Topic: Bitcoin and Keynes Plan (Read 338 times)

Bitcoin seamlessly embeds a virtual free financial environment into the world. The Austrian scholars who support Bitcoin believe that it is the fault of Keynesianism, so why do ZF insist on using Keynesianism, which is problematic?

Keynesianism: the economy cannot work without government control

The big central banks would probably create a global "central bank coin" rather than adopting Bitcoin as a global currency.
Comparisons between Bitcoin and bancor were made multiple times in the past,but I don't think that the idea of bancor is similar to the concept of Bitcoin.
Bancor was supposed to be a centralized currency controlled by a global central bank.
Bitcoin isn't supposed to be under the control of any central bank or entity.
The US dollar replaced the idea of bancor for several decades,but the Bretton Woods system colapsed in 1971.

Whether it is the Bretton Woods system or the Keynesian plan, there is only one goal to establish a world currency, but the problem lies in:

1.Currency means wealth and reflects the equivalent exchange of value. Therefore, currency must reflect credit.

2.In modern society, only a sovereign country can issue currency. Theoretically speaking, the country's currency is linked to the value produced by the country. However, the problem is that sovereign countries will print money arbitrarily for various reasons, leading to serious economic crises.

3.As the world currency, the US dollar, the Federal Reserve (Federal Reserve) uses financial policies to regulate the issuance of US dollars. When the economy is facing or in a situation of stagflation, many governments will adopt a policy of issuing additional currency to stimulate the economy. As a result, "money is worthless" (that is, the currency held is depreciated in disguise) has become a common phenomenon of globalization.

Therefore, the world currency is not controlled by any centralized sovereign currency or has dual identities like the US dollar.

Bitcoin's credit is based on the concept of complete self-distribution. The generation, exchange, and transactions of Bitcoin are all carried out on an open distributed ledger, which is open to all system participants.

This ledger adopts a distributed backup method, so even if one or even a certain part of the participant’s computer is damaged and stops functioning, it will not affect the integrity and security of the entire ledger.

The Keynes plan and the digital currency (Bitcoin) are both attempts to find a world currency that everyone is actively seeking. All the key points are the establishment of a new world credit system and the default balance value of each sovereign country and economy. Bitcoin takes time and will solve this problem perfectly.

With or without merit, I still thank you. For me, merit is not the most important thing. I wrote these articles to think deeply about Bitcoin from different aspects, exchange ideas, and improve my own knowledge system at the same time.

 I don't think Bitcoin is suitable as bancor . Because this initial quantity cannot be determined.
Unable to control and distribute, and thus unable to price.

First of all, congratz for such a post. I would have merited you but I am out of merits atm and I've seen you have gotten quite a few merits already as mv1986 has reported this post to merit sources.


I agree.


Not really. I mean, there is cheating in our world, but it is as old as humanity. And as for the printing of coinage... the Romans already started by debasing gold and silver coins, and I doubt they were the first. It is true that with today's electronic money there is massive printing but again, the appetite of politicians for spending and wanting to finance it by printing (or debasing metal) is as old as mankind.


I agree.

Fortunately, the Bancor you mentioned was designed for that specific purpose but Bitcoin was designed differently and it's meant to be decentralized and used by anyone.
I guess the government can try the Bancor experiment on new crypto/token or something, and make it voluntary. Bitcoin should remain decentralized, permissionless, trustless etc

Good friend, I have just replied to you PM. Thank you very much for your recognition of these articles. I will continue to pay attention to your academic views. Let us grow together in exchanges with each other. Bitcoin has now created unlimited imagination for us, and it is reshaping our society, allowing us to let our thinking go to enjoy the future.

Yes, our current world is still full of cheat, and we live in a terrible monetary system. Our wealth is constantly being diluted. However, Bitcoin has given us hope. Before the birth of Bitcoin, we would not think about whether the existing monetary system was reasonable, we could only passively be exploited. However, when Bitcoin was born, it gave us a whole new choice. We can truly control our wealth through Bitcoin. Bitcoin has just been born for 12 years. Give it more time to grow. I believe that the future will eventually change.

The whole thing is happening because people are lying faggots. (no offense to my dick loving friends) If people were honest, the gold standard would stand till to this day.

It is not just that, even if you be a honest person (or country), your competitors will cheat. Then you are forced to cheat too otherwise you will lose. (nobody wants to be the loser)

Bitcoin is happening right now. Did it solve anything? It did some but did the corruption go away? No.

Now we have a pseudo dollar tether that is 3% backed by real dollars and real dollars are getting printed out of thin air.

I think the future will be more retarded than today.

When you check out the paper about system's theory you will get my idea about Bitcoin rather being a global frame/framework rather than the center of events. Bitcoin may not be the most used currency in the world, but it might become the most influential currency in the world. There are interesting parallels to be explored concerning Bentham's theory regarding the Panopticon. I have started to write something down, but haven't really done much more than extensive research so far.

The super-sovereignty as you call it has a guard function for the global economy consisting of a network of national fiat currencies. From system's theory perspective, Bitcoin could create competition not only between Bitcoin on the one side and fiat currencies on the other, but also among fiat currencies themselves. Governments need to practice sound monetary policy in order to compete with other national currencies. As an end result I see improved economic equilibria as a potential outcome.

Hello, thank you very much for your recognition of my articles. I will carefully read the PM you gave me later, and then reply to you. Super sovereign currency is also a word I like very much. My next article is about whether Bitcoin can become a super-sovereign currency. I firmly believe that Bitcoin will become a super-sovereign currency, and with Bitcoin as the center, a new human civilization will be reconstructed. This has always been the direction I have explored over the years, and it is also the direction of my next practice.

Exactly, I like the term super or maybe even supra-sovereign currency. I sent you a PM. Check out the paper about system's theory. I have read a couple of other papers that might be more precise rhetorically, but just to show you a simple graphic that describes my thoughts.

Bitcoin's transformative power also lies in its ability to induce global isomorphism. If you think about Bitcoin as a bubble being next to the fiat system bubble, Bitcoin will create a pull effect that absorbs the fiat system bubble into its own bubble, with Bitcoin itself turning into a higher order structure according to system's theory as outlined in the paper I shared with you.

There is nothing new in our world. Much of the time, history has already told us the answer when we are confused. The same is true for Bitcoin. To anticipate the future of Bitcoin, we must know the history of human currency clearly, especially the changes of the world currency. Previously, I have talked about the establishment and demise of the Bretton Woods system and the story of the international gold standard system. Today we will proceed with the discussion over Bitcoin from a historical perspective. Focus is on Bretton Woods Conference in 1944.

In 1944, the Bretton Woods system with USD as its core was set. USD is linked to gold, and the currencies of other countries are linked to USD, indirectly linked to gold, and a fixed exchange rate regulation was the solution to supporting the world's monetary system. Factually at the Bretton Woods meeting at that time, USD was not the only way out. Another plan was there but failed. The plan was about the Union for International Settlements proposed by Keynes, an eminent economist, called Keynes Plan, which chooses bancor as the accounting unit.

John Maynard Keynes, one of the most distinguished economists in the United Kingdom, the most influential economists in modern economics, is known for creating the Keynesian Revolution and is called the father of macroeconomics. Bretton Woods Conference is the last stage of him. He devoted himself to the construction of an international monetary fund and world bank. After the meeting, he was overburdened with numerous talks. About one year later, in April 1946, he died for overwork.

At Bretton Woods Conference, Keynes put forward the Union for International Settlements program with bancor as the accounting unit to cope with financial, economic and currency problems of the globe. That program was called Keynes Plan. Another is White Plan raised by the official of the US Treasury Department. The decentralized exchange protocol "Bancor" was named by that. But the Bancor of DeFi has become the modern token exchange protocol instead of the world currency plan.
wiki:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics

Keynes Plan is approximately composed of three parts:

1.Build an international settlement union as the World Central Bank, a currency called bancor will be issued by it. Governments set up accounts with bancor as the unit. That account would be used in the settlement with other countries in World Central Bank. The number of bancor in each country is determined by a certain percentage of the country’s average import and export volume in the three years before WWII.

2.Connect bancor and gold. As a nominally super-sovereign international currency, bancor is actually not a currency really applied in circulation because it's just a unit in the international settlement union, but the value of bancor can be converted into some value of gold. At the same time, gold can be exchanged for bancor, it is a one-way deal.

3. Establish a restraint and adjustment mechanism between deficit countries and surplus countries. The former is of debt, which means their bancor account is in debt; otherwise, their bancor account is in surplus.

The UK and the US had an intense discussion over the two plans. However, due to World War II, the latter was the largest creditor nation and the biggest beneficiary then while Britain’s economic and military power declined. An agreement was reached in April 1944, which basically reflected White Plan, so Keynes Plan was eventually abandoned.

Does Keynes Plan have anything to do with Bitcoin?

Personally, bancor is the super-sovereign currency that economists came up with eighty years ago. Discarded as it was, bancor provided a feasible solution to world currency system. Keynes Plan is more economically reasonable in theory and has very profound guiding significance for global financial and monetary fabric. I believe, the most basic positioning of Bitcoin in the future is super-sovereign currency as well, playing a role similar to bancor in Keynes Plan and truly functioning as a world currency.

Anyway, my point is, Bitcoin can surely become a super-sovereign currency that affects the entire world economic structure in the future. That is based on certain economic theory and that is decided by the characteristics of Bitcoin itself and the trend that human society will become fairer.

What do you think?