The Peter McCormack Show

Phil Geiger is the Managing Director of Concierge Services at Unchained Capital. In this interview, we discuss how a robust protocol and monetary policy, a vital utility for energy producers and a committed community of hodlers, makes Bitcoin an extremely low-risk investment. - - - - No other scalable commodity, currency or asset has as robust a fixed supply issuance as Bitcoin. 21 million coins. That’s it. The rough consensus governance process, miners’ financial incentives, and a highly decentralized node verification process combine to make this digital scarcity rigid. No altcoin can compete. “Digital scarcity is a one-time phenomenon” - Phil Geiger, April 2020. There are those that have been pushing the edges of this assumed commitment. They are motivated by different concerns, chiefly that a declining supply will impact security: how can a 51% attack be avoided when the volume of Bitcoin issued becomes significantly low and eventually finishes? Can transaction fees alone secure the network? But it is the fixed supply schedule that supports Bitcoin’s value, from which all other considerations follow. According to Phil Geiger, these 21 million coins already exist. Both in terms of the supply schedule and the fixed limit. This is what underpins the huge investment by miners: a transparent monetary policy, and scarcity that supports the price. Changes to this could seriously damage minings assimilation into energy production. This is what makes, in Phil’s view, Bitcoin an extremely low-risk investment compared to other assets (both digital and physical). The proof is in the hodling behaviour. Using Bitcoin is vital for the transition of Bitcoin from a defensive store of value to a productive medium of exchange, the fact that those hodling Bitcoin for more than a year is at an ATH shows investors still remain extremely confident in its long-term success. So, what about long-term security? Decreasing block rewards will incentivise miners to maximise the use of block space. Combined with more users this should drive up Bitcoin transaction prices, thereby supporting the transition to a post-block reward world. The issue is whether there are enough incentives to ensure miners don’t game the system. This needs to be debated. But, making Bitcoin inflationary isn’t the answer, because this is the essence of Bitcoin.

Parker Lewis is Head of Business Development at Unchained Capital. In this interview, we discuss the failure of currencies, the collapse of the economic engine and Bitcoin being the largest tidal wave that's ever existed. - - - - In the nearly 14 years since Bitcoin was launched the global order has continued to shudder in the wake of a rolling set of crises. Front and centre is the unwinding of the global economic order. Fiat currencies are straining, inflation is rising, and central banks are using ever more extreme and counter-productive measures to keep the economy afloat. We’re in the final throes of the long-term debt cycle. Everyone can see it. And yet governments and central banks are refusing to accept the inevitable. Money printing continues, in part to deal with the second-order effects of the previous round of money printing. Bitcoin rose sharply at the beginning of this period, but it has stalled in the shadow of Covid as the world struggles to repair economies whilst dealing with growing geopolitical tensions. Throughout this turmoil, as Parker Lewis states in our interview, Bitcoin’s value proposition has remained the same. Why is it then that Bitcoin has been in a bear market? The protocol has proven itself to be a solid basis for a new form of money. Yet, its volatility in the wake of rising inflation has resulted in a wave of commentators dismissing its value. This has an effect. We all know people who still think Bitcoin is a crazy fad. This issue, as Parker Lewis contends, is that you need to do the work to understand Bitcoin’s vital importance. Bitcoin adoption is a function of knowledge distribution. Those of us who are in the know must therefore keep spreading the word, educating, advocating, orange pilling. If we do that then Bitcoin can’t lose.

Nic Carter is a Partner at Castle Island Ventures & Lane Rettig is a core developer for Spacemesh. In this interview, we discuss the Ethereum merge specifically addressing the issue around increasing censorship of Ethereum transactions, the chilling state attacks on privacy and what Bitcoiners could learn. - - - - In November 2013 Vitalik Buterin produced the Ethereum White Paper, which set out that Ethereum was to utilise the Proof of Work mechanism to facilitate participation in the transaction validation process. Eight months later, hidden away in the announcement about the Ether ICO, Vitalik stated that “We may choose later on to adopt alternative consensus strategies, such as hybrid proof of stake…”. Ethereum’s merge in the first 2 weeks of September has been the biggest event in crypto this year. Part of the reason is that it has been a very long time coming. Further, it has been a huge engineering challenge: transitioning from Proof of Work to Proof of Stake in a live blockchain for the second-largest digital currency. Many predicted that it would result in technical issues. They were wrong. The merge was a success. And yet, in the months that have followed, events have shown that just as Ethereum has sought to resolve some issues, it has caused others. Yes, Ethereum now uses significantly less energy, albeit a smaller drop in energy consumption than they would have many believe. But, evidence of a concerning concentration of staked ETH indicates that not only is the consensus becoming centralised, but it is becoming dominated by entities who are censoring transactions. The result is a very clear distinction between Bitcoin and Ethereum. The issue at hand for Bitcoiners is that the battle to win the argument with political decision-makers over the importance of Bitcoin’s energy usage is still yet to be won. But, more importantly, there are downstream centralisation and capture risks for Bitcoin. Forewarned is forearmed.

Steven Lubka is Managing Director of Private Client Services at Swan Bitcoin. In this interview, we discuss how the misallocation of money by central banks distorts money, destroys capital, and creates zombie companies. Steven calls for money to be left to find its natural state within a free market. - - - - Society has become accustomed to the intervention of central banks in the economy. The underlying narrative is that central banks have the power to direct the economy through the manipulation of money. A principle level is through the control of interest rates: artificial adjustments to the cost of borrowing money aimed at promoting or tempering growth. You don’t have to be an economics expert though to know that central banks' interventions seem to have become excessive. We have had a decade of near-zero interest rates. In addition to this, central banks have heavily lent on money printing to maintain economic stability: one-fifth of all US dollars were printed in 2020 alone. These significant adjustments to the money supply set in train damaging second-order impacts. Given rising debt levels and recessionary forces, governments are seeking ways to stimulate growth. However, the economy has not been allowed to function normally for an extended period. We may therefore be in a position where significant businesses aren’t able to operate with a more natural cost of money. Many businesses have developed in a period where the cost of money has been artificially low. This has created zombie companies, which need support to survive. This leads to a cascading series of issues: such companies divert resources from more efficient enterprises, but they are destined to fail, which destroys capital. It effectively hollows out parts of the economy. The misallocation of capital is therefore counterproductive: short-term stability is a mirage that hides long-term systemic vulnerability. Steven Lubka’s thesis is that Bitcoin is the answer. It is a real tangible asset with a fixed monetary policy that enables price to be reflective of reality. The result is a market that can make rational decisions, build robust companies, and allow order to emerge In short, Bitcoin fixes the money.

Andrew Bailey is a philosopher, professor, fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, and co-founder of Resistance Money. In this interview, we discuss the philosophy of money in respect of what it is, what makes good money, the traps we can fall into with money, and why Bitcoin is a bulldozer that makes us rethink money anew. - - - - Economists, historians, philosophers, bankers and politicians have all contended with the concept of money. What it is, what it can be, what it’s not, what it’s useful for, how it should be used, how it can be misused: there are a myriad of questions that have spurned a myriad of theories. Consensus has formed around different ideas lasting for generations, only to be followed by sudden shifts as perceived universal truths are dissolved. Debates and evolving thinking around money have always been a feature of its existence, certainly within modern capitalist structures of the past few hundred years. And yet, we do seem to be in a rare period. Firstly, we are entering a new paradigm of money, when established norms are suddenly being uprooted. Secondly, laypeople are joining the ranks of the so-called specialists in the debate around money. This change has been spurned by the failures of fiat money. Suddenly, people realise that the assumed solid ground is shifting beneath them. Within a short space of time, we have experienced a flurry of unprecedented events: bank runs, money printing on a vast scale, massive stimulus packages, huge volatility in the markets, systemic inflation, and currency collapses. The debate has also been spurned by the revolutionary innovation of Bitcoin. A totally new form of money has enabled a reevaluation of the principles and qualities of what we use to store value and what we use to exchange value. This process is being undertaken at all levels: if Bitcoin can continue to flourish, it will serve as a check on those in power. It could for the first time enable money to become pluralistic. All this means we are living in a time when the debate around money is live and fluid in which we all get a say. Buying Bitcoin, developing Bitcoin and orange pilling are all positive actions that force us to consider these fundamental questions. And, in this process, we’ll find we are asking the most fundamental questions of all - what is the essence of a good life and how does money help to achieve that end?

Joe Consorti is a Market Analyst at The Bitcoin Layer. In this interview, we discuss Austrian economics, Credit Suisse & the risk of large scale defaults, price distortions and how Bitcoin fixes this. - - - - When faced with economic turmoil, central banks have a few tools they can turn to, one of which is interest rates. Since interest rates are the price to borrow money, and prices are emergent, manipulating rates is an intentional distortion analogous to fixing prices. Rates instead should be a factor of the supply and demand of credit, risk of default, and a reflection of opportunity cost. However, during the financial crisis in 2007/2008, the US federal reserve had little option but to step in and repeatedly cut rates. They did this in an attempt to prevent complete collapse and to restart the credit-seized economy. Rates went to basically zero (and even negative in some countries), and since 2008, we have been in an era of cheap credit. Now, we are potentially in the midst of another financial crisis. Countries across the globe are battling with inflation issues for a raft of reasons, including supply-side constraints, excessive money printing during covid, and war in Europe causing energy shortages. To battle this, central banks are raising rates in an attempt to regain control. So does cheap access to credit really boost the economy and stimulate growth, or has it prolonged an artificial bull market in equities, over-financialised assets, incentivised mal-investment, added to the growing wealth divide and played a key role in near double-digit inflation?

Nic Carter is a Partner at Castle Island Ventures and co-founder and Chairman of Coin Metrics. In this interview, we discuss the White House bitcoin mining research paper, regulation and the role of renewables in the energy mix. - - - - In September, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) published a study which looked into the climate impacts of bitcoin mining. The report successfully acknowledged the differences between PoS and PoW, the contribution of bitcoin mining to grid flexibility & demand response and the potential to unlock stranded renewables, but the rest of the report offers little, if any merit. Overall, the findings in this report were quite damning. The report relies on non-peer-reviewed and often totally flawed data from the likes of De Vries and Digiconomist and even cites the absurd 2018 Mora et al paper. As Nic says in his article, "The Mora reference is shocking. It's a bit like reading a scientific government report on the history of the moon landing and finding a reference to a conspiracy website claiming that the entire thing was faked." With papers like this from the White House, the New York Mining Moratorium Bill and general growing disdain for Bitcoin mining, the US risks giving up its headstart. It is the country with the most to lose, and as we saw when China banned mining, Bitcoin is totally agnostic, and by banning, or overregulating, America won't hurt bitcoin, only itself. "If you ban it, you empower your enemies, like Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea. If you embrace it, you directly hurt them, and give their citizens tools to free themselves from those oppressive regimes."

Cathie Wood is the founder, CEO and CIO of Ark Invest. In this interview, we discuss investing in disruptive technologies, the importance of research for investment, deflationary signals, uncertainty in the Fed’s decision-making, and Ark’s continued bullish outlook for Bitcoin.     - - - -  Back in 2015, Cathie Wood’s Ark Invest became the first public fund manager to invest in Bitcoin. This was a very early trade for an institutional basis, prior to some of the major news events that have led others to have followed Ark in recent years. But this is Ark’s business, identifying nascent technologies that could serve to be the basis for real societal change.  Cathie Wood’s business strategy is to get into the detail of the markets they're interested in. This means research by informed analysts who can unpick the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for each specific industry. Any bullish statement they make is based on hard business data, not just an extrapolation of financial performance.  The elephant in the room for Ark is that their Innovation ETF is down 75% from its highs in the early part of 2021. This has placed Ark and Cathie in the firing line of commentators. And for every negative article or tv piece, there will be a line of nervous investors seeking reassurance. This is when research pays off - it matters when you have a strong narrative to fall back on if you want to maintain investor confidence. So, when Ark makes statements about Bitcoin we should all take note, as they’re not in the market for unwarranted hyperbole. Well, they remain one of the biggest cheerleaders for Bitcoin within the institutional space. Ark followed up a bullish prediction for Bitcoin’s valuation at the beginning of this year by doubling down on their forecast a few weeks ago: they are expecting a $1 million per coin valuation in the coming years. In an interview with Bloomberg earlier this month, Ark stated Bitcoin is in “an arms race” against traditional finance and asset classes. Ark is confident of Bitcoin’s ability to be at the heart of a revolution in money given its multiple use cases. Seeing as their fund has tracked the performance of the S&P500 over the past few years, despite it being an extended and brutal bear market for tech stocks, you wouldn’t bet against them getting this call right.

Sam Abbassi is the founder and CEO of Hoseki. In this interview, we discuss the growing demand for proof of reserves. Whilst the use case for businesses is clear, there is also an increasing retail need: it enables individuals to use Bitcoin as collateral, but also validates financial credentials. It is another means for assimilating Bitcoin into the fiat-dominated world.  - - - -  The hodl mantra has been a vital behaviour within the Bitcoin community. It was emblematic of the transition from the current credit-based paradigm into a low-time preference mindset that reasserts storing of value. It has also been technically important in supporting the price. However, up until recently, hodling was akin to storing gold in a box or cash under a mattress. It was inward-looking. As Bitcoin matures and its volatility declines, the value that can be ascribed to an individual by their Bitcoin holding becomes more important and useful. For a growing cohort, Bitcoin’s utility requires an outward engagement with the fiat world.  As society increasingly seeks to store value in Bitcoin, it is increasingly going to become some people’s main source of wealth. Therefore, reintegrating Bitcoin’s store of value into the arena of working capital is becoming more acceptable; there are growing opportunities to use that Bitcoin to access working capital for things such as mortgages and other loans requiring collateral.  Bitcoin can also be used to support residency applications and other activities requiring validation of financial security. It is likely that the purposes for which we need to provide proof of our Bitcoin holdings is going to increase. However, without proof of property Bitcoin has no utility beyond its resale value. How does one prove to a third party proof of property in a still nascent digital asset?  This is where Hoseki comes in. They are seeking to provide a much-needed service in the market to produce independent and trustworthy proof of Bitcoin reserves, opening up Bitcoin’s value. Being developed by Bitcoiners means that the basic principles of privacy and security are top of mind in terms of their product development. It also means they are in lockstep with the Bitcoin philosophy.

Jeff Snider is co-host of the Eurodollar University podcast and Head of Global Research at Atlas Financial Advisors. In this interview, we discuss the crazy possibility that nobody knows what money is, and as a result, nobody knows how to run or fix the economy. Central banks and governments are essentially engaged in a high-risk game of pretend.   - - - -  Every year around 800 million containers (categorised as Twenty-foot Equivalent Units, TEUs) are handled by ports every year. This represents around 80% of official global trade. Harvard has produced an incredible visualization of total global trade. They have populated the globe with the origin of exports of every type of product. Each tiny dot represents $100 million of exports. The globe is covered in a mass of tiny dots.  This complex, interconnected and shadowy web of global trade, where final products, intermediate inputs and raw materials are exchanged on a massive scale, represents about 50-60% of global GDP. The rest is made up of all kinds of activities, business investment, personal consumption and government expenditure.  The IMF predicts that the combined GDP of the world economies will exceed $100 trillion by the end of 2022. However, this is dwarfed by global wealth, which is estimated to be over $1,500 trillion.  To put these numbers into context, US debt is currently estimated to be over $31 trillion, whilst global debt is reckoned to be over $300 trillion. Global finance, which helps manage and fuel global trade and debt, is expected to be valued at $25 trillion this year. These are obvious gigantic numbers. Yet, these figures aren’t the thing that should give you pause for thought. What should stop you in your tracks is that nobody really understands the workings of this complex system, let alone is in control of the resultant global economy.  Most of the global trade is conducted in Eurodollars, which is money generated outside of any control of the US or the nexus of other countries' Central Banking/Government institutional structures. Eurodollars are not understood by the major actors involved in oversight or management roles affecting global economics. That is why nobody knows how to fix the issues with the global economy. It’s because nobody knows what money actually is.