[seligerasmus]

>Why would it be any different for Monero This response does not make much sense: how do you pay for cars, groceries, condoms with Monero?

With fiat, you use some centralized banking instrument like cash, credit, debit, or whatever. Reconciling how that purchase experience is identical with Monero (but is somehow an anonymous, decentralized transaction) might require slightly more explanation to distinguish it from your garden variety anarchocapitalist crypto daydreaming.

Or, more likely, you mean that _in theory_ you could use it to buy anything, with the small hurdle of instantly overturning all of modern commerce infrastructure and the leviathan hard currency sovereigns that deliberately engineered traceable, centralized transactions as political and cultural contagion. Just gotta overcome that, teach grandma about cold wallets and the paramount value of anonymity, and we'll be off fiat.

Wake me up when Monero is broadly known for something other than the de facto payment vehicle for ransomware.

[anonym29]

It's a stretch to call FIAT "money", let alone "hard money". The US dollar has lost >97% of it's value just since the inception of the Federal Reserve in 1913... and that's widely viewed as one of the strongest FIAT currencies in the world. The only stronger FIAT currency that immediately comes to mind for me is the Swiss Franc (CHF).

In places like Venezuela, doctors and lawyers spend their days playing Runescape and World of Warcraft, because thlse fictional, virtual currencies are more stable than their real state-backed FIAT currency, and because they can earn more real-world currency by exchanging ingame currency for it than they can as doctors and lawyers in their "equitable" economic system of socialism.

[tromp]

> The US dollar has lost >97% of it's value just since the inception of the Federal Reserve in 1913

That's over a 100 years ago. I can easily see bitcoin lose much of its value in about 4 decades when the block subsidy is negligible and it relies almost exclusively on transaction fees for security.

[anonym29]

>I can easily see bitcoin lose much of its value in about 4 decades when the block subsidy is negligible and it relies almost exclusively on transaction fees for security.

I actually agree with this, and that's one reason I, too, prefer Monero - the tail emissions + tx fees are more economically sustainable than tx fees alone.

[dragonwriter]

> The US dollar has lost >97% of it’s value just since the inception of the Federal Reserve in 1913…

Yeah, that’s the result of placing function as medium of exchange nd unit of account over function as a store of value, as a deliberate measure to both facilitate exchange and encourage investment outside of the money in productive assets.

Also why, while Bitcoin might arguably be a decent investment if you can take the volatility (note that I am not saying that it is, either), its crappy money compared to major world currencies.