The Nashian Bitcoin Standard - jalToorey/IdealMoney GitHub Wiki

The Nashian Bitcoin Standard as OPPOSED and in CONTRAST to the (Saifedean) Bitcoin Standard

The Nashian Bitcoin Standard is an economic framework that runs in prefect and complete contrast the Bitcoin Standard as authored, described, and professed by Saifedean Ammous.

The Bitcoin Standard as authored, described, and professed famously by Saifedean Ammous relies on a series of arguments that lead it to be inconsistent with Mises, Hayek, and therefore the Austrian economic theory and school in general (Mises institute is yet to comment their own inconsistent with regard to the existence of bitcoin).

The IMPORTANCE and RE-LEVANCE of Nash's ICPI and its relation to Hayek's Ducat Proposal

Nash's proposal for a monetary standard, which our work wraps around bitcoin:

idealMoney{bitcoin} == nashianBitcoinStandard

relies on the utilization of the concept of a basket of world prices Nash calls an ICPI. The ICPI plays a critical theoretical role in the related philosophy and dialogue:

We published a paper entitled "Ideal Money" in the Southern Economic Journal (in 2002) and it was essentially the text of a keynote lecture that we gave on that topic at the meeting of the Southern Economic Association in Tampa, Florida. Of course, necessarily, on a topic with such a universal relevance to human affairs, it is difficult, really, to say something new. But there can be novelty in the details and in terms of the context and the times.

Our key proposal was/is that an index that can be called an ICPI or "Indus- trial Consumption Price Index" could be employed as a basis for the standard-ization of the value of money. This proposal was for an index based on the international prices of specific goods. For example like the prices for silver or copper as recorded daily at London.

That the ICPI is a key component of understanding the implementation of Nash's proposal runs in perfect harmony with Hayek's work The Denationalisation of Money as this is how Hayek described the basis for his theoretical ducat money/device:

Experience of the response of the public to competing offers would gradually show which combination of commodities constituted the most desired standard at any time and place. Changes in the importance of the commodities, the volume in which they were traded, and the relative stability or sensitivity of their prices (especially the degree to which they were determined competitively or not) might suggest alterations to make the currency more popular. On the whole I would expect that, for reasons to be explained later (Section XIII), a collection of raw material prices, such as has been suggested as the basis of a commodity reserve standard, would seem most appropriate, both from the point of view of the issuing bank and from that of the effects of the stability of the economic process as a whole. ~ Hayek The Denationalisation of Money

Nash's Austrian Roots and Hayekian Admission

It is stated and unsurprising that Nash's work is so perfectly aligned with Hayek (and it should be noted that Nash's only formal economics training is from an Austrian professor in an Austrian economics course):

after consulting with some of the economics faculty at Princeton, I learned of the work and publications of Friedrich von Hayek. I must say that my thinking is apparently quite parallel to his thinking in relation to money and particularly with regard to the non-typical viewpoint in relation to the functions of the authorities which in recent times have been the sources of currencies (earlier “coinage”).) ~ Nash Ideal Money

Saifedean's Critique of Nash And Hayek's Theoretical Use of an adjustable basket of prices

And again this runs in perfect contrast to the Saifedeanian exposition of Austrian economics and the bitcoin standard he authored, describes, and professes:

Exactly. It's just another centrally planned currency, based on ridiculous price stability index measurements. And he's extremely naive to imagine it can be done internationally apolitically. It's far closer to an international CBDC than bitcoin ~ Saifedean Ammous commenting on John Nash's works Ideal Money

Nash's Equilibrium is the Key Concept Our Leaders and Global Citizenry Need to Re-levate

Nash's proposal illuminates the concept of what we refer to here as "Nash's Equilibrium" or perhaps the great equilibrium:

“Nash’s Equilibrium” is the theoretically driven imposition of an equilibrium in which humans can draw from philosophically in order to begin to reason to a new rational order first as individuals and then, through the construction and use of technology (money, contracts etc.), in a game theoretically cooperative fashion. For this, the validity of Nash’s Equilibrium is self-reflexive, if at all.

It provides the basis for us to move to a single, stable, politically neutral, monetary order (not a single currency).

Nashification vs. Hyperbitcoinization

The Nashian Bitcoin Standard sees an opposite end than hyperbitcoinization which professes the idea that Bitcoin will replace fiat by hyperinflating all major currencies:

This article is about the possibility of Bitcoin-induced currency demonetization, or hyperbitcoinization, which is what would happen to any hapless currency that stands in Bitcoin's path of total world domination. If this happens, the currency will rapidly lose value as Bitcoin supplants it.

The Nashian Bitcoin Standard instead derives from the consideration that all major currencies, might, could, and should instead be encouraged and demanded by the general public to adopt Bitcoin as their inflation target, thereby ensuring exchange stability with Bitcoin, all other major currencies that accept such a program, Hayek's ducat money, and Nash's ICPI etc.

Ideal Money As An End To a New Mean

Achievement of Ideal Money (a global equilibrium of inter-relationally/exchange stable money) has not happened to humanity yet. It's a new technological advance humanity hasn't achieved. It will mark a change in our psychology. It precludes proper extra-terrestrial contact. It is an eternal achievement we can't lose once we have it as it becomes our culture immediately. It provides a security basis for ALL complex system (I haven't explained this yet.). It is the biggest technological advancement available and achievable in our time.

It can only be achieved through Bohmian dialogue and Bohrian Consensus.