[Francon]

Historically speaking, we've never seen an economy succeed long term when the monetary system is based on a fiat (fake) currency. Sadly, this trader is telling the truth: "We bought the ticket so take the ride and profit" is the message to people. This is a manufactured crisis but it matters not weather it is intentional or unintended. It is happening. Historic precedent exists for this. The Collapse of: Egyptian Empire, Roman Empire, U.S.S.R. and Zimbabwe. All from fiat overexertion of an unsustainable empire or economies. The history of fiat money, to put it kindly, has been one of failure. Seems this trader is going to profit from the shift rather than sit idly by waiting for some magical intervention.

[eftpotrm]

While the history of commodity-backed money was one of major problems with restricted money supply, of industrial use of said commodities becoming prohibitive and itself becoming an economic limit, of significant periodic deflation and currency fluctuation based on mining returns.

Fiat money isn't ideal, but neither was the gold standard.

[nhaehnle]

Egyptian and Roman Empires? Where is your data suggesting that their collapses had anything to do with fiat money?

USSR? It's pretty clear that they suffered a lot due to economic mismanagement (i.e. inefficiencies due to how their economy was run), but that had nothing to do with whether fiat money was involved or not.

Zimbabwe? The causes of hyperinflation was a combination of a collapse of (especially) the agricultural sector and foreign-currency denominated debts. Both events were caused by political decisions, not by fiat money.

It is likely that all the collapses you mentioned (including the ancient ones) involve some level of economic mismanagement, where the productive capacity of a society was destroyed, misallocated, or left idle.

Fiat money was never the problem. If you disagree, please point out how fiat money was the problem, instead of only asserting it.