Cryptonauts, we love you, and so does the long arc of history. The world is a more beautiful place because y'all exist. Decentralization is the will of the people, against the constant evils of any tyrant / dictatorship / concentration of power. You are the person best able to decide what is right for you! Even if someone else decides for you, it doesn't matter - the decision WILL be wrong until the day YOU take it. This isn't even tough love - it's just actual love. Y'alls love for crypto is the love of the individual, which is the only love that is possible. 
We are grinding our teeth today over the despicable state of crypto news in the FT Weekend, which is ZERO.
There is a metric effton of crypto news. ETH has surged up ~70% this month on the Merge! EIGHTY BILLION bucks of market cap created!! Is that news? The FT wouldn't miss it for the world in any other sector. Kathie at ARK sold a million shares of Coinbase, she still holds five million, but that's (bad) news about Coinbase management, FT's usually right ON the bad crypto news.
Congressman Brad Sherman broke all protocols in an SEC oversight meeting when he commented on an OPEN CASE still in court. Dear readers know Brad is despicable, calling to ban all crypto. 
But this time Brad outdid himself, calling for the SEC to prosecute exchanges for selling "security" XRP while the case is still on trial. Put your thumb on the scales / in the eye of Lady Justice much Brad!?!? Ripple lawyers called out the SEC's "bullying" two days ago, THAT's NEWS!! Dear readers know we dislike Santander blocking Binance in the UK - but NOW Santander Brazil is launching crypto!!! Along with Chas Schwab's new crypto ETF. We could do this all day - y'all know better than us there is financial crypto news a-plenty.
What does the FT give us? One op-ed only saying "crypto bubble."
But OK, fine, let's work on that one then.
Two new books debate Keynes vs. Hayek. TLDR: Inflation is back, and actually killing people. So people are asking WTF is up with central banks, cuz that WAS their ONE JOB....
Ben Bernanke, the 12 year central bank rat who oversaw the REAL Lehman moment, says, surprise, Keynes is still god, and everything the Fed did is the best in HIS book. Not in the FT, but we should say Ben's GHOSTWRITTEN book - Bernake openly admitted former AP reporter Dave took a year's leave of absence from his cushy job at the Fed to write an earlier book "by" Ben. & we bet Ben did not get any LESS lazy in the last decade.
In the "other corner," real author / journalist / historian/ money manger / Ed Chancellor writes "The Price of Time," meaning interest rates. Ed loves seminal Austrian econ Fred Hayek. Ed knows Ben's free money has wrecked the world.
Ben says all the fed banks love Keynes, the goal is to sustain full employment and to avoid the zero inflation Japan hit. The FT says Ben explores "fundamental realities" of weak inflation, decline in interest rates, and financial instability. Ben says the Fed avoided another depression and returned the US to growth. The FT agrees, breaking protocol in book reviews.
Chancellor does not. Ed & Hayek think that "malinvestment" causes depressions. The gummint misallocating resources, or causing misallocations, drives problems that have to be worked through, like an alky puking.
The FT claims that Hayek lost the debate, then wrote the Road to Serfdom. 
Ed & Hayek know that free money killed savings & investment, slowed productivity, created zombie companies, stopped survival of the fittest. Free money created rising inequality & financial instability, and drove constant bubbles.
The FT denies that low interest rates discourage saving (??!!!??) why you need to save more!! ( Guess the FT never heard of inflation?) Denies that free money stops risk taking (they never heard of stock buybacks? ) Zombies might be a problem, but good biz should be able to compete for employees (who have no reason to leave??)
The FT denies free money creating inequality, after all when billionaires go 10x, what do the poor care, they just want a job, which the fed banks give them ( guess the FT never heard of McJobs.)
The FT denies that free money causes instabilities, they always exist despite meaningful interest rates, and the Fed was created to stop crises (the FT won't consider it's not working so great.) Ed and Freddie think bubbles are bad news, but unemployment is ok, a "dose of salts."
The FT goes all the way, calls Ed & Hayek nazis just like "preparing the ground for Hitler." (guess the FT doesn't remember their icon the BIS stealing all the gold from another nation's central bank to actually GIVE to Hitler.) 
Ed has written a "overheated and unbalanced polemic" (quit holding back FT) despite including warnings from BIS members that financial risks have built up.
The FT sees it all as interest rate choice: shorter term stability vs financial risks. Regulation and fiscal policy are two more tools to try and balance. Regulation gets arbed, and fiscal policies are usually bad.
More "Bernanke is right;" free money and quant easing for the Great Recession did NOT create hyperinflation. They caused it when overused for Covid. (whatever Boomer)
The FT says we will continue with central banks, we will not embrace the gold standard nor bitcoin (guess the FT has not heard Russia is back on gold, and BTC is spreading like wildfire in any country where the central banks have LUDICROUSLY lost it, 80% or > inflation.) Incontinent expansion of credit and debt is a problem ( Finally, a true statement, and "incontinent" is a good word.) But the real problem is that interest is tax deductible, and that should be fixed (guess the FT doesn't know any reform against the superrich never passes. Hedgies pay lower income tax rates than their secretaries, the gummits been about to fix that for decades.)
The REAL story: This is all such bad news we had to start pushing back as we did the TLDR. 
Not a shred of pretense, the FT is all into Ben.
No statement about MMT, the real death machine for supercharged printing. TBF, the gummint has perverted Keynes's theories far beyond anything he would have recognized in his relatively conservative life.
Dear readers know we think free money is like giving a junkie just one more hit / pile of money while pretending to be "kind." Yes, sometimes ya have to give steroids to help a sick person, but if ya just KEEP GIVING THEM FOR YEARS they're DOOMED. Gotta be a path back to reality.
Keynes was a silver spoon baby, he went to Eaton, then on to Cambridge. In the first world war he bragged that he handled all the money blowing through as England started losing their empire. Hayek, on the other hand, led an artillery squad throughout the war, then went to school in Vienna afterwards. Maybe saw some life lessons there.
We remember being force fed Keynesian crap on our b-school NYU scholarship. Our brain rejected the lie that gummints could whip unemployment and inflation up and down at will. No they can't!!! We also could not stomach the lie that when the GUMMINT spends money, there is an amazing invisible big people only "multiplier" effect. We had to swallow that lie for hours. Meanwhile, Art Laffer won his Nobel prize for the Laffer curve, where lowering tax rates can increase tax revenues by increased compliance and stimulated biz. That got eight minutes from the NYU econ profs. 
How bad was this agitprop? Our little brain conflated Keynes with Mao. This was right when it came out that many NYU profs were actually on the CCP payroll. Before we visited China for school, we had to buy Chinese HISTORY (not! lol) textbooks that totally censored the Great Leap Forward, where kids turned in their parents to be killed and millions starved to death under central mismanagement. 
One payroll prof rotated in with wild hair and sneakers to give us a couple of anti capitalist lectures. In the first one, a visiting asian kid, maybe from Taiwan, stood up to give a heartfelt rebuttal of everything the professor said, basically calling him evil. We gave that kid a standing O from the back row. On the second suspect prof lecture, he was just mailing it in, he started in on the EXACT SAME LECTURE he gave us before - same slides, same propaganda. With our usual lack of social skills, we attacked him so viciously that even sympathetic students who agreed thought we went too far.
One funny moment came in China. A very pro socialism econ prof came with us. He then freaked out when he realized our "tour guide" was a CCP rep assigned to watch our every step. Then he REALLY lost it when he threw all his private stuff into the hotel safe. When he returned, the CCP had neatly tidied it all up inside the "safe," even tied a ribbon around it! Who's in charge!?!? We laughed till we cried. 
The FT skips the big questions here. Zoom out. if you are an established Cantillon positioned parasite, Keynes is great. Yeah, when the government cranks up your taxes to spend on something stupid, THAT money is "multiplied" to cause good. BS $(*@&$#(*!@$&!!! Good ONLY to the cronies that got the crazy stupid contract for firms that collapsed once the Cantillon favoritism stopped. Viz Solyndra, who got HALF A BILLION of fed money, then turned out to be a pack of corruption & lies. Money never came back to the taxpayer, tho.
Of course capitalism has to be somewhat checked by gummints. But OF COURSE free money, and market manipulations, death of the law of the markets and destruction of price discovery causes massive problems in the long term. The FT has led a charmed, wonderful life to be able to not see this with a straight face. All centrally tightly controlled gummints fail horribly, even the CCP had to allow a lot of capitalism in to keep going.
But zoom out more: Where is the love? Should a few make all decisions for the many? Or should the people be free to figure out things individually, then let market forces aggregate this into wisdom? Does ANYONE really believe price discovery should be dictated by a handful of kleptocrats? Well, yes, but ethically, morally, SHOULD they? Remember Hayek's prize winning thinking - NO!! 
The FT says Keynes won. Did he now? Hayek actually won a Nobel prize for his work showing that open market forces create the true interest rate, which is a huge, intelligent boon to mankind. Keynes was nominated over and over, but never won. Oh, Keynes won the love of professors and power mad governments, that's true. But honestly, one of the greatest intellectual thrills of our life was seeing the resurgence of Austrian economical thinking. Yes, bitcoin let us revel in the joys of possible freedom through economics, not just eternal subservience and slavery!
Mankind has managed to steal the power of fiat away from gummints "without their notice" as was once a dream for Hayek, Ed and the gang.
FT, how can you say Keynes won, and Hayek & BTC lost? There's a lot of evidence to the contrary. Ultimately, this question is gonna be a lot of fun for some time to come.
Here's some background music: Note Ben Bernanke leading the cronies lol. Match one was funny, with Ben and Tim G playing the bartenders giving Keynes the hair of the dog. Match two ( this one ) is hilarious The institutional bias against Hayek is the FT in a NUTSHELL, baby !!
it is well past time for Match three, with BTC entering the iron cage.
All in all, four out of five FU's for this one-sided claptrap, FT. Y'all should be ashamed. 
Peace out, love
Dave
PS zoom out for one more big hypocrisy. Technology marches on and is inherently deflationary. eBay destroyed prices for many collectibles that turned out to be not that rare. Amazon delivers cheap quality from mass production straight to home. Point being naturally most everything ( think flat screen tv’s) gets cheaper and better faster.
Inflation on the other hand is the favourite tool of politicians, as it steals money from the people without visually raising taxes. Of course central banks want steady inflation, for the good of the gummint NOT the people. Ed and Hayek question if inflation should even exist. Ben and the FT assume inflation should exist just to make it easier for their power to screw with the market. #%%*$¥+##??!!?? We want to give another FU for this omission but judges say too late.
