3 ms·

What better currency competition is out there?

by psychlops 3y ago

acdha 3y ago
Almost all of them? It hasn’t had much impact on the real economy so clearly most people do not consider it better.
- alchemist1e9 3y ago
  The entire history of fiat currency is a combination of warfare and currency collapse. Why was the Bank of England created? To wage war. Perhaps “wasting” 2% of the world’s electricity supply will look a lot better when civilization scale money laundering and currency collapse is a thing of history, not to mention the curb on national budgets being allocated to war machines!
  - acdha 3y ago
    Are you seriously arguing that money laundering or military spending will go away if Bitcoin is more widely used? Continuing this, “fiat currency” has a specific meaning in economics: it’s a currency not backed by a commodity. Bitcoin is a fiat currency because the only value it has is based on social consensus, making it exceptionally volatile, but at the time the Bank of England was founded the pound sterling was based on silver (hence the name) as it had been for a millennium and it transitioned to gold for a couple centuries. The reason the Bank of England was founded wasn’t due to the choice of currency but rather credit, and as with war I find it unpersuasive that humanity will discontinue either.
    - alchemist1e9 3y ago
      What we’re talking about here isn’t your everyday money laundering; it’s civilization-scale laundering facilitated by central banks. This isn’t some small-time operation; it’s legalized crime on a global scale. Banks pack their balance sheets with worthless securities, then cry for bailouts when the jig is up. It’s a classic con, and it’s happened worldwide numerous time, from small to large countries, and always propped up by the fiat system. Without fiat’s flexibility to, let’s say, ‘creatively manage’ economics, this kind of scheme becomes a whole lot harder, if not impossible. Bitcoin fiat? That’s way off base. No serious analyst would lump Bitcoin in with fiat currencies. Why? Because fiat currencies are backed by government decree, used for tax payments, and can be issued ad infinitum by central authorities. Bitcoin ticks none of those boxes. It’s decentralized, with no central authority to pump out new units or demand its use for official transactions. Bitcoin is as far from fiat as you can get. Regarding the Bank of England’s founding in 1694—let’s get our facts straight. It wasn’t about credit; it was about waging a war without the cash to back it up. This move marked a turning point, expanding the empire and cementing the British Pound as a reserve currency. This kind of dynamic isn’t ancient history; it’s alive and well, fueling today’s massive military expenditures. These are bankrolled by the fiat system’s ability to inflate currency and issue debt. And when fiat currencies collapse? It’s usually the losers of these conflicts who feel the burn. So, yeah, Bitcoin offers a real alternative to this endless cycle of warfare and financial manipulation.
    - npoc 3y ago
      Fiat currency is an excellent mechanism for stealing wealth from a population without them realising (well without them realising who took it at least). Each time they create credit by increasing the money supply with new money, they don't create value, they simply dilute the value of the money supply across more monetary units. The value in the newly printed "credit" comes from the existing money. That's why prices go up endlessly. It's not the value of things we buy increasing, but the value in our money leaking away into the money they are creating. The reality is that value of most consumables (food, electronics, cars, toothbrushes etc) is going down in value year on year by ~5% (due to efficiencies in production, automation etc) but by increasing the money supply by ~7% each year (doubling it per decade!), we actually see prices increase by ~2% average (CPI). They are essentially creaming off all the efficiency gains made by the people over the decades and then taking some more just because...they can. Meanwhile people are accusing the shops of being greedy, and employers accuse employees of being greedy for wanting a pay rise that doesn't even cover half of the pay cut they are effectively getting each year. It also distorts other fundamental signals like GDP. Devaluing the unit of account by printing money makes the GDP figures go up because you're measuring it with something that's going down in value. Looking at the USA and accounting for money supply increase, it has had falling GDP for decades. You think your savings are going up, but they are going down etc. etc. Money is proof of work, or it should be. To create it should take as much work as it's worth (this is true for both gold and bitcoin). In reality, the fiat we currently use is proof of work for the population, while the bankers have a free money spigot. They can pour trillions of money out of nowhere with a few keystrokes and then charge interest on it for decades to come, as if it was their own money.. It gives them undeserved, unlimited power. And what's the best way for them to get more free money? Generate more loans/credit. And what's the most effective way to do that? Trigger wars and, if possible, fund both sides.
- psychlops 3y ago
  If all of them were competing then Argentina would be using the Indian Rupee or any of the many other options for their failing currency. But they don't. Fiats are tied to a specific geographic location. If there isn't an impact on the real economy then the discussions here on how much energy is burned aren't meaningful.

What better currency competition is out there?

acdha 3y ago

Almost all of them? It hasn’t had much impact on the real economy so clearly most people do not consider it better.

alchemist1e9 3y ago
The entire history of fiat currency is a combination of warfare and currency collapse. Why was the Bank of England created? To wage war. Perhaps “wasting” 2% of the world’s electricity supply will look a lot better when civilization scale money laundering and currency collapse is a thing of history, not to mention the curb on national budgets being allocated to war machines!
- acdha 3y ago
  Are you seriously arguing that money laundering or military spending will go away if Bitcoin is more widely used? Continuing this, “fiat currency” has a specific meaning in economics: it’s a currency not backed by a commodity. Bitcoin is a fiat currency because the only value it has is based on social consensus, making it exceptionally volatile, but at the time the Bank of England was founded the pound sterling was based on silver (hence the name) as it had been for a millennium and it transitioned to gold for a couple centuries. The reason the Bank of England was founded wasn’t due to the choice of currency but rather credit, and as with war I find it unpersuasive that humanity will discontinue either.
  - alchemist1e9 3y ago
    What we’re talking about here isn’t your everyday money laundering; it’s civilization-scale laundering facilitated by central banks. This isn’t some small-time operation; it’s legalized crime on a global scale. Banks pack their balance sheets with worthless securities, then cry for bailouts when the jig is up. It’s a classic con, and it’s happened worldwide numerous time, from small to large countries, and always propped up by the fiat system. Without fiat’s flexibility to, let’s say, ‘creatively manage’ economics, this kind of scheme becomes a whole lot harder, if not impossible. Bitcoin fiat? That’s way off base. No serious analyst would lump Bitcoin in with fiat currencies. Why? Because fiat currencies are backed by government decree, used for tax payments, and can be issued ad infinitum by central authorities. Bitcoin ticks none of those boxes. It’s decentralized, with no central authority to pump out new units or demand its use for official transactions. Bitcoin is as far from fiat as you can get. Regarding the Bank of England’s founding in 1694—let’s get our facts straight. It wasn’t about credit; it was about waging a war without the cash to back it up. This move marked a turning point, expanding the empire and cementing the British Pound as a reserve currency. This kind of dynamic isn’t ancient history; it’s alive and well, fueling today’s massive military expenditures. These are bankrolled by the fiat system’s ability to inflate currency and issue debt. And when fiat currencies collapse? It’s usually the losers of these conflicts who feel the burn. So, yeah, Bitcoin offers a real alternative to this endless cycle of warfare and financial manipulation.
  - npoc 3y ago
    Fiat currency is an excellent mechanism for stealing wealth from a population without them realising (well without them realising who took it at least). Each time they create credit by increasing the money supply with new money, they don't create value, they simply dilute the value of the money supply across more monetary units. The value in the newly printed "credit" comes from the existing money. That's why prices go up endlessly. It's not the value of things we buy increasing, but the value in our money leaking away into the money they are creating. The reality is that value of most consumables (food, electronics, cars, toothbrushes etc) is going down in value year on year by ~5% (due to efficiencies in production, automation etc) but by increasing the money supply by ~7% each year (doubling it per decade!), we actually see prices increase by ~2% average (CPI). They are essentially creaming off all the efficiency gains made by the people over the decades and then taking some more just because...they can. Meanwhile people are accusing the shops of being greedy, and employers accuse employees of being greedy for wanting a pay rise that doesn't even cover half of the pay cut they are effectively getting each year. It also distorts other fundamental signals like GDP. Devaluing the unit of account by printing money makes the GDP figures go up because you're measuring it with something that's going down in value. Looking at the USA and accounting for money supply increase, it has had falling GDP for decades. You think your savings are going up, but they are going down etc. etc. Money is proof of work, or it should be. To create it should take as much work as it's worth (this is true for both gold and bitcoin). In reality, the fiat we currently use is proof of work for the population, while the bankers have a free money spigot. They can pour trillions of money out of nowhere with a few keystrokes and then charge interest on it for decades to come, as if it was their own money.. It gives them undeserved, unlimited power. And what's the best way for them to get more free money? Generate more loans/credit. And what's the most effective way to do that? Trigger wars and, if possible, fund both sides.
psychlops 3y ago
If all of them were competing then Argentina would be using the Indian Rupee or any of the many other options for their failing currency. But they don't. Fiats are tied to a specific geographic location. If there isn't an impact on the real economy then the discussions here on how much energy is burned aren't meaningful.