What Does a Voter Really Vote For? Rent!

Here's a response to an associate bleating about blockchain technology adoption. He still has no idea of the net economic effect of every 'successful' tech.

"Will the tech allow 'me' to acquire 'my' own monopoly. Or successfully be a rent seeker? That, is the technology 'I' am waiting for. I will ignore anything that does not. 

Real estate leads with 2.5 billion homeowners globally receiving an unearned income in the relentless rising price. Free from tax and inputs of work and savings. And bailed out first by governments of all party's during hard times. It's the only asset possessing these remarkable qualities.

You see, 'I' am a voter. You must comply with 'my' wishes here, else lose. In the final analysis, 'I' am the ultimate source of power.

If blockchain tech can give 'me' these benefits, 'I' will vote for any planet saver, demagogue or sleepy man and adopt the tech willingly. Do you really think 'I' care about my sister's and brothers? 'I' do, but they come second place to this.

But it had better be big. These location value priced assets have a total market size of $500 trillion. Bigger than everything else put together.

Is blockchain big enough to compete or is it another slave technology? Imagine this: say Bitcoin gets adopted wholesale as you hope and is useful. I fully agree that will act economically like an enormous labour saving device. The effect of such a device is to boost productivity hugely. The knock on effect is to raise the demand for locations where this new production takes place. Ultimately this means the price of locations, in rent, will rise to the extent of the new productivity. History testifies that it rises more than that!

So if you truly are serious about blockchain enterprise adoption, you should be promoting it on that basis. That it will boost rents. 'I' am a voter remember."