100pc agreed and then some. Labor is what it's always been, a trap. Whatever your station in life your future is best served by doing EVERYTHING to get out of selling your labor all day long for a stipend, and into ownership of something that you can control and grow. Most people aren't lucky enough to do it in one step; sometimes it can take a lifetime or multiple generations of lifetimes to move from labor to capital. But not trying to do so is to capitulate financially, physically and emotionally because you can never be free if all you do is sell your labor. Marx was right! Kind of. 'Cept for the smashing the machines part. Great work as always Packy.
Until then... DAOs where governance has the potential to be more valuable than a share of profits (like in the Braintrust example where the token is worth more to a user than an investor / speculator) will have to do most of the heavy lifting
"Ownership" is highly overrated. We had the multi-decade push for home ownership culminating in an epic real estate bubble that popped in 2008. Ownership levels for homes remains basically flat since the 1970s; the big NINJA loan era only temporarily bumped the percentage up 5% and it has retreated since.
Now you're pushing ownership of startups and whatnot even as we face the inflation + rate hike headwinds for the foreseeable future? Really?
This is yet another article that fails to recognize that the majority of Americans simply do not have the wherewithal to invest significantly in ANYTHING because their rent, their health care, their education - pretty much everything associated with actual life is horrifically expensive compared to the rest of the 1st and 2nd world nations.
Wow. This is your best piece yet! On the level of A Time to Build by Marc Andreesen.
While I love your ambition and optimism, there’s one way you’re underestimating yourself (and, to be blunt, getting lazy). Instead of saying “I don’t know how to fix this,” a positive-sum growth-mindset Bezos-type framing would be: I want to help fix this and am eager to help anyone who has ideas. Perhaps set up a 501c4 nonprofit lobbying arm of Not Boring. Your army of readers would contribute money and expertise. You know that lobbying (not just grassroots campaigns) change laws, right? So let’s make a lobby for the little guy! The Main Street investor! I’d be thrilled to help.
Late to the game, but: You missed natural capital. It's the ultimate common good, and the source of ~50% of the global economy (as in: we need to breathe air, drink water, etc). It's also presently moving from primarily government-run infrastructure (so no one has incentives to improve it) to fuzzily financialized (so all benefits from improving go to the already-wealthy), via something called "Natural Asset Companies" (https://www.nyse.com/introducing-natural-asset-companies). What should happen, of course, is that the wealth intrinsic in ecosystems, and the many revenue streams from conserving and improving them (ex: carbon credits, payments for ecosystem services, etc...) should accrue to the people and communities who live in them.
So, what's the "YouTube" for this market, you might ask? What is the pathway to make natural capitalism become a game for the masses, not just for the wealthy? I'm glad you asked - we're building it at @_digitalgaia. ;)
Couldn't agree more - capital deployment is the only way out of the rat race. Although I bet all those landlords (even Trump?) would argue that they worked hard and deployed their capital strategically to get where they are, so why should they cede any ownership to anyone. Nobody wants to give up control once they seize it. The web3 pendulum swing is going to take a longgggg time to level the playing field. Forza small business!
Great analysis! I am learning a lot from every one of your posts. I always wondered how DAOs could be regulated. I am from Italy and am scared that (as for everything) we will arrive late on this, losing every competitive advantage.
This is an attempt to solve a problem by going back to first principles kind of post, however you didn't actually go back to first principles, you stopped about half way.
The reason for the worsening inequality is that due to the debt based monetary system, banks have the capability to constantly create money from thin air, and asset inflation does not show up in any normal inflation measures, hence this problem is invisible politically. The only time it shows up is when taxpayers have to bail out banks that are too big to fail.
The solution is not DAOs per se, but that crypto allows permissionless democratised issuance of an unlimited number of currencies that are tied to the value they create. Instead of banks inflating asset values(stocks and real estate) by creating money out of thin air and then taking their middleman cut.
CBDCs issued by governments will be explicitly transparent as to the actual growth of money supply, with a greater amount of democratic oversight due to the transparency.
Packy, my man. I know you get this all the time, but I've gotta tell you. You're just not being optimistic enough.
What's old is new again, and the ownership economy isn't new. This is one of the two oldest fights in America. It's the crux of Hamilton v. Jefferson, to centralize finances or not?
We've fought (and won) this fight before. From trust-busting the railroad/oil giants to fighting mega-corps in the the Great Depression. We've always needed government to step in with antitrust reg's to prevent centralization of power. The people reined in too much financial power through their only available weapon, governance.
We're seeing a revival of antitrust action, e.g. Lina Khan at the FTC, Johnathan Kanter at the Justice Dept, FOMC reg's, app store smack-down's. It's early, but it's there. This eventually means the Next Zuck might not be allowed to buy WhatsApp, Instagram, and a thousand other companies. The theory used to be that more smaller companies in a market meant more decentralization and less strong-arming the little guy. That sort of thinking is coming back in vogue.
Web3 personifies this, it just doesn't quite know it yet. The Next Zuck can (credibly/honestly) decentralize his power to his users, avoid regulation, and still profit like nuts. This time the people are fighting for America from the top with government and the bottom with Web3.
Web3 and antitrust regulation are both aiming at decentralization. Why wouldn't they reinforce and compound each other? I'm betting thing's are about to get even crazier.
good work dude. more like this. the only topic that matters is "can financialization unlock a Better World, or not?" and this advances that case. u luh 2 c it!!!
....still wish you'd address an actually decent anti-web3 case, like "Line Go Up" or "Handwavey Technobabble Nothing Burger", but making a positive case is a good start.
Great point on bringing ownership back to Americans Packy. Also agreed on the accredited investor laws; it really sucks that the average joe can't get in on some of the VC opportunities. I feel like you did miss a few places how this is slowing improving/changing though: 1. Average people can invest in their favorite crypto projects by investing in the project at the ICO or through the air drops. 2. More technical folks can have ownership in the project and earn rewards by running nodes.
This was painful to read and brought to mind: if you have a hammer (web3/DAO whatever) everything looks like a nail.
I disagree with pretty much all of the suggestions but I do agree with the fact that people should own their own data and be able to monetize as they should. However what is the reason that has not happened yet? Because BIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGG business that benefits from it is not allowing it to happen and the government is in their pockets too much to be able to legislate it.
And ultimately THAT is one of the biggest reasons people want to pull down FB or Google a.s.o. Because they basically have made it 10000 times harder for individuals to advance or get some common sense rights in this new economy.
You entire article is like saying that if all mice band together they could defeat a pack of lions ... Maybe if there is a huge number of mice (and you can keep them all together and they accept that many individuals will die in the process). But it would be much easier to first get rid of the pack of lions and let the mice figure it out amongst themselves. And in theory us mice (regular Joes) have a tool to get rid of lions: government regulation but that has been dismantled systemically since the 50s and there is no coincidence why businesses did it and why we are in the mess we are now ...
100pc agreed and then some. Labor is what it's always been, a trap. Whatever your station in life your future is best served by doing EVERYTHING to get out of selling your labor all day long for a stipend, and into ownership of something that you can control and grow. Most people aren't lucky enough to do it in one step; sometimes it can take a lifetime or multiple generations of lifetimes to move from labor to capital. But not trying to do so is to capitulate financially, physically and emotionally because you can never be free if all you do is sell your labor. Marx was right! Kind of. 'Cept for the smashing the machines part. Great work as always Packy.
The laws will change as public sentiment does! You'd have my vote for president so things like this can pass:
https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/peirce-statement-token-safe-harbor-proposal-2.0
Until then... DAOs where governance has the potential to be more valuable than a share of profits (like in the Braintrust example where the token is worth more to a user than an investor / speculator) will have to do most of the heavy lifting
Matt Stoller has great arguments against monopolies and for the FTC. Many of these changes are long overdue.
https://mattstoller.substack.com/
Oh geez, talk about rehashing old history.
"Ownership" is highly overrated. We had the multi-decade push for home ownership culminating in an epic real estate bubble that popped in 2008. Ownership levels for homes remains basically flat since the 1970s; the big NINJA loan era only temporarily bumped the percentage up 5% and it has retreated since.
Now you're pushing ownership of startups and whatnot even as we face the inflation + rate hike headwinds for the foreseeable future? Really?
This is yet another article that fails to recognize that the majority of Americans simply do not have the wherewithal to invest significantly in ANYTHING because their rent, their health care, their education - pretty much everything associated with actual life is horrifically expensive compared to the rest of the 1st and 2nd world nations.
Wow. This is your best piece yet! On the level of A Time to Build by Marc Andreesen.
While I love your ambition and optimism, there’s one way you’re underestimating yourself (and, to be blunt, getting lazy). Instead of saying “I don’t know how to fix this,” a positive-sum growth-mindset Bezos-type framing would be: I want to help fix this and am eager to help anyone who has ideas. Perhaps set up a 501c4 nonprofit lobbying arm of Not Boring. Your army of readers would contribute money and expertise. You know that lobbying (not just grassroots campaigns) change laws, right? So let’s make a lobby for the little guy! The Main Street investor! I’d be thrilled to help.
Late to the game, but: You missed natural capital. It's the ultimate common good, and the source of ~50% of the global economy (as in: we need to breathe air, drink water, etc). It's also presently moving from primarily government-run infrastructure (so no one has incentives to improve it) to fuzzily financialized (so all benefits from improving go to the already-wealthy), via something called "Natural Asset Companies" (https://www.nyse.com/introducing-natural-asset-companies). What should happen, of course, is that the wealth intrinsic in ecosystems, and the many revenue streams from conserving and improving them (ex: carbon credits, payments for ecosystem services, etc...) should accrue to the people and communities who live in them.
So, what's the "YouTube" for this market, you might ask? What is the pathway to make natural capitalism become a game for the masses, not just for the wealthy? I'm glad you asked - we're building it at @_digitalgaia. ;)
Couldn't agree more - capital deployment is the only way out of the rat race. Although I bet all those landlords (even Trump?) would argue that they worked hard and deployed their capital strategically to get where they are, so why should they cede any ownership to anyone. Nobody wants to give up control once they seize it. The web3 pendulum swing is going to take a longgggg time to level the playing field. Forza small business!
Great analysis! I am learning a lot from every one of your posts. I always wondered how DAOs could be regulated. I am from Italy and am scared that (as for everything) we will arrive late on this, losing every competitive advantage.
This is an attempt to solve a problem by going back to first principles kind of post, however you didn't actually go back to first principles, you stopped about half way.
The reason for the worsening inequality is that due to the debt based monetary system, banks have the capability to constantly create money from thin air, and asset inflation does not show up in any normal inflation measures, hence this problem is invisible politically. The only time it shows up is when taxpayers have to bail out banks that are too big to fail.
The solution is not DAOs per se, but that crypto allows permissionless democratised issuance of an unlimited number of currencies that are tied to the value they create. Instead of banks inflating asset values(stocks and real estate) by creating money out of thin air and then taking their middleman cut.
CBDCs issued by governments will be explicitly transparent as to the actual growth of money supply, with a greater amount of democratic oversight due to the transparency.
Here's the thing though -- the American Dream was always a myth.
Packy, my man. I know you get this all the time, but I've gotta tell you. You're just not being optimistic enough.
What's old is new again, and the ownership economy isn't new. This is one of the two oldest fights in America. It's the crux of Hamilton v. Jefferson, to centralize finances or not?
We've fought (and won) this fight before. From trust-busting the railroad/oil giants to fighting mega-corps in the the Great Depression. We've always needed government to step in with antitrust reg's to prevent centralization of power. The people reined in too much financial power through their only available weapon, governance.
We're seeing a revival of antitrust action, e.g. Lina Khan at the FTC, Johnathan Kanter at the Justice Dept, FOMC reg's, app store smack-down's. It's early, but it's there. This eventually means the Next Zuck might not be allowed to buy WhatsApp, Instagram, and a thousand other companies. The theory used to be that more smaller companies in a market meant more decentralization and less strong-arming the little guy. That sort of thinking is coming back in vogue.
Web3 personifies this, it just doesn't quite know it yet. The Next Zuck can (credibly/honestly) decentralize his power to his users, avoid regulation, and still profit like nuts. This time the people are fighting for America from the top with government and the bottom with Web3.
Web3 and antitrust regulation are both aiming at decentralization. Why wouldn't they reinforce and compound each other? I'm betting thing's are about to get even crazier.
is that....is that a pretty decent 1AC???
good work dude. more like this. the only topic that matters is "can financialization unlock a Better World, or not?" and this advances that case. u luh 2 c it!!!
....still wish you'd address an actually decent anti-web3 case, like "Line Go Up" or "Handwavey Technobabble Nothing Burger", but making a positive case is a good start.
Great point on bringing ownership back to Americans Packy. Also agreed on the accredited investor laws; it really sucks that the average joe can't get in on some of the VC opportunities. I feel like you did miss a few places how this is slowing improving/changing though: 1. Average people can invest in their favorite crypto projects by investing in the project at the ICO or through the air drops. 2. More technical folks can have ownership in the project and earn rewards by running nodes.
This was painful to read and brought to mind: if you have a hammer (web3/DAO whatever) everything looks like a nail.
I disagree with pretty much all of the suggestions but I do agree with the fact that people should own their own data and be able to monetize as they should. However what is the reason that has not happened yet? Because BIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGG business that benefits from it is not allowing it to happen and the government is in their pockets too much to be able to legislate it.
And ultimately THAT is one of the biggest reasons people want to pull down FB or Google a.s.o. Because they basically have made it 10000 times harder for individuals to advance or get some common sense rights in this new economy.
You entire article is like saying that if all mice band together they could defeat a pack of lions ... Maybe if there is a huge number of mice (and you can keep them all together and they accept that many individuals will die in the process). But it would be much easier to first get rid of the pack of lions and let the mice figure it out amongst themselves. And in theory us mice (regular Joes) have a tool to get rid of lions: government regulation but that has been dismantled systemically since the 50s and there is no coincidence why businesses did it and why we are in the mess we are now ...