3 ms·
I have no position in Bitcoin, but isn’t it possible for “BTC scrip” to be the money used day to day. With actual blockchain transactions just being used to agg
by dcolkitt 6y ago
I have no position in Bitcoin, but isn’t it possible for “BTC scrip” to be the money used day to day. With actual blockchain transactions just being used to aggregate at the institutional level?
This is pretty much the way money worked in the 19th century, just with gold instead of BTC. Nobody physically carried or transferred gold to buy a beer. They just used bank notes that were backed by a trusted intermediary holding the physical asset. It might make sense for a bank, or even a very wealthy person, to pay the cost of physically transferring the hard asset. But most just used IOUs that were backed by the underlying hard asset.
- oliwarner 6y agoYou're talking about a BTC bearer bond. Isn't that just what cash used to be? You've gone full circle.
- UncleMeat 6y agoIt could, but why? The two things that BTC grants are trustlessness and the inability to enact fiscal policy. If BTC just becomes the backing for institutions, trustlessness is gone. So then it is a question of whether a backing unit that supports fiscal policy is better than one that doesn't. I think I know what institutions would prefer.