I used to have many of these same biases, before I actually used crypto.
First off, it is factually incorrect to say that transaction costs are higher than traditional banking. In fact, costs on some blockchains are negligible when compared to traditional banking fees -- literally fractions of a cent for moving large sums of money.
Moreover, it is very liberating to be free of banks, with all of their absurd controls, endless gouging, and inconvenience. Admittedly, in the beginning, it is somewhat scary to trust blockchains, but one gets over that fear very quickly and apps and services keep improving to make it easier and safer. It's not ready for grandma yet, but grandma may have a hard time with her normal bank app right now anyways.
Furthermore, blockchain based Web 3.0 technology with a wallet that automatically recognizes your account without having to ever enter a password or username actually solves a big problem and greatly improves the experience on most websites.
We can debate the philosophical merits of decentralization versus centralization of financial systems until the cows come home, but for me, the benefits of decentralization outweigh the costs.
Without getting into too much detail, the main ones for me are: Freedom over my money. Protection from inflation (since some coins limit supply). Transparency of markets (all transactions are public on the blockchain).
Also, I believe that for most governments there are real benefits to using crypto. After all, the transparency of public transactions facilitates taxation and the implementation of policy. In the long term, it should actually help to curb money laundering, rather than facilitate it. It is very easy to corrupt a banker. It is near impossible to corrupt the blockchain data. Also, in our complex financial system, blockchains and smart contracts can also unlock a lot of value that is currently trapped in our legal, administrative, and bureaucratic systems. Just solving the problem of custody of financial instruments, would unlock incredible value in the economy.
With regards to centralization, I suspect that the real argument that this author is trying to make -- and it really shows his bias -- is that the US should not/won't allow crypto to really gain mass adoption because it threatens its hegemony (the petro-dollar, World bank, dollar as the world's store of value, etc.).
The author ignores that for a lot of the world, solving inflation is a much bigger problem than maintaining central bank control. He assumes that US influence/control over world economics/affairs is a good thing. I'm American, but I don't buy that argument at all. It is manifestly unfair and illigical to ask the world to use the dollar as a store if value and then print trillions of dollars whenever banks or other bad economic actors crash the US economy. Think also of the damage that the petro-dollar has caused the environment, delaying the onset of renewable energy while even facing global catastrophe.
These are just some thoughts off the top of my head.
Lastly, I want to add that for me the most exciting thing about blockchain technology is the disruption and innovation that it will cause in many industries. NFTs are a great example, but just one. Defi is another. There is massive innovation going on right now in defi. New models for lending, raising capital, etc etc. Models that could probably never work with centralized control and current transaction technology. Granted it's something of a totalky deregulated Wild West right now, but there will be winners who may become (in size, hopefully not in spirit) the Amazons and Bank of Americas of tomorrow.
Maybe I just don't use many features of my bank. But my bank doesn't charge me for anything at all. What are some examples of banks gouging and fees? And my accounts are insured for free.
I have one of these. The screen keyboard has a very high error rate that makes it highly frustrating to use. Also, the battery life is surprisingly short. I get less than a day with almost zero use on mine. The idea of the phone is great, but the implementation is sorely lacking. Particularly at the $400 price point.
I've found memory palaces useful for public speaking (remembering main bullet points), cramming for exams, remembering trivia, and strings of numbers like credit cards and phone numbers. My nine year old daughter also memorized the US presidents with a memory palace app on the iOS store.
I had already purchased the Oculus and a few apps, so I can't take it back. However, I went into the settings on my phone and restricted facebook to 1 minute a day. Hopefully Congress steps in and stops these monopolistic practices. Bad Zuckerberg. Bad.
Tourism is only about 5-7% of Puerto Rico's economy. The majority is pharmaceutical manufacturing and services. It's true there is a lot of corruption. Colonialism seems to select for opportunistic and unprincipled public servants. If you want to learn about the island, I recommend you read War Against All Puerto Ricans by Nelson A. Denis. It does a good job of summarizing Puerto Rico's history with the United States. Best of luck.
Per the FDA, Puerto Rico produced (pre-Maria) $40B of pharmaceuticals for the US alone.
40 of those products and devices were deemed critical as they're the only producer or there's no viable alternative [1].
The largest (in terms of unit count) production was Normal Saline with Baxter's P.R. factory supplying 50% of U.S. hospitals with small volume saline bags (<=250mL as opposed to the more common 1L) prior to Hurricane Maria which took out their production facility [2]. The hurricane is widely credited as the cause of our national saline shortage (though as [2] details, it exacerbated a shortage that already existed for several other reasons).
I was not aware pharma was still a significant part of the PR economy after the IRS Code Section 936 phase out. Thanks for the book suggestion, purchased, looking forward to the read.
Yes, the pharmaceutical tech there has decades of experience; one of the first companies I worked for was a Bay Area biotech firm. They moved a big chunk of manufacturing to Puerto Rico and seemed very impressed by the transition. It wasn't just a matter of lower expense. The tech experience in industrial chemistry was very good. Early 1990s.
