Topic: Bitcoin: Revolution Or Trap? - page 2. (Read 1422 times)

This is a fallacy.  Money does not make the world go round, we do.  Why couldn't we live in the exact same manner as we do today without money?  Sure, we would have to abandon business models and systems that are obsolete, but this would only leave a larger workforce to contribute directly to man kind.

We would be multitudes more efficient if we did not think what can we do to make the most money but what can we do to help the most people.  Bartering isn't even necessary, everyone can contribute through volunteerism, we would be trading energy rather than material goods.  This is the only true path to complete freedom and world peace.

+1, current society for sure. Maybe in 100 or 200 years there will be some alternative but atm we can only dream.

Be practical. Without money, the society cannot function. Barter is not fail-proof.

Sorry, couldn't resist

The real revolution will come from disbanding all forms of money together.  Money facilitates greed and our actions should be measured not by the wealth they accumulate but by the impact they leave on humanity.

Bitcoin: Revolution Or Trap?

In the Internet’s early days there was general agreement that one of the first killer apps would be some form of cyber currency. Since money was already largely non-corporeal, existing as entries in bank accounts and ready to spend with plastic cards, the next logical step would be to move the whole thing online and dispense with paper and coins and their costly and burdensome infrastructure of banks, regulators and printing presses. The emergence of such currencies would, in this optimistic scenario, consign relics like the dollar and the Fed to history’s circular file and usher in an era of trust, stability, and growth similar to what occurred under the classical gold standard.

But the digital liberation of money turned out to be easier said than done, as the first wave of cyber-currencies came and went without much of an impact. eCash, for instance, was an encrypted, anonymous payment system that allowed anyone anywhere to send and receive instant payments. But it relied on the existing banking infrastructure, and because “anonymous” meant “money laundering” to the police, it faced extreme pushback from authorities who viewed such currencies as primarily empowering drug dealers – and from banks that saw no point in encouraging the competition. Only one small bank ever accepted eCash, and the currency died a quiet death a few years after its introduction.

http://www.investing.com/analysis/[url]bitcoin:-revolution-or-trap-201100[/url]