4 ms·
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
by 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 agoThank you! Only those with a short memory equate money exclusively with government.
- oreo81 9y agoThe fact that this comment is downvoted like this is frightening.
- aje403 9y agoSo 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
- d0lph 9y agoFirstly, I don't think it's likely a cryptocoin is going to destroy any major currency. I don't agree having a non government issued currency means you don't have a government, for one there seem to be a few countries that use the Dollar or Euro as the de-facto currency.
- tomkarlo 9y agoWhen they allow a foreign currency to become the de-facto medium of exchange in a nation, the government is basically admitting that it's lost the ability to issue currency and manage its own economy. The loss of economic control involved is so extreme that you'd only do it if you had essentially no other options left - the government is close to failure.
- michaelmrose 9y agoThis sounds like trumps if you don't have a border you don't have a country. Having alternative currencies doesn't obviate all the benefits of organized representation. It does not even replace the nation currency unless you think that the national currency is so defective that citizens will collectively choose coins.
- nokcha 9y ago>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. Legal-tender laws already prevent non-government currencies from subsuming fiat. Nobody is obliged to accept Bitcoin as payment of a debt, but they are obliged to accept legal tender. And besides that, there will always be demand for fiat at least for paying taxes.