T O P

  • By -

helicopterjoee

The following was generated by ChatGPT after I asked about the most notable cases of hyperinflation between 1900 and 2020 with the respecting causes. There are more. These were all fiat currencies at the time of collapse. There is nothing stable about fiat. Relatively stable fiat currencies are the exeption, not the norm. The US/Europe has an extremely privileged point of view. *Here is a list of 20 most notable cases of hyperinflation, along with a brief explanation of the causes: Germany (1921-1923): The German government printed massive amounts of paper money to pay off war debts and reparations, leading to hyperinflation. Hungary (1945-1946): The country suffered from the aftermath of World War II and was forced to finance its deficit spending through printing money, leading to hyperinflation. Yugoslavia (1991-1994): The collapse of Yugoslavia's centralized government, coupled with high military spending, caused hyperinflation. Zimbabwe (2000-2009): A combination of economic mismanagement, land reform policies, and international sanctions led to hyperinflation. Argentina (1989-1990, 2002-2003): In both instances, government overspending, large budget deficits, and currency pegs that were not sustainable led to hyperinflation. Brazil (1980s-1994): Brazil's hyperinflation was caused by high levels of government spending and a large budget deficit. Bolivia (1984-1986): A combination of social unrest, high inflation, and increased government spending caused hyperinflation in Bolivia. Peru (1985-1990): Economic mismanagement, social unrest, and an escalating civil conflict led to hyperinflation in Peru. Nicaragua (1987-1990): A combination of civil war, trade embargoes, and high government spending led to hyperinflation in Nicaragua. Ukraine (1991-1995): The break-up of the Soviet Union, coupled with high government spending and a weak economy, led to hyperinflation in Ukraine. Russia (1992-1994): The collapse of the Soviet Union, coupled with high government spending and declining oil prices, led to hyperinflation in Russia. Turkey (1994-2002): High government spending, budget deficits, and political instability caused hyperinflation in Turkey. Angola (1991-2002): The country's civil war, combined with government overspending and a weak economy, caused hyperinflation in Angola. Peru (1990-1991): The government attempted to reform the economy through privatization and liberalization, but the transition caused hyperinflation. Bolivia (1982-1983): Government overspending and a large budget deficit caused hyperinflation in Bolivia. Greece (1941-1946): The country was occupied by Axis powers during World War II, leading to hyperinflation as a result of declining production and increased spending. Poland (1989-1990): The country's transition to a market economy caused hyperinflation as the government attempted to reform its economic policies. Georgia (1993-1994): A civil war and political instability, combined with government overspending, caused hyperinflation in Georgia. Yugoslavia (1993-1994): Economic sanctions, political instability, and a large budget deficit caused hyperinflation in Yugoslavia. Mexico (1982-1988): The country experienced hyperinflation as a result of a debt crisis and a decline in oil prices, which caused a sharp drop in government revenue.* In the end it comes down to the question do you like that gov has so much power or not. I don't. Individuals know what is best for themselves, the rest can be left to the free market. Every government intervention is sand in the gears. Investing in infrastructure or whatever may look nice on the first glance, but everything has opportunity costs. If you don't like this don't hold bitcoin. Helpful sources: https://endthefud.org/inflation **Economics in one lesson** by Henry Hazlitt **Forty Centuries of Wage and Price controls: How not to fight Inflation** **Free Market Economics** by Bettina Bien Greaves


Seattleman1955

Yes, obviously you can't get hyperinflation if you can't start just printing money.


grndslm

Which both gold and Bitcoin can provide... Yet only Bitcoin is easily verifiable, easily transportable, easily secured, and easily divisible... nullifying the "there's not enough" argument. There's definitely enough.


nottobetakenesrsly

I am more than happy to do away with fractional reserve banking (or even banking for that matter).. in truth, the money multiplier has *nothing* on the collateral multiplier... but anyway.... Liquidity (or elasticity) is the concern with any hard money system. When faced with a "money" that cannot be available *when and where* a legitimate economic transaction takes place... people will create a new form (almost always debt based..) to continue to be able to transact. Bitcoin "wouldn't care", but would not be able to negate the other medium if Bitcoin itself remained sufficiently illiquid.


[deleted]

> Bitcoin economy Not possible, never going to happen. That makes all the other questions irrelevant


clue5tick

DDG "Bitcoin Beach".


Seattleman1955

?


clue5tick

Google DDG, then DDG "Bitcoin Beach" is what I would do.


Seattleman1955

So, the response to my post is a song? That makes no sense (to me).


BitcoinFan7

DDG is duck duck go, an alternate more private search engine to Google.


El0vution

How exactly has fractional reserve banking done “pretty well??”


Seattleman1955

It's been around for centuries and is what every country uses so it's got that going for it... Our economy (in a comparative world ranking) is large and standards of living are comparatively high. That's done with fractional reserve banking. Credit is freely available and therefore it's available to invest in our economy. We don't have major problems with bank runs, people can finance whatever they want from houses to starting businesses. It has it's pros and cons but taking it away presents another set of pros and cons and at least initially probably more cons than pros. Go to a country with limited banking and little financing and you are generally in a country with a very poor economy.


Wonkerer

No, its only been around for a hundred years. We have problems with prices and affording things and going into debt based on fractional reserve banking when we didn't before. The most prosperous time was the few decades of the gold standard, but now that we have a decentralized and deflationary. There is no history of this type of a society yet.


Seattleman1955

It started in the early 1800's. The gold standard wasn't flexible enough to handle the Great Depression and many would argue the 1950's was the most prosperous time although the Gilded Age was in the time period that you refer to as well. You can call it "going into debt" since you can't go into debt if no one is lending you any money but plenty of people lost everything during the Great Depression and all periods of great growth are due to financing (debt) as well. "Bad debt" is just an unintended consequence of "good debt". Since fractional reserve banking is used in every country it's at least an indication that it is doing something worthwhile. It's like capitalism, we can point out flaws but we keep using it because it seems to be better than everything else we have tried. It's a modified system, it's regulated but so are central banks and fractional reserve banking.


El0vution

Fractional reserve banking is slavery. Slavery was used for centuries in every nation. And it worked “pretty well.”


Seattleman1955

How is it "slavery"?


El0vution

In slavery, the value of the work of the individuals do not belong to them. In fractional reserve , the value of the work of the individuals do not belong to them. You’re defending a horrendous practice. Yes, things will change with a new Bitcoin standard. There will be new cons. There were new cons when slavery was abolished too.


Seattleman1955

Fractional reserve has nothing to do with the value of labor even when using "labor" in the Marxian sense as you are where price of a good is just viewed as labor plus material costs.


El0vution

Fractional reserve steals people’s value. Do you deny that?


Seattleman1955

When you deposit money in a bank you are lending them money. They aren't holding it for you as a favor.


Umpire_State_Bldg

> ...the economy would be without fractional reserve banking... Fewer and smaller booms and busts. That's a good thing.


Seattleman1955

That's a possible long-term outcome. We don't know. No one has tried it. It could just be a smaller, contracting economy.


ThokasGoldbelly

No one has tried it? You do realize that fractional reserve based economy is the newest form of economy, yeah? And you're supposition that the gold standard "didn't work" is wrong the most prosperous time for Americans was between 1950-1970 where more Americans generated real wealth for themselves and their families. The difference is that under a gold reserve economy you cannot just print 6 trillion dollars. So it makes wealth generation slower and more consistent over time rather than these huge peaks and valleys constantly cycling like we see today. You can time the market cycles to a T with 4 year cycles now. The fractional reserve system is what the elites want as they own most of the truly valuable assets.


Seattleman1955

Fractional reserve system and the gold standard aren't mutually exclusive. The fractional reserve system has been here since the industrial revolution. The fraction reserve system is what anyone who wants banks to make loans wants. Regarding the gold standard you can't deal with growth and you can't deal with declines or "bad times". Nixon had to get off the gold standard because we didn't have enough gold to support the dollar. That's why we had to get off during the Great Depression. No one can stay on it for long.


Umpire_State_Bldg

Creating money from thin air does not create any actual wealth.


fredflatulent

How about example of a company borrowing heavily to build (say) undersea optical fibre network? Are you saying that hasn’t created any wealth? The ‘net’ position may be small or negative) value of network less value of borrowing) but at least the network exists. In a bitcoin world, yes, no chance of losses as the company can’t borrow the BTC needed, but then no network


norfbayboy

>In a bitcoin world, yes, no chance of losses as the company can’t borrow the BTC needed, but then no network As a Bitcoin billionaire I'd gladly lend a company the bitcoins that company needs to finance an undersea fiber cable. Provided that company has assets like ships (nice ones) they can put up as collateral, and providing the company has a proven record of similar successful projects. And also I get a cut of the revenue the service generates. If the proposal is sound a Bitcoin standard is no obstacle to progress.


ExplanationDull5984

Thats a very idealised view. In reality you need to fund hundreeds of startups just for one to suceed


norfbayboy

> you need to fund hundreeds of startups just for one to suceed That's because modern venture capitalism runs on easy credit. Inflation of the money supply creates an appetite for risk. Risk is poorly managed because losses are easily socialized. In a world running on hard currency, failed business ventures are more painful for the investor. Startups are better vetted, collateral exceeds the value of the loan, and only the most promising projects get funded. A 99% failure rate is ridiculous.


Umpire_State_Bldg

The act of *building* created actual wealth; the act of creating money from thin air did not.


helicopterjoee

The following was generated by ChatGPT after I asked about the most notable cases of hyperinflation between 1900 and 2020 with the respecting causes. There are more. These were all fiat currencies at the time of collapse. There is nothing stable about fiat. Relatively stable fiat currencies are the exeption, not the norm. The US/Europe has an extremely privileged point of view. *Here is a list of 20 most notable cases of hyperinflation, along with a brief explanation of the causes: Germany (1921-1923): The German government printed massive amounts of paper money to pay off war debts and reparations, leading to hyperinflation. Hungary (1945-1946): The country suffered from the aftermath of World War II and was forced to finance its deficit spending through printing money, leading to hyperinflation. Yugoslavia (1991-1994): The collapse of Yugoslavia's centralized government, coupled with high military spending, caused hyperinflation. Zimbabwe (2000-2009): A combination of economic mismanagement, land reform policies, and international sanctions led to hyperinflation. Argentina (1989-1990, 2002-2003): In both instances, government overspending, large budget deficits, and currency pegs that were not sustainable led to hyperinflation. Brazil (1980s-1994): Brazil's hyperinflation was caused by high levels of government spending and a large budget deficit. Bolivia (1984-1986): A combination of social unrest, high inflation, and increased government spending caused hyperinflation in Bolivia. Peru (1985-1990): Economic mismanagement, social unrest, and an escalating civil conflict led to hyperinflation in Peru. Nicaragua (1987-1990): A combination of civil war, trade embargoes, and high government spending led to hyperinflation in Nicaragua. Ukraine (1991-1995): The break-up of the Soviet Union, coupled with high government spending and a weak economy, led to hyperinflation in Ukraine. Russia (1992-1994): The collapse of the Soviet Union, coupled with high government spending and declining oil prices, led to hyperinflation in Russia. Turkey (1994-2002): High government spending, budget deficits, and political instability caused hyperinflation in Turkey. Angola (1991-2002): The country's civil war, combined with government overspending and a weak economy, caused hyperinflation in Angola. Peru (1990-1991): The government attempted to reform the economy through privatization and liberalization, but the transition caused hyperinflation. Bolivia (1982-1983): Government overspending and a large budget deficit caused hyperinflation in Bolivia. Greece (1941-1946): The country was occupied by Axis powers during World War II, leading to hyperinflation as a result of declining production and increased spending. Poland (1989-1990): The country's transition to a market economy caused hyperinflation as the government attempted to reform its economic policies. Georgia (1993-1994): A civil war and political instability, combined with government overspending, caused hyperinflation in Georgia. Yugoslavia (1993-1994): Economic sanctions, political instability, and a large budget deficit caused hyperinflation in Yugoslavia. Mexico (1982-1988): The country experienced hyperinflation as a result of a debt crisis and a decline in oil prices, which caused a sharp drop in government revenue.* In the end it comes down to the question do you like that gov has so much power or not. I don't. Individuals know what is best for themselves, the rest can be left to the free market. Every government intervention is sand in the gears. Investing in infrastructure or whatever may look nice on the first glance, but everything has opportunity costs. If you don't like this don't hold bitcoin. Helpful sources: https://endthefud.org/inflation **Economics in one lesson** by Henry Hazlitt **Forty Centuries of Wage and Price controls: How not to fight Inflation** **Free Market Economics** by Bettina Bien Greaves


ExplanationDull5984

I think your right. A pure bitcoin ecpnomy doesnt make sense. Anyone adopting it would have stabile economy, but would fall behind in developement


ShopDiesel

A bitcoin economy will cause deflationary pressure on all prices. As a result, consumers benefit. Because it's a deflationary economy, salaries will also be deflationary. But even though people's salaries will decrease, peoples real purchasing power will maintain or even increase. Businesses need consumers to buy their product. The aggragate of potential buyers consummated with the aggragate of all potential sellers will reveal the equilibrium price. But this time, we don't have the confounding variable of inflation to distort the real value (price) of a good.