The False Premises and Promises of Bitcoin

TL;DR

This paper critically examines Bitcoin's claims, highlighting fundamental misconceptions and proposing reforms to reshape finance and investment practices for broader accessibility and stability.

Contribution

It exposes false assumptions in Bitcoin's design and offers specific recommendations to reform financial systems and investment mechanisms.

Findings

Bitcoin makes false claims about double-spending and reserve currency roles.

Bitcoin's technical approach overlooks currency and banking fundamentals.

Proposes reforms like open-outcry exchanges and venture banking for the masses.

Abstract

Designed to compete with fiat currencies, bitcoin proposes it is a crypto-currency alternative. Bitcoin makes a number of false claims, including: solving the double-spending problem is a good thing; bitcoin can be a reserve currency for banking; hoarding equals saving, and that we should believe bitcoin can expand by deflation to become a global transactional currency supply. Bitcoin's developers combine technical implementation proficiency with ignorance of currency and banking fundamentals. This has resulted in a failed attempt to change finance. A set of recommendations to change finance are provided in the Afterword: Investment/venture banking for the masses; Venture banking to bring back what investment banks once were; Open-outcry exchange for all CDS contracts; Attempting to develop CDS type contracts on investments in startup and existing enterprises; and Improving the connection between startup tech/ideas, business organization and investment.