3 ms·

> The dollar is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. It's more accurate to say that the dollar is backed by public familiarity,

by lutusp 13y ago

> The dollar is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. It's more accurate to say that the dollar is backed by public familiarity, faith and trust. Some of that trust is in the government backing the currency, but if that were not true, if the government wasn't involved, it's interesting to ask how much of paper money's role and legitimacy could be supported only by public faith and trust in the currency and its connection with the economy. Assuming, that is, that the number of dollars in circulation could somehow be regulated without governmental control (a problem that the Bitcoin system addresses).

thesimpsons1022 13y ago
well in my opinion, central banking is vital in my trust of a currency as well. But others may disagree. Otherwise, you're just dealing with gold, which is a regression.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > well in my opinion, central banking is vital in my trust of a currency as well. To each his own. Some think a central authority improves the reliability of a currency, some think the opposite. Let's ask Weimar-era Germans what they think: http://c3445010.r10.cf0.rackcdn.com/landscape_image/5759/big_df7ed34871.jpg http://c3445010.r10.cf0.rackcdn.com/landscape_image/5759/big... (Humorously, the sign in the back -- "Rauchen Verboten" -- means "No Smoking". No sense burning up people's pocket money.) > Otherwise, you're just dealing with gold, which is a regression. You just posed a false choice. There are choices besides central authority and gold coins. Any currency in which people have faith and trust can be a legitimate currency on that basis alone. Of course, any currency must earn trust, and Bitcoin is nowhere near earning the public's trust.
  - thesimpsons1022 13y ago
    > You just posed a false choice. There are choices besides central authority and gold coins. Any currency in which people have faith and trust can be a legitimate currency on that basis alone. Of course, any currency must earn trust, and Bitcoin is nowhere near earning the public's trust. My point was its equivalent to gold in the fact that it has no central authority controlling the supply. >Let's ask Weimar-era Germans what they think Oh yes, it had nothing to do with the massive amounts of money they were forced to pay in reparations and the rebuilding they had to do. By the way, no one ever said there wasn't a bad way to central bank. My argument is for good central banking, as Bernanke has done. Not the type of shit that Alan Greenspan did. (or the weimar republic). Just like I endorse democracy, but there are plenty of failed democracies. I could just as easily turn your weimar point back at you and say the great depression was because of the gold standard. Because we happened to have a gold standard at the same time. If we had central banking at that point, it could have mitigated a lot of the damage.

by lutusp 13y ago

thesimpsons1022 13y ago

well in my opinion, central banking is vital in my trust of a currency as well. But others may disagree. Otherwise, you're just dealing with gold, which is a regression.

lutusp 13y ago
> well in my opinion, central banking is vital in my trust of a currency as well. To each his own. Some think a central authority improves the reliability of a currency, some think the opposite. Let's ask Weimar-era Germans what they think: http://c3445010.r10.cf0.rackcdn.com/landscape_image/5759/big_df7ed34871.jpg http://c3445010.r10.cf0.rackcdn.com/landscape_image/5759/big... (Humorously, the sign in the back -- "Rauchen Verboten" -- means "No Smoking". No sense burning up people's pocket money.) > Otherwise, you're just dealing with gold, which is a regression. You just posed a false choice. There are choices besides central authority and gold coins. Any currency in which people have faith and trust can be a legitimate currency on that basis alone. Of course, any currency must earn trust, and Bitcoin is nowhere near earning the public's trust.
- thesimpsons1022 13y ago
  > You just posed a false choice. There are choices besides central authority and gold coins. Any currency in which people have faith and trust can be a legitimate currency on that basis alone. Of course, any currency must earn trust, and Bitcoin is nowhere near earning the public's trust. My point was its equivalent to gold in the fact that it has no central authority controlling the supply. >Let's ask Weimar-era Germans what they think Oh yes, it had nothing to do with the massive amounts of money they were forced to pay in reparations and the rebuilding they had to do. By the way, no one ever said there wasn't a bad way to central bank. My argument is for good central banking, as Bernanke has done. Not the type of shit that Alan Greenspan did. (or the weimar republic). Just like I endorse democracy, but there are plenty of failed democracies. I could just as easily turn your weimar point back at you and say the great depression was because of the gold standard. Because we happened to have a gold standard at the same time. If we had central banking at that point, it could have mitigated a lot of the damage.