4 ms·
> Anti-money laundering/sanctions/stopping terrorist financing efforts That looks like a pretty questionable line of logic, because, say for sake of argument,
by svd4anything 7y ago
> Anti-money laundering/sanctions/stopping terrorist financing efforts
That looks like a pretty questionable line of logic, because, say for sake of argument, that it can be demonstrated from an economics objective that competitive private currencies produce higher levels of growth. Now the terrorists also have us hostage economically as we need to use monopoly government money as the only way to stop them!
Come on, it’s lazy thinking to believe that only centralized authoritarian control of currency is how to keep everyone safe from various bad actors, terrorists, criminals and rogue nations. My intuition says that just can’t be correct, otherwise let’s also just put cameras in everyone’s homes ... just in case.
- baq 7y agothe goverment's role isn't to be a monopoly, it's to provide and enforce rules. otherwise the strongest player will coerce everyone to their own rules via force. it's naive to think that without governments everything will suddenly be better and cheaper - on the contrary, there will be a period of anarchy where no fair trade is possible because fraud won't have any consequences and after that the strongest players will form a kingdom or whatever with support of many tired ordinary people who just want to live.
- svd4anything 7y agoI’m confused. What rules will the government no longer be able to enforce? There is such extremism in all cryptocurrency related discussions. Why in the world would there be anarchy if central bank monetary policy was no longer effective when private currencies are used or during a Free Banking period? Why does that follow at all, by what mechanism?