"But I'm not sure simply printing money even faster than we already are is the right move - if that's what you're suggesting. The end result will be a destruction of value for everybody involved, correct? Not just the rich."
The "quantity of money" theory has been obsolete since '34 when FDR ended the convertibility of dollars to gold to enable our recovery from the great depression. As long as the resources and labor spending is meant to deploy exist, or potentially exist, inflation as a result of spending is minimal, at worst. Prior to the resource shortages of the covid-19 pandemic the Fed was fighting furiously to avoid deflation in spite of massive increases in the money supply post '08.
Japan had a similar problem and it responded with increased debt that is now over double the percentage of GDP ours represents. It has not entirely forestalled deflation, but its economy is far better than ours with much higher public purpose spending and a more aged population. Living longer and enjoying it should be a major goal in life and the Japanese seem to have managed both without creating inflation. They were far more generous with public purpose welfare spending as well as better at infrastructure development even prior to that, so we certainly have wiggle room.
"Even if that plan succeeds, you'd have to inject enough money into the public sphere to make the stock market irrelevant in order to unseat the current oligarchy, correct?"
The best way to get Wall St under control is via regulation/legislation. A return to Glass-Steagall would be a god start to separating banking from investment. My current concern is with the quality of investment bonds being monetized with QE. It isn't actually money creation technically, but it presents a good way for banks to shovel their bad casino bets onto the Fed, and the Treasury by extension of the combined balance sheets they share. Avoiding this will require a Congress willing to act as watchdogs, not lapdogs, of banking.
"If you need a shadow market to circumvent fiat currencies, crypto is already trying to take that spot (despite the greed-driven nonsense from the old guard about stores of value and what not"
What unit of measure would you use if you wished to sell off your crypto? Dollars? As long as the federal government retains the ability to levy and collect taxes in its own unit of measure the dollar will never be obsoleted and will remain the currency of commerce for our nation's business.
If that status is put at risk it will be because of the general ignorance of how our federal government funds itself among the population and the animosity the many myths and corruptions generate. However, trading in the most desired investment currency in the world for something as untried as crypto isn't likely to happen in either of our lifetimes.
"It's likely what replaces failed currencies /economies worldwide anyway - why not join that revolution now instead of trying to go out Venezuela style with the dollar?"
See above. :) Also, the use of Venezuela, or Zimbabwe, Weimar Germany, Greece, etc as comparisons to the US is invalid on its face. All of those economies were destroyed by either 1) resource shortages that required extreme money creation just to feed the people, or 2) giving up a sovereign nation status that resulted in disallowing the creation of new money to pay obligations. The member nations of the EU didn't think through the implications for their economies when they surrendered economic sovereignty. Several have failed since that didn't need to if they had that sovereignty back.
The US government isn't likely to give up its "currency of trade" status in the world without military action, much less roll over and allow crypto to supplant it. All it has to do is crack down on unreported earnings in crypto with some higher than normal tax rate and crypto will dwindle in significance from attrition. If you think blockchain is invincible you don't understand the motivation of our government when its currency is attacked.
