> There is thus an intimate relationship between the current system and fossil fuels and the military Even granting this premise, the argument still makes no s

> There is thus an intimate relationship between the current system and fossil fuels and the military Even granting this premise, the argument still makes no sense. Governments, banks, and militaries existed for centuries prior to the existence of even the U.S. itself, so the suggestion that these institutions are somehow a product of U.S. monetary policy in the 70s is absurd on its face. I also think it's important not to "forget history" and the history of these institutions far exceeds what that argument grants. > Compared to total global money, the transaction volume of fiat is also very small. This is also beside the point. Bitcoin's value is highly dependent on the utility of government issued currency so that people can obtain staple goods and services that have inherent value, bitcoin is simply not able to fill this role. > Bitcoin has payment solutions in the works, it is likely that transaction volume and unit of exchange utility will increase over time There is always a myriad number of solutions in the works, but they don't actually mean anything until they solve the problem.