In my opinion As long as fiat money still serves as a medium of exchange, it will always be needed by the people of today and therefore it will always have a function as an asset to all of us. although the best value-keeping asset is gold but even though gold is quite liquid, it is no longer money that serves as an intermediary.
It would be good to use gold as payment again or at least money that is backed by gold. Now we are paying with printed debt. It's best to keep your assets in gold and cryptocurrencies in my opinion. 
Topic: Fiat Currency Always Fails - page 7. (Read 2060 times)
also read about this assumption and mark the history, you need to study this fact in more detail, because perhaps this is another advantage of bitcoin
It is unfortunately true. That is why we are developing and looking for something better. Mankind is evolving and we understand now that we cannot rely on fiat money. Many years ago, we even did not think about that. Everything was fine. Evolution pushes us to think further. In the future, we will have virtual money. We will not need currencies that we have now. All our equipments will be digital, therefore, we will need digital money. Fiat money was just a point in our history.
We can see the failure of Fiat in Venezuela. Inflation has completely devalued the currency. Carrying too much cash just to buy a roll of toilet paper reflects the entire cash shortage during the period of inflation. And the Venezuelan government has issued the country's electronic money as a way to reduce inflation.
Though it may be true that fiat fails, fiat has been with humanity for as long as humanity has economy in their culture. That being said, fiat is a hard economic system to remove or even exchange with something as new and volatile as crypto currency. It would need time and alot of patience for this to happen.
I agree on that, fiat currency might fail someday because people will prefer to invest on on bitcoins but government will still do something in order to reduce the number of investors of cryptocurrency.
This is why we need the blockchain and cryptocurrency to keep track of all the money being produced. Over-issuing fiat currency will eventually bring the downfall of all countries if not kept in check. The world debt is actually fascinating as to how it will be paid with the amount that doesn't exist.
Though it may be true that fiat fails, fiat has been with humanity for as long as humanity has economy in their culture. That being said, fiat is a hard economic system to remove or even exchange with something as new and volatile as crypto currency. It would need time and alot of patience for this to happen.
I agree on that, fiat currency might fail someday because people will prefer to invest on on bitcoins but government will still do something in order to reduce the number of investors of cryptocurrency.
Though it may be true that fiat fails, fiat has been with humanity for as long as humanity has economy in their culture. That being said, fiat is a hard economic system to remove or even exchange with something as new and volatile as crypto currency. It would need time and alot of patience for this to happen.
I've been hearing variations of this statement for years now, so much so that my mind just tunes it out when I see the words. "Fiat always goes to zero" is part of the propaganda that precious metals dealers and others use to play upon people's fears so they can sell them gold & silver.
The US dollar might eventually die. It probably won't in any of our lifetimes, though. I think bitcoin has a better chance of becoming obsolete and dying than any of the world's stable fiat currencies. Be very careful what you listen to when you read this shit on the internet. Always take into account what people's motivations might be for telling you why you need to own gold & silver--they're probably trying to sell it to you.
Actually, electronic money or cash is no problem. Cash used for many years is no matter what it is too old to lose. However, if we have confidence in electronic money, we will reduce the cost of cash production. Electronic transactions are faster and safer. The US dollar might eventually die. It probably won't in any of our lifetimes, though. I think bitcoin has a better chance of becoming obsolete and dying than any of the world's stable fiat currencies. Be very careful what you listen to when you read this shit on the internet. Always take into account what people's motivations might be for telling you why you need to own gold & silver--they're probably trying to sell it to you.
See:
There Is No Escaping History. Fiat Currency Eventually Fails.
Notice that this is a critique of fiat money -- not a critique of state-issued money under a gold/silver or other standard. Fiat money is a rare occurrence in modern history. (We live in strange times!) As we can see, the examples found by the author are a small number of short periods here and there.
I have my own critique of gold/silver standards, but that's another issue.
Some of you guys in this forum are full-time dumbos. So you think that when dollar falls that means that it is over for the whole world and that Bitcoin and other crypto currencies will come and take over 😂? Sounds like something only a dumb person would say. How can you be thinking that? Whenever dollar falls, the value of Yen and Euro will appreciate. Bitcoin is not a real currency, it’s just like something else made to be on its own and when you’re using it you’re in complete control of your money and not the government being in control. There Is No Escaping History. Fiat Currency Eventually Fails.
Notice that this is a critique of fiat money -- not a critique of state-issued money under a gold/silver or other standard. Fiat money is a rare occurrence in modern history. (We live in strange times!) As we can see, the examples found by the author are a small number of short periods here and there.
I have my own critique of gold/silver standards, but that's another issue.
See:
There Is No Escaping History. Fiat Currency Eventually Fails.
Notice that this is a critique of fiat money -- not a critique of state-issued money under a gold/silver or other standard. Fiat money is a rare occurrence in modern history. (We live in strange times!) As we can see, the examples found by the author are a small number of short periods here and there.
I have my own critique of gold/silver standards, but that's another issue.
There Is No Escaping History. Fiat Currency Eventually Fails.
Notice that this is a critique of fiat money -- not a critique of state-issued money under a gold/silver or other standard. Fiat money is a rare occurrence in modern history. (We live in strange times!) As we can see, the examples found by the author are a small number of short periods here and there.
I have my own critique of gold/silver standards, but that's another issue.
Because fiat currencies are very uncertain. They (not all) depends on US dollar. And when the USD fails, all of them will be affected. Thanks for that interesting link. Cryptocurrencies is the next generation money of this era.
I agree, the fiat money is a short term popularity, it will be replaced by another kind of currency in a long term. However, in the near future, it will be prosperous and attract many investor.
I don't know for sure but to my mind this takes place due to the fact that it doesn't have a reliable strategy. I m sure that it is possible to trade only btc and ether , as for other currency i m not sure it is worth efforts
Fiat and the gold standard are financial practices that are hopelessly outdated. They are very hard to give up because they have been the basis of the world economy for many years, but the world is changing and the financial sector will have to change with it.
No fiat currency cannot fail at all.Fiat currency is used by whole of the world and it cannot be overtaken by any other form of currency.Fiat currency is functional since the traditional time period and every person on the Earth uses it.Fiat currency is accepted internationally and all the transactions are done through the fiat currency only.Fiat currency is centralised so it is backed by the central banks and governments too.People trust fiat currency only.
3rd parties are printing the money for most of the governments worldwide now, thats why people like you and me every year loose money due to so called "inflation"
Which is actually due to government ordered 100 billions and have to pay back 105 billions, there are no 5 billions on the market, so it will be taken from us.
Our current money - dollar, euro etc. are simply just paper, and nothing more! Only because people are being paid for their work with fiat, can buy things with fiat - it has value.
But nobody, really nobody can tell you how much dollars or euro are out there, because the banks even don't know.
So once again our current money will be replaced soon enough, with something better and what haves real value.
Fiat currencies will fail and fail hard at the end, unless 3rd parties will be printing more and more money, making countries go deeper and deeper in debt - that's what actually happening when they take another 100 billions.
I wouldn't be that sure about all people trust fiat only, as i know very wealthy persons who already transferred a large part from their money into bitcoin and ethereum for example few years ago, and i'm pretty sure they don't regret it.
I think, like most people, you totally misunderstand the gold standard. GS (as opposed to using physical gold/silver as money) was fundamentally no different from today's 'fiat' money, in the sense that the elites issue money and debt out of thin air and prop them up with state power. The only difference was that the elites owned enough gold to be able to use it to help prop up their issued paper money.
This paragraph contradicts itself. If the GS was fundamentally no different than today's fiat money, there would be no reason that the "elites" would need to own enough gold to back up the paper money since the paper money was created out of thin air and propped up with state power and had absolutely no tie to gold. It is because it was fundamentally different in function that the change was necessary. The GS backed paper money by allowing people to exchange it for gold the equivalent in gold. That is fundamentally different than the fiat money system we currently have.
The GS was fundamentally no different from today's 'fiat' money in the sense that the elites prop(ped) up their system with state power, while issuing paper money whose volume had really nothing to do with real economic needs but everything to do with the elites' needs to benefit themselves.
The difference that you mention is only in the precise mechanism with which they prop up their system. When they had enough gold, they could afford to allow anyone (at least in 'top' countries like the UK and US) to redeem paper money for gold at the fixed rate. This prevented any appreciation of gold in state money terms. But gold famously earned no interest, so, as long as their bubble lasted, the average saver was incentivized to put their money in interest-bearing debt based on paper money.
When they don't have enough gold, they have to resort to clandestine suppression of gold prices via derivatives (see serious books such as 'The Gold Wars' or 'The Gold Cartel' for evidence) to make it appear that gold is losing value all the time, except for brief periods when they have to allow gold to go up. This is why I always put 'fiat' in quotes. We never left the gold standard in any real sense (if you define GS, properly, as simply an elite-sponsored system for suppressing gold prices in state money terms.) We never left because the elites have never been able to.
The fiat currency has never failed Howard it just an evolution from the phase of the global economy know when you look at the phase of the fair it is just an evolution from the barter trade system and this is just a symbolism of the fact that democratic form of currency always prevails in this system
I think, like most people, you totally misunderstand the gold standard. GS (as opposed to using physical gold/silver as money) was fundamentally no different from today's 'fiat' money, in the sense that the elites issue money and debt out of thin air and prop them up with state power. The only difference was that the elites owned enough gold to be able to use it to help prop up their issued paper money.
This paragraph contradicts itself. If the GS was fundamentally no different than today's fiat money, there would be no reason that the "elites" would need to own enough gold to back up the paper money since the paper money was created out of thin air and propped up with state power and had absolutely no tie to gold. It is because it was fundamentally different in function that the change was necessary. The GS backed paper money by allowing people to exchange it for gold the equivalent in gold. That is fundamentally different than the fiat money system we currently have.
The GS was fundamentally no different from today's 'fiat' money in the sense that the elites prop(ped) up their system with state power, while issuing paper money whose volume had really nothing to do with real economic needs but everything to do with the elites' needs to benefit themselves.
The difference that you mention is only in the precise mechanism with which they prop up their system. When they had enough gold, they could afford to allow anyone (at least in 'top' countries like the UK and US) to redeem paper money for gold at the fixed rate. This prevented any appreciation of gold in state money terms. But gold famously earned no interest, so, as long as their bubble lasted, the average saver was incentivized to put their money in interest-bearing debt based on paper money.
When they don't have enough gold, they have to resort to clandestine suppression of gold prices via derivatives (see serious books such as 'The Gold Wars' or 'The Gold Cartel' for evidence) to make it appear that gold is losing value all the time, except for brief periods when they have to allow gold to go up. This is why I always put 'fiat' in quotes. We never left the gold standard in any real sense (if you define GS, properly, as simply an elite-sponsored system for suppressing gold prices in state money terms.) We never left because the elites have never been able to.
It is time the economists across the globe know that fiat currency cannot rescue the world from economic melt down. Cryptocurrency and blockchain is the solution. Cryptocurrency gives people opportunity to carryout Business transactions without constraints
You can't store value permanently. It's physically impossible. Things that have value decay and are consumed, and value is constantly destroyed through these two means. The failure of goldbugs is that they expect that all value ever created will last forever, which is why they push the gold standard so hard. It defies economy reality. The value of what you create in the present is going to be worth significantly less in 50 years, and the money that underlies that value should likewise be worth less. Value starts to decay the moment it is created. When money doesn't also, it creates deflation. The appreciation of value in money creates disincentives to spend, which lowers economy activity and puts downward pressure on the economy. Consumption is what creates value, and inflation stokes consumption. It may look manipulative, and perhaps it is, but it's far preferable to the the types of crises caused by the gold standard and our collective inability to shorten the duration and severity of those crises. If all value ever created was storable infinitely, the gold standard would make sense. Because value can't be stored indefinitely, gold ultimately does more harm than good.
I think, like most people, you totally misunderstand the gold standard. GS (as opposed to using physical gold/silver as money) was fundamentally no different from today's 'fiat' money, in the sense that the elites issue money and debt out of thin air and prop them up with state power. The only difference was that the elites owned enough gold to be able to use it to help prop up their issued paper money.
This paragraph contradicts itself. If the GS was fundamentally no different than today's fiat money, there would be no reason that the "elites" would need to own enough gold to back up the paper money since the paper money was created out of thin air and propped up with state power and had absolutely no tie to gold. It is because it was fundamentally different in function that the change was necessary. The GS backed paper money by allowing people to exchange it for gold the equivalent in gold. That is fundamentally different than the fiat money system we currently have.
Jump to: