Posers of Economic Brilliance – mytrbroadcast.com

I’m going to post just three questions; however, what they’ll express is whether or not you actually know something, or—you “think” you do, but you’re just chasing and believing in narratives. And with the more narratives you hear (i.e., mainstream business/financial media, influencer podcasts, et al.), the more you think you know and are resolved to chase it even more. Ready?

1.) How is it that the so-called “smartest people in the room” concerning economics, who subsequently set the monetary basis for not just the U.S. but lead for most of the developed world, base their rationale and reasoning to adjust said policy on one of their two mandates (e.g., maximum employment), only to find out—all the data they were quoting, using to defend their actions for or against rate cuts, and more—was either intentionally false, completely inaccurate (think bad reporting or incompetence), and was subsequently the inverse, meaning it proved they should have been adjusting their stance regarding monetary policy in the complete opposite direction? Unless…

2.) If Bitcoin™ has such value as is told and sold—then why does it only have real staying value when it’s tethered to the “stable” asset it’s supposedly replacing for stability and value? Example: stablecoins (meant as a generic term) using Bitcoin tied to Treasuries, or Gold, or _________ (fill in your favorite here). Again, if Bitcoin is so valuable, why does it need to be stabled to anything? Unless…

3.) The modern playbook for the Silicon Valley–based model of anything digital (broad brush, I know, but you get the idea) is: when investing money from late-stage V.C.s comes in, they’re quite comfortable with the company losing money in its first year (again, broad brush simplistic for this example) if it can reduce costs to enhance revenue by 10% per year via efficiencies and more. Why? Because, theoretically, in about 10 years the profit margin would be at 90% or higher. That’s the formula that’s been at play since the dot-com era. However, the current latest and greatest new thing, known as A.I., currently works in the exact opposite way. i.e., Every time the model gets better (version 1 to 2 to 3, and so forth), the cost for “efficiencies” (aka training new models) goes not just higher, but in some cases exponentially so. Therefore, how does this model actually work and become profitable, when at the same time those using it are mostly “free” subscribers and have demonstrated they will not pay? Unless…

And if you haven’t figured out what “Unless…” really means to this point, let me help you…

It means: it’s all just narrative selling. Or, said differently, the so-called “smart crowd” have demonstrated they really aren’t, or they’re completely politically biased, regardless. Bitcoin is nothing more than this time’s game of musical chairs, or a glorified Ponzi. And A.I. is a fantastic realization with a business model that is unsustainable at current trajectories, much like 1999.

Yet, you won’t hear it said anywhere else but here. Why?

Because everyone’s salary involved is based on the continuation of said narrative.

It really is as simple as that.

Note: This commentary is for education purposes only and is not to be construed as trading or investing advice of any sort. These commentaries/opinions are for “big picture” discussion purposes only. Please read, or re-read the “About This Site” page for any questions or clarifications.