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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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