5 ms·

> has no intrinsic value and is only valuable because others may accept it. So does USD

by Encybe 5y ago

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
chaganated 5y ago
to be fair, we print it on some pretty nice paper
- huseyinkeles 5y ago
  ~90% of the USD is also virtual. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblack/2020/03/01/who-needs-cryptocurrency-fedcoin-when-we-already-have-a-national-digital-currency/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblack/2020/03/01/who-needs...
- ben_w 5y ago
  Sorry to burst your bubble (unless that was a joke in which case carry on), but as a foreigner, American currency is one of the most boring I’ve seen. More seriously: the USA really needs to retire the $1 notes from circulation a decade or more ago.
Darmody 5y ago
Or any other fiat currency. I want to see blockchain gone but most legislators don't understand it, they think it should be gone but they are not sure why so they end up with nonsense like this.
- ludamad 5y ago
  It's also a bit ill-timed as Bitcoin is "now a fiat currency", if you go by El Salvador's wiki page
  - wsc981 5y ago
    > It's also a bit ill-timed as Bitcoin is "now a fiat currency", if you go by El Salvador's wiki page It's probably timed right now by the Dutch CPB because El Salvador accepted BTC as a fiat currency.
  - phire 5y ago
    That makes it "Legal Tender" in Salvador, but not fiat. It's a bit of a weird situation. Normally when a currency is legal tender and not fiat it's backed by a physical resource, like gold or silver. But here it's only backed by software and people agreeing that it has value. Kind of puts bitcoin in its own unique category.
  - bidirectional 5y ago
    A fiat currency is issued by a government without being backed by a physical commodity. El Salvador's adoption of Bitcoin does not make it a fiat currency.
    - imtringued 5y ago
      I think this is in reference to a US law that states that a "currency" adopted by a foreign country is not classified as an asset but as a currency. This has tax implications but I don't know the details.
jdmoreira 5y ago
Technically true! But it is backed by a very powerful commercial empire who also happens to have the worlds largest military.
- read_if_gay_ 5y ago
  Does that military count towards the US dollar's impact on the climate?
  - ipaddr 5y ago
    Yes but it might be positive. Did that surprise you?
    - read_if_gay_ 5y ago
      If you can explain, it might.
      - cassianoleal 5y ago
        I'm guessing they do it by emitting a ton of CO2. /s https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27472360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27472360
  - imtringued 5y ago
    Only partially, because the US military protects more than just the US dollar banking system. For example, the US military protects the united states and everything inside it. Bitcoin mining only protects the currency and since Bitcoin is exactly like fiat in the sense that it is just a ledger that allocates resources, it is entirely dependent on the physical world that the all the militaries around the world protect. Do we count the US military towards Bitcoin's impact on the climate? It would be justified.
    - read_if_gay_ 5y ago
      Clearly not all of the military should count towards the dollar’s climate impact, not even close, but some of it wouldn’t be needed without the dollar, and that should count. What portions of the government and military could be dropped if the US dollar hegemony didn’t need to be maintained? What could be dropped if we didn’t need banks to handle money? This is of course impossible to quantify accurately, but it shows the picture isn’t as simple as “ban BTC because it uses more power than Argentina”; an angle that’s thrown around a lot around here.
tome 5y ago
Not so. The US government can require you to pay them it, under certain (very common) circumstances.
cassianoleal 5y ago
So does the Euro, which is used in his country, and so was the Dutch Guild, the one that came before. So does any other currency in use in the world. > Fiat money does not have intrinsic value and does not have use value. It has value only because a government maintains its value, or because parties engaging in exchange agree on its value. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money
- toshk 5y ago
  Being backed by a government, or multiple governments, with an army and lots of financial tools is a very real thing.
  - cassianoleal 5y ago
    Why are you bringing this up? Sounds like a straw man to me.
  - dcolkitt 5y ago
    I agree that being backed by a government carries weight. Largely because tax liabilities are denominated in the home currency, which creates a persistent demand for the currency. But it's silly when people bring up the army or military when it comes to the USD or other fiat currencies. As if the only thing keeping the dollar valuable are carrier strike groups threatening people around the world. If military spending was cut in half, I guarantee you the dollar would be just as valuable. China, Russia and North Korea all have formidable militaries. Their currencies carry very little weight outside their borders. In contrast the Swiss Franc, Swedish Krona and New Zealand Dollar are all considered ultra-hard currencies despite those countries having little to no ability to project force around the globe.
  - Growling_owl 5y ago
    What if those who produce, use and mantain those tanks, ships, planes and rifles suddenly lose trust in the mean of compensation which the government offers them in exchange of their services? Nobody ever thinks about this, but government and all the infrastructure it owns are embedded in society The general view is that Bitcoin takes hold among the population and then there is a fight between the population and the government....quite the contrary, Bitcoin simply takes over the government at an equal or slighly inferior rate compared to the general population. See how many people in the Capitol are being bitten by the bitcoin bug. For every critic you'll find somebody who is willing to speak in favor of it.
acheron 5y ago
I guess, if you specify that by “others” you mean “men with guns” and “may accept” means “require you to pay them in”.
anonuser123456 5y ago
You can pay the tax man in USD to stay out of jail. Sounds pretty valuable to me.
- ur-whale 5y ago
  Same line of reasoning used by every racketeer's victim trying to convince themselves paying up is the reasonable thing to do.
  - ben_w 5y ago
    I believe that’s why, in America, non-landowners, women, non-Christians, former slaves, and non-white people in general, all fought for the right to vote on how that power could and could not be used.
rualca 5y ago
> So does USD The USD is the official currency of the US of A, and all transactions and specially taxes are expressed in the official currency. This its value is automatically tied to the nation's total economic output.
imtringued 5y ago
Yeah, boring argument. Fiat currency depends on acceptance. Cryptocurrency does too but the problem is that the size of the economy that accepts Bitcoin as payment is absolutely tiny. You have to exchange your Bitcoin to fiat first before you can buy anything, which means Bitcoin will just end up driving more USD acceptance.
redis_mlc 5y ago
The US has an army. Bitcoin doesn't.

> has no intrinsic value and is only valuable because others may accept it. So does USD

by Encybe 5y ago

> has no intrinsic value and is only valuable because others may accept it. So does USD

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

chaganated 5y ago

to be fair, we print it on some pretty nice paper

huseyinkeles 5y ago
~90% of the USD is also virtual. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblack/2020/03/01/who-needs-cryptocurrency-fedcoin-when-we-already-have-a-national-digital-currency/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblack/2020/03/01/who-needs...
ben_w 5y ago
Sorry to burst your bubble (unless that was a joke in which case carry on), but as a foreigner, American currency is one of the most boring I’ve seen. More seriously: the USA really needs to retire the $1 notes from circulation a decade or more ago.

Darmody 5y ago

Or any other fiat currency. I want to see blockchain gone but most legislators don't understand it, they think it should be gone but they are not sure why so they end up with nonsense like this.

ludamad 5y ago
It's also a bit ill-timed as Bitcoin is "now a fiat currency", if you go by El Salvador's wiki page
- wsc981 5y ago
  > It's also a bit ill-timed as Bitcoin is "now a fiat currency", if you go by El Salvador's wiki page It's probably timed right now by the Dutch CPB because El Salvador accepted BTC as a fiat currency.
- phire 5y ago
  That makes it "Legal Tender" in Salvador, but not fiat. It's a bit of a weird situation. Normally when a currency is legal tender and not fiat it's backed by a physical resource, like gold or silver. But here it's only backed by software and people agreeing that it has value. Kind of puts bitcoin in its own unique category.
- bidirectional 5y ago
  A fiat currency is issued by a government without being backed by a physical commodity. El Salvador's adoption of Bitcoin does not make it a fiat currency.
  - imtringued 5y ago
    I think this is in reference to a US law that states that a "currency" adopted by a foreign country is not classified as an asset but as a currency. This has tax implications but I don't know the details.

jdmoreira 5y ago

Technically true! But it is backed by a very powerful commercial empire who also happens to have the worlds largest military.

read_if_gay_ 5y ago
Does that military count towards the US dollar's impact on the climate?
- ipaddr 5y ago
  Yes but it might be positive. Did that surprise you?
  - read_if_gay_ 5y ago
    If you can explain, it might.
    - cassianoleal 5y ago
      I'm guessing they do it by emitting a ton of CO2. /s https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27472360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27472360
- imtringued 5y ago
  Only partially, because the US military protects more than just the US dollar banking system. For example, the US military protects the united states and everything inside it. Bitcoin mining only protects the currency and since Bitcoin is exactly like fiat in the sense that it is just a ledger that allocates resources, it is entirely dependent on the physical world that the all the militaries around the world protect. Do we count the US military towards Bitcoin's impact on the climate? It would be justified.
  - read_if_gay_ 5y ago
    Clearly not all of the military should count towards the dollar’s climate impact, not even close, but some of it wouldn’t be needed without the dollar, and that should count. What portions of the government and military could be dropped if the US dollar hegemony didn’t need to be maintained? What could be dropped if we didn’t need banks to handle money? This is of course impossible to quantify accurately, but it shows the picture isn’t as simple as “ban BTC because it uses more power than Argentina”; an angle that’s thrown around a lot around here.

tome 5y ago

Not so. The US government can require you to pay them it, under certain (very common) circumstances.

cassianoleal 5y ago

So does the Euro, which is used in his country, and so was the Dutch Guild, the one that came before. So does any other currency in use in the world. > Fiat money does not have intrinsic value and does not have use value. It has value only because a government maintains its value, or because parties engaging in exchange agree on its value. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

toshk 5y ago
Being backed by a government, or multiple governments, with an army and lots of financial tools is a very real thing.
- cassianoleal 5y ago
  Why are you bringing this up? Sounds like a straw man to me.
- dcolkitt 5y ago
  I agree that being backed by a government carries weight. Largely because tax liabilities are denominated in the home currency, which creates a persistent demand for the currency. But it's silly when people bring up the army or military when it comes to the USD or other fiat currencies. As if the only thing keeping the dollar valuable are carrier strike groups threatening people around the world. If military spending was cut in half, I guarantee you the dollar would be just as valuable. China, Russia and North Korea all have formidable militaries. Their currencies carry very little weight outside their borders. In contrast the Swiss Franc, Swedish Krona and New Zealand Dollar are all considered ultra-hard currencies despite those countries having little to no ability to project force around the globe.
- Growling_owl 5y ago
  What if those who produce, use and mantain those tanks, ships, planes and rifles suddenly lose trust in the mean of compensation which the government offers them in exchange of their services? Nobody ever thinks about this, but government and all the infrastructure it owns are embedded in society The general view is that Bitcoin takes hold among the population and then there is a fight between the population and the government....quite the contrary, Bitcoin simply takes over the government at an equal or slighly inferior rate compared to the general population. See how many people in the Capitol are being bitten by the bitcoin bug. For every critic you'll find somebody who is willing to speak in favor of it.

acheron 5y ago

I guess, if you specify that by “others” you mean “men with guns” and “may accept” means “require you to pay them in”.

anonuser123456 5y ago

You can pay the tax man in USD to stay out of jail. Sounds pretty valuable to me.

ur-whale 5y ago
Same line of reasoning used by every racketeer's victim trying to convince themselves paying up is the reasonable thing to do.
- ben_w 5y ago
  I believe that’s why, in America, non-landowners, women, non-Christians, former slaves, and non-white people in general, all fought for the right to vote on how that power could and could not be used.

rualca 5y ago

> So does USD The USD is the official currency of the US of A, and all transactions and specially taxes are expressed in the official currency. This its value is automatically tied to the nation's total economic output.

imtringued 5y ago

Yeah, boring argument. Fiat currency depends on acceptance. Cryptocurrency does too but the problem is that the size of the economy that accepts Bitcoin as payment is absolutely tiny. You have to exchange your Bitcoin to fiat first before you can buy anything, which means Bitcoin will just end up driving more USD acceptance.

redis_mlc 5y ago

The US has an army. Bitcoin doesn't.