This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Congrats on founding your blog, I wish you and your companions well.
The problem with the theory that there is anywhere better to put your money than a bank is that you have to spend money to secure it. A significant lump of gold doesn't hold its value for you over time. The gold itself holds its value, but not for you. You have to guard it, you might lose it. If you lose it, you lose it all.
If you don't guard it, you risk theft and total loss. Your hypothetical yeoman saver is going to have, what, let's say $10,000.00. So he buys 5 ounces of gold. He can choose to keep it on him, like a pimp, but if he gets mugged there goes his life savings. Ditto keeping it at home, he better not get burgled when he isn't at home, better make sure no one ever finds out you're a goldbug. So while any single hypothetical yeoman farmer might get lucky and hang onto his retirement savings throughout his life, we should discount the value of physical savings like gold and silver by the odds of theft of that gold in the course of that 20 years. Of course, your level of personal security varies with who you are as a person. You might be big, tough, and live in a town where everybody knows you and either likes you well enough to protect you or knows that too many others like you too much to risk messing with you. But the unbanked small, weak, the stranger, the unloved, those who the police aren't interested in protecting, they can't carry their wealth with them; without banking they pretty much just never accumulate much mobile wealth at all in a modern and disconnected world.
The alternative in non-financial/banking investments in something concrete and productive like land. But land must be worked to give produce. Either by the owner or by a tenant. Any landlord will tell you, good tenant's are hard to find. Worth their weight in gold. The tenant who does his own repairs, pays his own costs, pays his rent on time, is rare. So if you want to invest in land, you're paying the costs (either by labor or by percentage) every year you own it. In cultures that are built around those kinds of leases, the costs are lower. But we don't live in those cultures.
I won't even countenance the idea of investing directly in a small business in this day and age. The risk of total loss without an owner putting blood, sweat, and tears into the business is basically 100%; even with that it's pretty high over 20 years.
So we probably need to start with eliminating the cash economy, the lack of connection and community among atomized individuals. But failing that, you're gonna need a bank.
Bitcoin does not cost anything to store, though you do have to spend some time learning how to self-custody securely. It's a lot easier than it was ten years ago, very low risk of losing your keys or having them stolen if you do it well.
Storage costs of gold are overblown. You can fit a million dollars of gold in a standard $70 a year safe deposit box. GoldMoney.com or BullionVault.com will store it for you with high security for 0.1% a year -- so that is a 2% loss over 20 years. That is far less than the numbers cited in the article for the monetary dilution losses from holding cash in a bank.
Unless someone knows that in your brain is the key to $100,000 of untraceable, irrecoverable currency, in which case a 9mm held to your knee is sort of a universal key. With crypto transactions being, ideally, irreversible and untraceable, it's much riskier than gold coins because you can't even catch the guy with the gold. Alternatively, if crypto transactions are traceable and reversible, you are at the mercy of the government system, they can confiscate your money without even sending out the goon squad.
You have me on the safe deposit box, but I'm not sure I'd really trust a storage company with a significant fraction of my net worth. My bank can't fiddle with the numbers, I can show my math and my records. What do you do if your gold comes out lighter. Probably paranoia, I'm not sure that any of that is accurate, just vibes.
Unfortunately safe deposit boxes are steadily disappearing as a bank service across the US. And they're not exactly safe from Government intervention either.
More options
Context Copy link
Do not tell anyone who much crypto you have. For a wrench attack, the thief would have to know how much you have, otherwise you just open up a side wallet and only give them a small portion of your funds. Also, you can use multisig or split up your seed so that you literally could not give an attacker your keys on the spot even if you wanted to.
But yeah, given a high enough rate of crime, nothing is safe, kidnapping loved ones is always a risk, no matter what form of wealth you hold.
Safe deposit boxes aren't perfect as bank customer service has declined. There are horror stories about banks shutting down a branch and not properly notifying customers and the deposit boxes ending up in limbo somewhere.
Which is practical, as long as Crypto is an extremely marginal aspect of both the world economy and your personal net worth, or you live as a kind of digital nomad cyberpunk gray man. But it rather precludes it as a primary store of value for settled individuals and communities as a whole. If we ever reached a point where most wealth was stored through crypto, you would just have to target random rich people.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Even if you assume there's no risk, though, the loss to inflation is still there. Even if I don't secure my cash an no one steals it, it's still going to lose value even compared to the modest return a savings account or CD would offer me. Investing in gold is just another commodity subject to the normal swings of commodity markets—it may prove to be a good investment, it may not be.
Gold doesn't inflate, it fluctuates. At least until we can rip atoms apart and rearrange them.
Mining increases the global gold supply by 2% every year.
I wonder how much is lost per year from accidents, caching/hoarding, wear, etc. The best figure I can get for wear is silver coins losing 5% weight over a lifetime.
Probably much less of an issue these days: nobody's sunk any spanish treasure ships lately, and fewer people are burying valuables to hide them from raiders. Plus more gold gets kept in bar form rather than being periodically switched between plates/ornaments and coinage, with whatever losses are involved.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link