Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

coindesk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 383 posts

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#301

Post by marcosdumay »

tasuki wrote: post #229
iamnotagenius wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was expecting a lot more from (I think) the first politician following the Austrian school of economics. This is exactly why you've heard only demagoguery; Austrian school is fringe.

I don't see how that follows. Many of the people who appear to me to talk the most sense (eg: Tyler Cowen) follow the Austrian school. It being fringe does not mean they're wrong. It could be the mainstream is wrong. I'm not an economist and don't know.

In all likelihood, the reason they appear to talk the most sense to you is that both you don't understand what is wrong with them¹ and you never even read the actual theories they pose themselves against.

Anyway, the criticism about the Austrian school isn't even that it's wrong. It's that it's neither a theory nor a school of though. There isn't much "though" in it. But when you get to the views of an actual person, they will necessarily be more complete than the school, and need to be evaluated independently.

1 - "I can clearly see that objects stop moving without anybody messing with then. That Newton guy makes no sense whatsoever."

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#302

Post by dudefeliciano »

Izikiel43 wrote: post #270
dudefeliciano wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that doesn't necessarily mean he is a bad economist all of the sudden Define bad, I'm sure the insiders who made millions selling Libra at the right time don't consider him bad. If he was involved in the scam, it wasn't a bad financial decision from his point of view (just a stupid political decision). Argentinian entrepeneurs don't consider him bad. Those waiting in line at the soup kitchens probably see it differ…

With (a previous to this event) 56% approval rating, > Those waiting in line at the soup kitchens probably see it differently... At least half those guys also approve of him. Thanks to his government's policies of reducing inflation and removing middlemen out of social assistance, those people can afford to sustain themselves, and poverty has gone back down to around 37% according to several private economists/univer…

I keep seeing these numbers being thrown around about inflation improving and poverty decreasing in argentina, but then i also read articles about the increasing poverty rates and diminishing of social welfare for the poorest segments of society. I don't live there so I can't say first hand, but this latest move by milei surely made my opinion on him settle on the "not a good guy for the people"

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#303

Post by littlestymaar »

Panzer04 wrote: post #212
karparov wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> stop spending money the government doesn't have That shows quite the misconception about what "money" actually is.

Sure, but Argentina wasn't doing ING what an MMT theorist would advocate for (which is balancing government spending with available productive capacity). This is evident because they had an out of control inflation rate.

Argentina's economy has been a shit show for a while. And of course outright killing the economy and everybody's standard of living in the process means you're doing something, but it's not what I'd consider helping the economy.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#304

Post by toss1 »

andriesm wrote: post #221
coffeebeqn wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would he not be? If he did zero due diligence on this and then pitched it to his countrymen as an investment. Incredibly poor judgement no?

It's pretty bad, but smart people do stupid things all the time. Hopefully he learns from this mistake. And as pointed out, it does not automatically make all his prior decisions bad - we can actually analyse them each on their individual merit.

>>smart people do stupid things all the time

That may explain it but it does NOT excuse it or the consequences.

Smart people are also supposed to consider the consequences of their actions a bit more deeply than dumb people, and leaders are supposed to surround themselves with even smarter and more broadly experienced advisers to alert them to potential stupid actions and so moderate their actions to avoid harming others (as well as harming their own reputation or standing).

>>Hopefully he learns from this mistake. ...

Right: so just let smart people with a lot of power make whatever mistakes come along that damage others but face zero consequences for them beyond "we hope they learn".

That is an excuse for keeping incompetent autocrats or oligarchs in power, not a plan for a sustainable and growing complex society.

Milei should face whatever consequences apply in his country to any person loudly promoting a fraud with a large platform. But he probably will not, Such a lack of consequences should be recognized as a wrong, not merely dismissed with a shrug.

Sheesh

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#305

Post by abc123abc123 »

dysoco wrote: post #69

Just to clarify, here are some important differences compared to the Trump case: 1. Milei did not sell this as a memecoin at all, unlike Trump, he sold it as a "financial instrument to help finance small Argentinan enterprises". 2. Trump tweeted about $TRUMP BEFORE stepping into office, Milei is already the president of Argentina. This constitutes an obvious ethical violation, and possibly a legal one as well. 3. 80%…

Nonsense.

"A few hours ago I posted a tweet, as I have so many other times, supporting a supposed private enterprise with which I obviously have no connection whatsoever," Milei wrote. "I was not aware of the details of the project and after having become aware of it I decided not to continue spreading the word (that is why I deleted the tweet)." quote from Milei.

The big problem is that people might (or might not) buy crypto based on tweets. No shadow falls over Milei here, one of the true geniuses of our life time! He has done so much for Argentina, freeing it from socialism, and I won't stop until the last remnants and traces of socialism has been eradicated from the argentine psyche.

Then argentina will rise as a great financial power, built on solid capitalist and libertarian values.

I think there will be a lot of brain drain from the socialist EU to Argentina in a few years time. The question is if Argentina would want to receive the millions of refugees from the EU?

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#306

Post by iamnotagenius »

tasuki wrote: post #229
iamnotagenius wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was expecting a lot more from (I think) the first politician following the Austrian school of economics. This is exactly why you've heard only demagoguery; Austrian school is fringe.

I don't see how that follows. Many of the people who appear to me to talk the most sense (eg: Tyler Cowen) follow the Austrian school. It being fringe does not mean they're wrong. It could be the mainstream is wrong. I'm not an economist and don't know.

Fringe means that it attracts weirdos, demagogues etc, as things normally fringe for a reason, but even if they are not, people have so much reputational risk for publicly advertising these views, so that either suggests they are grifters, so they do not have reputation to start with or they have poor judgement.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#307

Post by marcosdumay »

tombert wrote: post #109
adriand wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As was noted elsewhere (I forget the source), it's zero sum: anyone who makes money is making it off someone who is losing money. In fact, it's less than zero sum because of platform fees.

Yeah, this is the thing that made me realize that cryptocurrency is pretty much always a bad investment. Stocks aren't zero sum, at least in their idealized form; if I buy a share of some company, they can use that investment to create products or provide value in some form, and if the product is good then that gets reflected in the stock price increasing. It creates value, and the stock price follows. With cryptocur…

Being used as money creates value.

So, to see if cryptocurrency is a pyramid or not, just look at how much is transacted compared to its total value...

Or don't, because you already know the result. But it's not inconceivable for a cryptocurrency to create value. It's just that nobody did one that does it yet, and the culture around them makes it less and less likely as time passes.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#308

Post by marcosdumay »

7speter wrote: post #93
protocolture wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have heard every reasoning for regular currency to have more value over cryptos since 16/17 when I started paying attention. Gold Standard, Government Protection, Debt, Government credit instruments. But everything I read about currency tells me that its largely always just agreed upon make believe. The case with the Real absolutely confirmed that for me.

Neither the rule of law nor following through on contracts and other obligations are imaginary

Well... they both are.

Just like currency. All of those were imaginary since they were invented. People have create physical representations for currency in particular, but that doesn't change the fact that it's only a group of people agreeing on something that only exist on their heads.

Equally imaginary things are "corporations", "governments", "military"... If you push hard enough, even "person" fits that, but this one is deeply entrenched in people's minds.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#309

Post by csomar »

impossiblefork wrote: post #188
csomar wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people don't realize that governments can't just "print" currencies and the few that do (ie: Turkey, Argentina, etc...) have chronic hyperinflation. The US went a bit loose with supply and it already came back biting and still to this day struggling with the higher interest. The government does constantly devalue the currency, though. It does it at an imperceptible pace to not scare the chickens and make busines…

Yes, but when demand for the currency leads to a prices increasing,such as from an attempted corner, then you do not destroy price stability because the person operating the corner is buying the cash with something. The money-printing used to break a corner can in principle be small and you can even have an inflation target of zero and still print money to break such corners. What I want to emphasize with this though…

What you are saying, if I understood you correctly, is that money is a method of accounting. If all money is borrowed, then money is literally worth 0, which what a unit in an accounting system is worth.

If this makes sense to you, then it'll make sense why Bitcoin is worth something. There is a circular demand to it even without debt. I'll not argue to the legitimacy of that demands (scams, phishing, laundering, etc...) but it is demand and it creates a baseline value (beyond the boom/busts it cycles through).

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#310

Post by chubot »

spacechild1 wrote: post #208
chubot wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't actually see a problem with that ... He is uncritical, yes. But he doesn't deny being uncritical. It's a useful "service" to get people with diametrically opposite viewpoints to talk freely, and he does that well The interviewer doesn't need to impose their world view on the guest, or the audience -- it's OK to let the audience make up their own minds. Contradictions aren't inherently bad, either ... "consist…

> The interviewer doesn't need to impose their world view on the guest, or the audience -- it's OK to let the audience make up their own minds. What if the guest lies or omits crucial facts? How is the audience supposed to know that? Fact checking is the very basis of responsible journalism.

What if I go to a dinner party and someone lies or omits crucial facts?

I guess take it for what it is -- it's a conversation recorded on YouTube ... maybe don't be fooled by the suit and the mics. Anyone can buy those, there is no certification AFAIK :-)

(I'd also say that 95% of journalism you see on TV is not much different than a conversation recorded on YouTube, i.e. they don't do fact checking themselves.)

Post reply on HN