leading people of his generation. I think Green represents a set of guard rails for people like Breedlove, if he chooses to listen and realize some his existing stances border on fundamentalist. It doesn’t serve Breedlove to proffer to someone who is at least as knowledgeable and a lot wiser.

[@HidingFromFate]

Well put.

[@S4RWS]

The market is the market is the market. Let the market decide... Governments should stay out of it... and governments will follow if the markets demands. Keeping it SIMPLE is the only way... this conversation is way too complex BUT ALSO HIGHLY VALUED. Thank you for this content. Great conversation.

[@loudnewsnet7796]

If these are the best reasons to buy BTC and the best advocate, then I’m suddenly concerned about my long position

[@nickkacures2304]

Me too I’ll have to go back to my Bitcoin Master Michael Saylor And drink in a couple hours of his soothing Kool aid and get back in-line with Bitcoin and follow my whales 🐋 advice

[@loudnewsnet7796]

@@nickkacures2304 lol right? I need a dose of Pomp stat.

[@jordanliu9747]

Never do something purely based on someone else's reasons

[@loudnewsnet7796]

@@jordanliu9747 well, obviously

[@dcntralizedmind2754]

Breedlove’s show explores the social ramifications of high time preference and fiat. I realize this was a debate about utility, but there is no future where we coexist and trade freely when coercion runs rampant in the system.

[@samyguindy8490]

I want to see a debate Michael Saylor with Mike the headphones manager

[@coachk8542]

Great debate! I think the Bitcoin side could make a stronger argument if they referred to the total qty of SATS, when people bring up the qty of Bitcoin. Also, compare the value of SATS to the dollar. Lastly, Bitcoin is infinitely divisible.

[@SyrUS85]

The gap in fundamental financial knowledge between Mike and breedlove is astonishing. The absurdity of breedlove’s proposal of US government buying BTC under the radar left Mike no choice but to be aggressive from the beginning

[@jordanliu9747]

You always have a choice not to be aggressive

[@OnBelayAndOK]

The government is always buying assets without public knowledge / under the radar.

[@willo5537]

Well done Robert, you got up every time you were floored, problem is, each round you came back more dazed and confused. It was some beating you took. Tip, don’t take on a heavyweight while a featherweight.

[@BitcoinAndChess]

Although I'm decidedly on Breedlove's side here, I do not fully understand the answer to Mike's question about how interest is going to be paid on Bitcoin accounts if there is a fixed supply. Breedlove's answer left me wondering how exactly people will be paid with BTC (that others will be somehow incentivized to sell) while the economy grows. I'm not selling... and according to onchain metrics, neither are a majority of people.

[@chuck604]

Interest is often used to counter inflation. So, in this case, it's not needed. People will surely sell Bitcoin when they have more than enough and they want to buy something. If the medium of exchange is Bitcoin, then they have to trade it for food at least.

[@Erikpdx]

That's the problem with deflationary currency....there's no incentive to engage in economic activity. You're better off hodling

[@BitcoinAndChess]

@@Erikpdx Not true at all. We were on a gold standard for 10,000 years before 1971! Are you saying there was no incentives for growth or technological innovation in that time? No reason to spend? That's silly. TV's, computers and almost all electronic goods have been deflating in price for decades and people still spend money on them, right?

[@bullmeatt]

@@Erikpdx this is why we need bitcoin. Its an option for anyone to save money and to use as a reserve asset. Other currencies can be issued on top of it, backed by it. People who want to save for the long term will hold bitcoin and those 2nd layer inflationary currencies can be held for the short term as an easier method of exchange. Some will come and go but bitcoin will always be there just like gold, except its digital gold that can be seen by the public. We can see if and when the central bank is moving our bitcoin reserves or lying about them. The interest is paid by the borrower, if he cant pay his interest then he defaults. If he isnt being payed in btc with the business hes running by using that bitcoin loan, then he will have to purchase bitcoin to pay the interest with whatever currency hes earning from the open market. The fixed supply means that as goods and services become more plentiful, their value deflates against bitcoin. This is why bitcoin is a tool for people who want the option to save. It would also create more transparent and stable monetary policies for central banks. Right now we have bonds and gold, but they are garbage and gold has its issues. The weight, divisibility, easy to steal, still inflationary as its mined, 3rd party risk in vaults, nobody knows how much gold anyone has, over 100:1 paper to gold ratio etc.

[@pmc9194]

You're not selling because you no doubt have either alternative funds (fiat) or a self-sufficient through non-monetary means. Most people have income in the form of fiat, and would rather consume a weakening currency over a strengthening currency. But Humans need goods and services. The suggestion that in absense of any other option one would rather starve themselves to death rather than spend some Bitcoin is quite absurd.

[@cryptomon86]

They already do this now. There is no transparency. They have a balance sheet and then the "balance sheet"

[@ramseyramadan9515]

Mike Green is the best advocate for Bitcoin. I feel like his learning process is just naturally more combative and pedantic, because Breedlove makes a rationale case, whether it plays out or not is not the point.

[@tyalprince]

Breedlove looked confused & unaware half of this debate. It was kind of embarrassing.

[@1301cb]

@@tyalprince that’s what happens when the other side blindsides you with semantics instead of the actually topic at hand.

[@nickkacures2304]

Totally opposite for me!! I’m wondering if you might have been watching a different video !Breedlove is woefully uninformed or is just so invested in a economic dogma of his own making that he doesn’t realize how much he is embarrassing himself. This is cringeworthy

[@tatepinto6285]

@@nickkacures2304 if you watch any Breedlove you would see he is always on a learning journey with his guests. Mike has a much deeper understanding of the mechanics of the financial system and I would guess Breedlove will be thinking about his points going forward. I don't fault him for that. For me I always learn from Mike. I just don't see most market participants grasping his concepts so I'm still bullish btc/gold, for now.

[@nickkacures2304]

@@tatepinto6285 I have watched many hours of Breedlove and do enjoy his videos and feel bad now for being rough on him but our system of inequality is so out of balance that it’s failing us all . I like Bitcoin and own it but I don’t want it to become another form of escape from the responsibilities of a functioning Democracy that asks for sacrifices from us all but delivers wealth to just a few

[@byron2099]

This conversation is amazing

[@1Bob4All]

The fixed supply of money was interesting. When money was based on gold, did it exhibit a behaviour which we might see in a system with a fixed money supply?

[@georgeklein6078]

It had just the drawback that Mike pointed out - that if you create too many dollars then people come to get your money (gold) and then your broke! That is the reason Nixon had to shut the gold window temporarily. The benefit of not backing your dollars with money (bitcoin/gold) is that you have the flexibility to print as many as you need. (of course you would never print more than you needed, that would be wrong and nobody would do that ;-)

[@1Bob4All]

@@georgeklein6078 In your example, you include a currency which is backed by gold. In that scenario, one can vary the amount of currency. I was wondering about a system which only had a fixed supply of gold and no currency. The gold itself would be the coin. I see this type of system more limiting, as Mike Green was apparently trying to explain to Robert Breedlove. What are the economic lessons we can learn from previous fixed-money supply systems?

[@georgeklein6078]

@@1Bob4All We have never had a fixed money supply. Gold is added to the money supply through mining. So there are no complete lessons there. However one can imagine that fixed money requires people to delay gratification and to go through difficult times when they make mistakes. (Nixon didn't want to pay the price of guns and butter overspending and so took us off gold). It requires slower growth some times but also will produce a smoother business cycle. And it wouldn't allow politicians and other evil people to take money at will. If we didn't allocate money to defense it would mean we couldn't defend ourselves. Ultimately it requires responsibility. "Daddy can I play with my friends in the middle of the freeway?" -- Fixed money supply has to say "NO, it's not safe." and probably a lot of people don't want/like that.

[@arssve4109]

What is the issue with losses occuring? The resulting rise of interest rate and resulting velocity drop would only require price adjustment, wouldn't it?

[@kerynadcock2226]

Velocity of money IE faster turnover & enabled rapid economic activity, would be the increasing factor with a bitcoin fixed supply?

[@bakermilton98]

Was looking for more of an exchange of ideas.

[@samyguindy8490]

Real Vision I want to see a Michael Saylor debate with the Michael the hedge fund manager

[@bradynields9783]

3:27 The "just" compensation is where they get their hooks into you. When bargaining with shared ignorance its trust that's on the other side of the scale.

[@alanmrsic893]

Great stuff, Green is great, nice debate, please invite Michael Saylor⚡️vs Great Green, thanks again:-)

[@samueldeveault2263]

Mike green, sorry but you cannot go in a conversation like this and only refuting your opponent point of view. You need to contribute to a solution witch will ultimatly be an assumption too ... Robert assumption was correct that a bitcoin standards will be a better system that we have now. Will it be perfect ? No but what system is ? Thats the question Mike failed to anwser ...

[@sivi9741]

U already have the system …. Solution ? Stop electing bad corrupt politicians .

[@rodmula4313]

Excellent point! 👍

[@brentandrewchua3824]

Wow. This is the most intense debate I’ve seen so far.

[@Reutzel507]

The fact that their is a futures market and options market on BTC makes it less and less of a reality to be a payment method for anything.

[@ZidaneSteiner]

Green likes to find logical holes to force Breedlove to further articulate his point of view without proposing an alternative of his own.

[@tomv7986]

Great interview! Serious quality. Mike made some very interesting points. I find his way of communicating unfortunately somewhat condescending. The problems of a BTC standard are similar to the gold standard. No ability to expand actually stifles growth.

[@acgrizzle7530]

It's condescending because he's been debating the same naive BTC talking points over and over again.

[@sivi9741]

Not only that , having a currency like gold or bitcoin with a lack of elasticity prevent government to deal with emergency events by not being able to Grow the money supply to help . problem of fiat isn’t fiat itself , it’s the people mismanaging the fiat currency outside of crisis . It’s like a gun , the gun isn’t the problem , it’s the carelessness of guns owners that creates lot of problems with guns …

[@neekcux]

@@sivi9741 the issue is fiat currency has never been managed correctly in human history, so is it the tool that’s ineffective?

[@ponk2634]

Money supply don't need to be increased when economy grows. The value just go up accordingly e.g. same amount of money can buy you more stuff. If ones offer a better product or service than the other with same amount of energy and time, they just gain market share from the less competitive ones. The total economy does not increase in value, just reallocating values. Only when ones able to offer the same or better product or service with less time and energy usage, the economy grows and it's benefiting everyone. Therefore bitcoin is simply better money and not a zero sum game. Fiat created artificial economic expansion which is the core reason for war, unfair wealth distribution, and human made environmental disaster by unnecessary consumption and wastes.

[@sivi9741]

@@ponk2634 if fiat money was real reason that entice wars like you say , why 2 world wars happened before the fiat system got created and none since it came into existence? Depressions far more likely to creates massive conflicts because having absolutely nothing is worst than having inflation where a minimal standard of living is assure through money Printing .

[@afdave7]

I would've argued my digital asset assertion by saying "Well Raoul Pal is all in. Isn't that enough?". LOL. Kidding. Great debate.

[@dvnChristen]

Not sure! What language are they speaking? I wish i understood 1 word of that!!!

[@mdevvvo]

ash would be such a funny south park character

[@SiLoMixMaster]

Unfortunately the crypto guy got absolutely schooled here, wasn't even close.

[@spaceworm123]

Love it... more debates plzzzz!!!!!

[@mikeybinmike]

Robert Breedlove seems like a nice guy who means well, but he’s really gunning to be a Dunning Kruger first ballot hall of famer here.

[@erik8719]

Lol.

[@samyguindy8490]

I would pay $10,000 to see a Michael Saylor debate with Mike

[@carloslaend1635]

This felt like a first points presentation and kind of a missed opportunity to get somewhere interesting.

[@gwills24]

Why can Realvision not find a suitable Bitcoin proponent to debate Mike? Are there none? Robert trying to talk about government finance while being unaware of the Daily Treasury Report is unacceptable. His tangential fever dream for a crypto cyber punk utopia sounded sophomoric and not sufficiently considered.

[@luismendez3982]

Interesting. A very grandious debate on the potential but not exact future of bitcoin.

[@richardfromtexas]

Never debate Mike Green. The smartest guy in the room.

[@maxilopez1596]

Don't invest with someone just because they can win debates. He's missed the entire history of Bitcoin, basically the biggest financial opportunity in history.

[@jwhauling4014]

Inflation is absolutely taxation.. if you have to defend that position, you're likely speaking with someone that is framing an agenda. Mike is afraid of change - This is quite clear, however he makes a solid debate for the need of elasticity...thx for the thought provoking debate.

[@TheMcBadie]

It will never be one or the other, govt simply can't let go of fiat and the printing presses. Ultimately fiat will remain and Bitcoin is your life raft. Interesting that Asset inflation of houses and stocks is criticised whilst Bitcoin asset inflation is seen as ok? Ultimately all hard assets will be dragged higher via currency debasement. Take your pick and protect yourselves. The real issue will be social unrest due to wealth inequality as so many have so few assets.

[@MatthewEGolden]

38:40, but the economy can't grow. He is right, nothing can appreciate in terms of Bitcoin, because a growing economy provides even less bitcoin available to service loans. This doesn't even touch the fact that if Bitcoin were integrated into the economy to this degree, it wouldn't work because of scaling issues.

[@geovanniecheverria5678]

Mike is a beast

[@pistolen87]

I don't get how Bitcoin will solve the problem with inelasticity.

[@sivi9741]

Exactly ! Because it can’t :) . I guess bitcoin maximalist would just need to live once through a real depression (1930s) to realize how currency elasticity can be incredibly useful to counter crisis . Yes , the price of elasticity is inflation but that could be remedy easily by fiscal policies . Sadly lot of democratic governments been infiltrated by lobbies and oligarchs to steal from the people by corrupting politicians. That is the real problem .

[@kurtjensen5798]

elasticity is the problem. remove it and don't allow government bureaucrats to control the economy.

[@sivi9741]

@@kurtjensen5798 Go read some about 1930s depression (check some pictures ) and tell us how great it would be to live in those times afterwards….

[@geoffmtchell9603]

Mike= let’s change but not really Robert= let’s reset the heck out of this A ground swell of people may just beat the elite this time…

[@Erikpdx]

If the US is buying bitcoin in the tens and hundreds of billions of dollars, You're just going to have a new elite from the current bitcoin whales. There's no math where this doesn't increase inequality In wealth

[@bullmeatt]

@@Erikpdx it doesnt change current wealth inequality but it gives more opportunity to the smaller guy than they used to have. You can buy any fraction of BTC but try buying a house without going into monstrous debt. As BTC is adopted as a reserve asset it becomes the easiest way for someone to save money. You dont have savings accounts which earn negative yields, instead you have an asset that everything deflates against unless there are recessions/depressions

[@Erikpdx]

@@bullmeatt you don't understand who owns most of the bitcoin

[@steveruiz9177]

Let’s goooo! Great guest!

[@samafari8168]

I think FIAT and Store of value should coexist. People should be free to switch between the two whenever and however they want.

[@kenjo3045]

So then Mike wants debt to continue to supply the interest rates needed to make bankers rich off the backs of its borrowes, lenders and investors. According to him, Bitcoin does not solve any of the economic issues that it was created for so let's keep going down the same black hole. Genius, ... More like the definition of insanity.

[@chalisblur]

Land is fixed supply, so how does real estate capitalisation function in an inflationary economy? Does more global surface area suddenly become available? Does the earth expand at 5% per annum? By Greens logic its not possible. Just look at Bitcoin in the position of real estate. Ownership of BTC can be carried in a ledger, while the title of a piece of land in the form of a government backed Wright of ownership. Other layer 1s that function as a form of exchange ala currency are a different argument entirely.

[@tonyconnolly5385]

Nice to hear both sides of the argument.

[@orca.digital]

The pursuit of happiness is obviously a failure in a country where more people per capita are on anti-depressants (the opposite of happiness) and the public debt has gone past the point of no return. Thus, property matters, particularly digital property since Russia is proving that ‘public domain’ can use brutal force to get what they want at the expense of the people pursuing happiness. This also happens in the US, but the media is quick to cover it up. Robert is correct and hopefully those with an opposing view will reconsider their opinion and join the Reformed Bitcoin Haters Club sooner rather than later.🕊

[@kenadams971]

Mike's views are predicated on the belief that human beings will act differently despite the same system/incentives. Robert is spot on, the incentives mean that when in power, almost all of us would end up succumbing to the temptation to inflate the currency

[@aqualuxx]

FASAB 56 passed a few years back took the entire budget black in essence. Us is already engaged in subterfuge unfortunately

[@nicolasbevilacqua6690]

I was thinking about that too.

[@HarveyMushman]

Mike Green dismantled Roberts arguments very intelligently. An economy solely based on hard money simply doesn’t work.

[@noahlockwood9766]

Wouldn't the starting point be the production of goods and services? Money then is an abstraction of those goods and services that satisfies a number objectives that the goods and services in and of themselves do not.

[@charlesbodi]

Robert offered solutions while Mike argued over definitions of words. Also, Mike taking a shot at Roberts religion is low and disrespectful.

[@mathewward6229]

BTC, Gold, Silver and most non-perishable commodities are on par or better than acquiring equities that the fed have been currently doing. But governments will never switch to sound money they need to expand and shrink the balance at will.

[@ryanc3656]

The way Mike Green talks, reminds me of a guy with a massive chip on his shoulder, he’s oddly abrasive. If he wasn’t a hedge fund manager, he’d make a great loan shark on a used car lot.

[@Erikpdx]

He has to bring reality back to Breedloves fantasy. He shouldn't have to.

[@hardforklife4967]

A literal fantasy featuring libertarianism, rewriting the constitution, desalination, nukes, beating China, stopping the fed’s balance sheet expanding with bonds so that it can secretly expand with crypto to benefit the hodlers.

[@kellyjewett2721]

Mike Green 🏆

[@epac2816]

Yay for slavery he def won 🎉🎉🎉

[@clintalexander8]

How does this gentleman propose we get better leadership when people can’t even agree on what they hold valuable to society society has lost control because there’s too many individuals that have too much power already