Topic: How Would "Government Coins" Be Different From The Financial System Today? (Read 1821 times)

Did I mention that Credit Unions pay interest? And so does MCXNOW.  I should have just bought MCXFees and left them there.  When I first bought one it was 0.196 BTC now they're like 0.28 per... sh*t!  Ya'll are going to buy them as soon as you can and drive the price up past what I can afford aren't you?

For one thing a government sponsored cryptocurrency would be scalable.

No government would ever issue a currency able to sustain only seven transactions per second.

Fun fact for you, a few people I know thought the interest payments on savings accounts were payments TO THE BANK

No kidding!  JPMorgan is still the biggest most powerful bank and why?  Why do people do business with them?  Are these customers all doing international business transactions?  No.  Then why?  All I can figure is that people love excessive fees, penalties, poor customer service, and just generally being treated like worthless garbage.

That people love to be defecated on by the wealthy and powerful is the only plausible theory I can come up with.  So far I haven't been able to convince even family members to start using credit unions instead of major banks.  It's stupid. 

There is a Credit Union here called America First which is HUGE.  They have branches all over the region.  It seems like there's one on every street corner.  They even have one in the busiest Walmart in the state.  Why the heck would you not do business with them?  There customer service is gold, they have minimal fees, you get a voting stake in the orginization by depositing a small sum of money, they have a 20% reserve instead of the banks 10%, they are insured in much the same way, and they treat their members like gold.

Most of the people I know that bank with major banks have college degrees and they hardly travel let alone do any interstate or international transfers.  It's so stupid and pathetic but they wont listen.  Why do people hate themselves so much?

Maybe the biggest weakness of bitcoin is human self-hatred properly exploited! 

The advantage of a government crypto over fiat would mainly be allowing merchants to accept payments with zero transaction fees as opposed to credit cards. 

That and lowering the costs involved with printing, guarding, and moving money.

The government would not relinquish their ability to print money, etc.

___________________________________
Get 420 with bitcoins at zeltasgarden.com

That's exactly the point!

The likes of you and I and most on this forum would prefer Bitcoin. However, the great unwashed would prefer bankster/gov backed fraudcoins. There is just no stopping people being stupid.

Well on a basic level it would make the 'hardness' of BTC and the 'softness' of the USD the only principle difference between the two and we would get to see these two economic paradigms battle it out on a more level playing field. 

Some people focus on the 'instant', 'digital', 'cryptographic' nature of BTC, if that is your primary focus then you would not expect BTC to be competitive once government co-ops thouse features.  If you focus on 'limited supply', 'deflation', 'lack of central banking' then BTC would retain it's core advantages compared to a governmental crypto currency managed according to current practices.

Dream big. First, assume that crypto isn't suppressed by force - monopoly of force is broken, at least temporarily. Then what happens if crypto wins? Fiat starts failing, but then...

...people will still demand "centralized government services" of some sort. How do you account for those?

Solution A: Private markets entirely trading in decentralized crypto.
Solution B: Government operates in crypto balances.

Sol. A eventually resembles Sol. B when a single party gets big enough. Either way, once you have a big actor, the incentive to take control of currency again rises anew - write out debt, impose market controls, etc. Thus we get a govcoin as Solution C: Centralized, uses strong identity, cuts the majority of today's bureaucracy. It can be 99%+ digital with paper as an "emergencies only" backup. This means...

...the economy can be tuned in ways unavailable to both fiat and decentralized systems. "Money supply" is a crude tool for managing transaction flow - it's abolished in favor of a pastiche of sinks, generators, taxations, records, rules and rewards as seen in online digital games. It can play sort of like capitalism, but with increasingly little drudgery exposed to humans, and made more efficient and motivating besides. I would note that there are already exchanges between game assets and crypto - the games are good enough to make people sit there clicking for hours, they need only be repurposed and scaled up to animate the larger economy. The only limit to their specific design is your imagination.

But how do people end up preferring the new govcoin over crypto if they start in crypto? Through the same mechanisms as the "free" model of today's popular online services. The coin and the associated rights and services are issued to you in exchange for your identity. Proven, well-understood marketing mechanism; may be done without your consent, via the existing institutions that track you. And as long as the government works for you, you play within its rules, no matter how arbitrary. When it starts failing, you go back to crypto, just like how older economies cycled between gold and fiat.

Recall that we are assuming monopoly on force is broken. But force is likely to be increasingly accessible to individuals in the future; if they don't already have a weapon, they will have tools that can make one. So the monopoly that will matter is monopoly of information - finding out who is dangerous. Governments will assume the worst of someone who isn't within their systems and subject to monitoring, so they will, sooner or later, start pressuring people to enroll. This doesn't, however, stop people from being a non-participant in the economic game the government is providing. The old tensions will continue to exist, but the mechanism to signal loss of faith will be through speculation on crypto assets. Governments will start moving at the speed of technology, because they will have to - if they want to be competitive.

So as I see it, govcoin is in all facets anticipated by existing systems and technologies; crypto is the mechanism that motivates its reification as a concept worthy of discussion. The two are already in competition with each other, but crypto is surging ahead right now, as we still discuss both in the dying language of industrial capitalism.

+1

That's how far we have come.

Although the overwhelming majority of people still trust their governments - but I expect that to change rather soon. Watch out for what will happen to the price of BTC then...

Your cross discipline knowledge puts you in a very tiny minority. Add an understanding of economics and finance to your bag of tricks and you would be a member of a group that you could count on one hand. There are millions of people watching government and nothing changes in the corrupt systems of the world. That was my point. It's sad that people would rather trust a select few unregulated private citizens than their own government.

Actually, the answers to those questions are: yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and no.

But even for those that are not deeply into mathematics, programming, or cryptography, it's still very trustworthy that rather than just having trust to a single person, company or authority, instead you can now rely on literally thousands of independent programmers, hackers, mathematicians, cryptography experts, and other dedicated and very knowledgeable people from all over the world who are closely examining Bitcoin from every angle.

Question Authority

Really? Do you program? Are you well versed in public-key cryptography? Do you fully understand the Hashcash proof-of-work system? Are you capable of reading the current code in this download and understanding exactly what it's doing https://codeload.github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/zip/master or do you trust that someone like a more knowledgeable stranger is keeping you safe?

NO, NO, NO!

Bitcoin users are not trusting "complete strangers" with their money. They're trusting cryptography and mathematical laws with their money.

Very true.

Unfortunately politicians and government bureaucrats tend to be some of the least-in-touch-with-reality people out there.

It's a sad statement toward governments that people would rather trust a bunch of complete strangers worldwide with their money before trusting their government. I hope government bureaucrats realize that support for Bitcoin type concepts mean that their people hate and distrust them.

government coins would say: hey guys, i know the limit to the number of coins to be mined is xxxx, but we really need to create more of them because.. well, just because we said so. and once we create them, they will go into the hands of our friends.

GovCoin = just the same as Euro or Dollar, except they have to put little more effort into creating them out of thin air. Not too much though, as they'll be the only ones allowed to mining them.

So, no thanks, I'll skip the centralized crap and stick with Bitcoin