5 ms·

couldn't have said it better. The very idea that a random citizen in a modern country can invent their own notion of money is beyond problematic so it is confo

by Edmond 9y ago

couldn't have said it better. The very idea that a random citizen in a modern country can invent their own notion of money is beyond problematic so it is confounding that this whole thing has been allowed to mushroom into what it is today. Proponents like to drag skeptics into crypto debates but that is far off the mark when it comes to the real implications of the current situation. Some questions to ponder: When will the government decide it is illegal to create your own money? will those who have already amassed fortunes (even imaginary) be allowed to keep it? And if so why would the citizenry tolerate such a situation?

lagadu 9y ago
"money" is a representation of value that is recognised as such by a group of people. If a few people decide that a bunch of stones are now money[0] (in other words, represents value), should they be arrested? Similarly, when a group does the same not to stones but to seashells [1] or salt are they committing securities fraud? Someone decides to do the same for a few hashes on the internet and suddenly they can't? What's the difference? What about doing the same with currencies recognised in countries other than the one you're in, is that illegal? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_money https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_money edit: the way I see it, you're advocating against the concept of trading.
- nsxwolf 9y ago
  Is it really money if nobody's using it like money? When people started using sea shells as money, they were buying stuff with it, not just speculating about its value using some other currency.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- Edmond 9y ago
  The problem with these analogous argument about what money means fails to account for the implicit contract that we all sign as members of a society. If you buy your own island like Sir Richard Branson then by all means do what you please. Legal tender is perhaps the most important corner stone of a modern nation state, if an entrepreneur can invent their own money and subsume the one issued by a government then you don't have a government. I for one prefer having a government. This is not a trivial issue as cryptocurrency proponents seem to think it is.
  - CryptoPunk 9y ago
    >>if an entrepreneur can invent their own money and subsume the one issued by a government then you don't have a government. I for one prefer having a government. Nonsense. We've had non-political money before. During the free banking era we had thousands of bank-issued currencies that competed in an open market, and the state was alive and well. The state exists as long as it has a monopoly on force within its jurisdiction. It doesn't need to monopolize the control of money and imprison anyone who has wrong-think about what they consider to be money. I understand that a lot of people here don't like cryptocurrency and the get-rich mentality around it, but understand that when you call for laws to prohibit various uses of it, you're calling for people to see the inside of a prison cell because they have different ideas about what money is than you.
    - mhluongo 9y ago
      Thank you! Only those with a short memory equate money exclusively with government.
    - oreo81 9y ago
      The fact that this comment is downvoted like this is frightening.
    - aje403 9y ago
      So wait, okay, in the 1800s state-and-gold-backed banks issued legal tender in lieu of anything else, this is a fair analogy to cryptocurrency and anybody against cryptocurrency just wants to see people in jail
- rhizome 9y ago
  By my read, neither of those are ever converted into currency. I'm reminded of Simon & Garfunkel's "The Boxer": I am just a poor boy Though my story's seldom told I have squandered my resistance For a pocketful of mumbles Such are promises
- voidmain0001 9y ago
  I know a car dealership that had a customer attempt to purchase a vehicle with a cheque drawn on a currency called RA, or something similar. The customer said that they were paying the sum of $30,000 in comparable spiritual RA. Would you have taken the cheque?
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    The question is not whether or not someone would accept it. The question is, would it make sense for charges to be filed against you if you had accepted the cheque (or not accepted the cheque).
- kgwgk 9y ago
  > If a few people decide that a bunch of stones are now money, should they be arrested? As long as they pay (using real money!) the taxes owed on the economic transactions carried using this alternative currency, I think they will be fine.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jMyles 9y ago
Obviously not everyone has this same notion about the role of government. Since we (at least aspire to) live in a society of democratic ideals and freedom, what do you say to people who want innovation in this space? I prefer for government to be wholly uninvolved in the matter of decided which assets constitute currency; it seems to me to be an utter conflict of interest.

by Edmond 9y ago

lagadu 9y ago

"money" is a representation of value that is recognised as such by a group of people. If a few people decide that a bunch of stones are now money[0] (in other words, represents value), should they be arrested? Similarly, when a group does the same not to stones but to seashells [1] or salt are they committing securities fraud? Someone decides to do the same for a few hashes on the internet and suddenly they can't? What's the difference? What about doing the same with currencies recognised in countries other than the one you're in, is that illegal? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_money https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_money edit: the way I see it, you're advocating against the concept of trading.

nsxwolf 9y ago
Is it really money if nobody's using it like money? When people started using sea shells as money, they were buying stuff with it, not just speculating about its value using some other currency.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
Edmond 9y ago
The problem with these analogous argument about what money means fails to account for the implicit contract that we all sign as members of a society. If you buy your own island like Sir Richard Branson then by all means do what you please. Legal tender is perhaps the most important corner stone of a modern nation state, if an entrepreneur can invent their own money and subsume the one issued by a government then you don't have a government. I for one prefer having a government. This is not a trivial issue as cryptocurrency proponents seem to think it is.
- CryptoPunk 9y ago
  >>if an entrepreneur can invent their own money and subsume the one issued by a government then you don't have a government. I for one prefer having a government. Nonsense. We've had non-political money before. During the free banking era we had thousands of bank-issued currencies that competed in an open market, and the state was alive and well. The state exists as long as it has a monopoly on force within its jurisdiction. It doesn't need to monopolize the control of money and imprison anyone who has wrong-think about what they consider to be money. I understand that a lot of people here don't like cryptocurrency and the get-rich mentality around it, but understand that when you call for laws to prohibit various uses of it, you're calling for people to see the inside of a prison cell because they have different ideas about what money is than you.
  - mhluongo 9y ago
    Thank you! Only those with a short memory equate money exclusively with government.
  - oreo81 9y ago
    The fact that this comment is downvoted like this is frightening.
  - aje403 9y ago
    So wait, okay, in the 1800s state-and-gold-backed banks issued legal tender in lieu of anything else, this is a fair analogy to cryptocurrency and anybody against cryptocurrency just wants to see people in jail
rhizome 9y ago
By my read, neither of those are ever converted into currency. I'm reminded of Simon & Garfunkel's "The Boxer": I am just a poor boy Though my story's seldom told I have squandered my resistance For a pocketful of mumbles Such are promises
voidmain0001 9y ago
I know a car dealership that had a customer attempt to purchase a vehicle with a cheque drawn on a currency called RA, or something similar. The customer said that they were paying the sum of $30,000 in comparable spiritual RA. Would you have taken the cheque?
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  The question is not whether or not someone would accept it. The question is, would it make sense for charges to be filed against you if you had accepted the cheque (or not accepted the cheque).
kgwgk 9y ago
> If a few people decide that a bunch of stones are now money, should they be arrested? As long as they pay (using real money!) the taxes owed on the economic transactions carried using this alternative currency, I think they will be fine.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

jMyles 9y ago

Obviously not everyone has this same notion about the role of government. Since we (at least aspire to) live in a society of democratic ideals and freedom, what do you say to people who want innovation in this space? I prefer for government to be wholly uninvolved in the matter of decided which assets constitute currency; it seems to me to be an utter conflict of interest.