Shooting Birdies and Vultures

in LeoFinance11 months ago

I am not a golfer, but I have found the drama around the PGA and LIV over the last couple years fascinating in many ways. It goes to show how authority functions to protect itself and the various techniques it employs to degrade the challenge from competition.

LIV is essentially a rebel startup golf league that was backed by copious amounts of Saudi money, so it could attempt to attract some of the best players in the world. At first it was ridiculed and belittled, until it started offering massive amounts of money to jump ship, and some of the big names did just that. All kinds of attacks started, against individuals, backers, organizers and anyone who showed interest. Players were banned from competing, traditional invitations for past winners were rescinded, character assassinations applied. They were labelled,

No good, money-grubbing, amoral assholes, who didn't respect the laws of the game.

LIV was looking to dispose of some of the traditions and bring in a new demographic to game, with looser dress codes, party-like atmosphere and more prize many than ever seen before. The PGA on the other hand, which holds a near monopoly on professional golf, felt itself "too big to fail" and that they would not only crush the rebellion, but be celebrated for doing so, for upholding the traditions.

1000035107.jpg

Yesterday, the PGA announced it was merging with LIV.

In many ways, it is a parable to what is happening in the economy between the traditional centralized forces, and the decentralized forces. They see themselves as too big to fail and that any alternative is laughable, should be ridiculed, and never taken seriously.

Yet, if this is actually the case, the attacks are far too severe, far too public, and completely out of line with the actual value of the entire crypto capitalization. Currently, it stands at 1.1 trillion dollars, which is a quarter of what the US government raised the debt cap by last week. And, that is the value globally. No government has access to all of that value, yet while they are ridiculing it as something that will never work, they are trying to regulate it for a piece of the action.

The SEC in the US and other governments around the world have been citing "the risk to investors" as the reason for their heavy-handed approach, yet look at the cost of the government actions themselves, the bailouts, the debt burdens, the cronyism, the tax breaks for the wealthy, the corruption.

At some point, people are going to wake up and realize that alternatives are possible and there will be incentive to make a switch to the decentralized league, because it gives some protection from having personal value used in ways one doesn't want it to be used.

I normally offer the example where if all people had control of their value and a government had to ask the people to fund directly from their wallets, instead of through future taxes, we'd never have wars at any kind of scale. No country would be able to raise a large enough army. And, if any single entity began to get too big, monopolize and become harmful, it would be regulated through the removal of value by participants, rather than it getting protected by the authorities.

As crypto becomes more mainstream, offers increasingly convenient solutions to handling and security, and has crypto-first businesses building, innovating and generating value on the blockchains, more will turn to it, because there will be incentive to make the change. If one technology isn't doing the job it needs to do and people are suffering, they will look for another - and the financial economy is a technology.

While economic laws apply on the behavioral side, the monetary economy is an invention created to solve a problem. However, due to the nature of the machine, while it solves some problems, it also creates more through not being robust enough to self-regulate. So, the regulators come in to make the rules, which are always imperfect and will fail somewhat constantly, create more issues, or be totally unsuitable and need to be reformulated.

But, again by the nature of the financial animal, the incentives are aligned to maximize the fuel the machine uses to run, not for solving problems that energy can be used to address. It is like needing to get from point A to B, and stockpiling oil, but never building a vehicle to drive. The economic machine isn't being used effectively or efficiently to help us develop our wellbeing, it is being used to make fuel to keep itself running.

But, it isn't running well, because in order to create the fuel it requires, it has to mine us of our value, which is done through many mechanisms that enhance wealth gaps, decreasing the wellbeing for many, while pushing value to those who can't actually add any more wellbeing to their lives, so they spend frivolously, because they can, knowing they will never run out of wealth - as the machine keeps printing it for them, at the expense of the masses.

Once the decentralized economy starts solving problems and making tangible impacts on people's lives, whilst simultaneously, the centralized economy is meeting less of the needs of society, the swell starts to shift. Much like how many sports over the space of decades have to go through new iterations to keep their game alive, the economy has to shift too. But, the economy isn't going to shift, because what it needs to do in order to meet the needs of the majority of users, is dilute the power of the decision makers and those who benefit the most from the machine working the way it does.

That is never going to be supported by those who would need to support it.

So, what has to happen is a rebel economy needs to start, attract users, prove itself capable, innovate and grow to the point that it is a shadow economy, one that offers a real alternative to the point that key industries and corporations start to weigh up the pros and cons of staying put, or making the shift. And the incentive is high to make the move, because it gives ,more freedom of action, making it a freer market for corporations too, where rather than being beholden to a government, they are beholden to the consumer, having to meet actual needs, and solve actual problems.

The most valuable people and companies in the world shouldn't be the ones that offer nothing tangible in return, it should be those that offer us a greater well being, a stronger society, better relationships, healthier bodies and a life experience filled with goodness. That is not the way it is now, nor is that what the governments are creating legislation for. All they are doing is helping generate more fuel for the machine for a few, so no one can threaten their position.

We all act on incentive and people tend to blame those who go after money, but it isn't money that is the problem, it is how we use it. Currently, the economy isn't looking to solve for wellbeing, but it should be.

Regarding LIV and the PGA, the question has to be asked, what are the golfers there for? They say that golf is a solo game and you play against yourself, but if you play and are never seen, no matter how well you play, you aren't part of the financial economy. The top golfers get paid well because of the fans, the audience, the consumer of the sport. The money is generated through sponsorship and advertising, not the level of golf. The money comes from audience attention and they pay attention, because they want to see the best, but as the culture changes, they also want to feel more part of the action, more connected, more excitement.

Look at the Indian Premier League for cricket.

The richest league in the world. They said it wouldn't work.

They keep saying crypto won't work. They say it can't solve the problems it promises. But, the question really needs to be asked, if things like massive wealth inequality, corruption in government and volatile economies are problems that need to be solved, why would any group be against another group trying to solve them? Why is it that we need to be protected from trying to help ourselves, when no one else is doing the job adequately?

Who are the governments protecting?

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]

Posted Using LeoFinance Alpha

Sort:  

Tiger Woods turned down $800 million whilst Phil Mickelson pocketed $200 million for 8 events. I do think a lot of it has to do with jealousy as many weren't in a position to jump ship or they weren't invited as there were only 4 teams of 12 players in LIV. The only problem is you cannot take back the words that were slung around at each other as it did get nasty.

It got very nasty, and childish at times.

What this goes to show, is that the PGA cares nothing about the tradition either - it is all about money. It is always about money.

It always is and if you have enough money there are no morals as they can be accommodated. The PGA bought in 9/11 widows trying to shame the golfers who were contemplating going to LIV. Mickelson lost many of his sponsors and I am sure that was down to pressure from the PGA.

Yes, it was shameful. Much like what is happening now with crypto.

I wrote a post about the merger today too from my @bozz.sports account. I think my big thing with all of this was the outrage over the civil rights violations by Saudi Arabia and this attempt to whitewash that. Do they suddenly not care now? The SEC is off the rails. I don't know if this whole thing lately is a death knell or something more that we are going to have to worry about for a long time to come.

Do they suddenly not care now?

They never cared. It is always about money and now they see they will make more money in the merger.

The SEC is off the rails.

Is there no oversight?

They are trying. Did you see the hearing where they were grilling Gensler. It was pretty comical. I just wish they would press harder.

Like US now, not wanting to join the crypto party, believing they can kill it. As someone said, the only ones who think they can kill crypto innovation are the ones who did not understand it.

It will be an interesting few years - another interesting few years, that is.

I heard a little bit of the drama on the golf side a few years ago. It’s funny that it culminated to this. What a fraud.

I know that the decentralization of everything is going to have huge changes. It already has with decentralization of things like crafting, printing and lots of other things. Eventually production and then even money is going to make huge changes. How will that shake out for many? Hard to say. One thing I am wondering how we will handle it is cash. If these currencies collapse, how do we do the cash transactions, that many of us do and prefer so we keep the tax thieves out of it? Would be nice to have a privacy layer or mixer on something like hive!

What a fraud.

This is business.

Would be nice to have a privacy layer or mixer on something like hive!

A mixer might be interesting for Hive. I wonder if someone has or will create one using the HAF layer.

Do you think regulation would bring back the world where it started when the crypto was just introduced? Like we had a lot fo rules and stuff which prevented us to transact online or even do business properly due to local rules. Do you think that time would be coming back and forced on people?

They are trying to regulate that way, reducing options, increasing control. Whether they are successful is up to us.

I have no idea about golf. I really should because besides baseball, golf is Japan's biggest passion. Just about every single businessman is obsessed with the game and is constantly talking about it. Yet I have no interest, so everything they tell me goes in one ear and out the other.

So there is an upstart league looking to take over and this was creating the drama, the PGA initially fought against it but then decided to skip the fight and just buy them? Interesting. I'll have to go read more about it.

Just about every single businessman is obsessed with the game and is constantly talking about it.

Probably because it is such an exclusive thing there, it is "bragging rights"

Yep - the PGA fought against it in pretty terrible ways. Anyone would think the startup league was against covid vaccines... :D

The governments are protecting the rich or powerful people. They aren't there to help us and at times, I think the big guys will fight with each other. I don't think it's too big to fail but people will always be trying to get more. I don't trust them at all and I doubt the government really is out there to help us.

I think the big guys will fight with each other.

And, at some point the big guys will realize they have more freedom in the "shadow" economy, moving over and legitimizing it.

Yea but there are only limited spots for the people in the shadows. We can probably expect a huge fight for those spots.

Lovely post...
Keep it up dear friend

Do these high quality comments work for you?

That comment made me laugh 😂 i think he or she often write such comment

Really interesting and very informative. Thanks for sharing. Have a blessed day.

Centralized VS Decentralized economy will be still a long lasting conflict as people already holding power will do their best to keep it while other people will try to fight for decentralization to try to get a bigger slice of the pie.

But the comparison with golf makes sense! And I was not aware of some of the aspects you mentioned

Who are the governments protecting?

Governments are protecting themselves, and only ensuring their continued growth and existence.

I once heard a person I respect say that "it is in the nature of governments to take power from its people." IMO they have to take and maintain that power to protect themselves and ensure their existence.

I think this is just like SEC. I think they believe that they can make cryptocurrency go into extinction which does not really make sense to me. They think they can never fail and think they can stop all of us from using cryptocurrency...

As someone who doesn't follow golf at all, I learned more about the PGA in this post than anything else I've ever come across. No idea there was even another league!

The parallels you draw with crypto are spot on though, and like any old regime fighting off a new upstart - they all tend to play out the same. Sure they can slow things down and even kill some movements for a period of time, but others will pop up in their place as the world naturally progresses toward innovation.

The 'we're so early to crypto' mantra is super cliché at this point, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. More adoption is happening every single day, week, and year and eventually people will vote with their wallets once they realize the benefits of a mature, decentralized economy.

Is Indian cricket really the richest league in the world? That's wild!

I think the parallels between golf and the general economy is a good fit here. While I wouldn't exactly say that LIV is decentralized, I get the point that itis challenging the status quo. And it basically won...

I hope crypto is up for the challenge, but these governments are going to play fair when their very survival is on the line.