IMO cash is still safer than Bitcoin, cash cannot be traced by any means, Bitcoin could be traced with the correct knowledge. Probably a coin like Monero over i2p or so will be used as the next digital cash by the bad boys. Is this good or bad? I don't fucking know? as im a good guy.
You can lose cash by simply dropping it, but yes I agree with you in the sense that once you receive the cash, you don't know where it came from, as nothing is left on the bill to prove that. With bitcoin, you can trace the money all the way back to the block that it was created in. The problem with this is that you can see the balance of anyone, which I think is why people will hide their balances from their friends for privacy. 
Topic: Is there room for a State Run Cryptocurrency? - page 6. (Read 5389 times)
So the question came up - If Scotland needs a new currency, why not set up a State-Run Cryptocurrency?
And so my question came up- ok, but what for? No, seriously, why? You want to save up on paper and ink or what?
Compare old fashioned paper-newspaper and issue sent to you to read on tablet. You get it?
Why not just adopt Bitcoin itself as a main currency? You could even set up a fractional banking system based on top Bitcoin. The first government to do this is going to have a huge economic advantage for the rest of this century.
You know, it's REALLY difficult to do FRB with Bitcoin, since you are REALLY relying on having more people funneling in Bitcoins. And guess what happens when some-one wants to withdraw? Either you start funneling Bitcoins out of other's accounts, and they're left with the IOUs. And what happens when they want to withdraw, etc. It's possible, but difficult.That's why wallets were made, so people can be their own bank. And not have to go through the bureaucracy that comes with banks. And they can't be left with IOUs, ever. Either a Bitcoin is there or it's not.
If you can do FRB w gold you can do it w bitcoins. The difference is if people have wallets then they dont need to keep their deposits in a bank.
But loans would still exist and credit money would still exist. Banks dont really need deposit accounts these days to create loans.
For example if you lease a car, the leasing bank creates credit without any deposit accounts
To do this (that is create credit without a deposit), banks need a governing body called a central bank which works behind them actually creating new money on behalf of a lending bank. Without a CB, banks could only issue their own "private" money. Now guess what happens if this money is Bitcoin (that is there is no central bank).
I just showed example where credit is created w out Central Bank. Most if not all car companies has financial services. If they didn't youd have to go to commercial bank which then is connected to the Central Bank. But surely BMWFS dont have deposit accounts.
You can't create credit in national currency (emitted by a central bank under whatever name) without the central bank. I don't understand how car companies are related to all of this.
Because 50% of money exist as credit in shadow banking. Too lazy to post a chart. But its on the Fed Reserve website. Someone said its difficult to do FRB w bitcoin bc reserves. I said it isn't. The point about car companies is to illustrate a bank that creates credit w/o deposit accounts or reserves. They create credit using assets (cars)
My view of money comes from Modern Monetary Theory so if a little hard to understand if you don't know the theory. You are correct that base money comes from Central Bank. BTW, I think Central Banks are necessary but also their policies are ineffective in crisis
My point is that bitcoiners mistake bitcoin as a solution when its not. Bitcoin is based on a 20th century understanding of banking not modern banking
Why not just adopt Bitcoin itself as a main currency? You could even set up a fractional banking system based on top Bitcoin. The first government to do this is going to have a huge economic advantage for the rest of this century.
You know, it's REALLY difficult to do FRB with Bitcoin, since you are REALLY relying on having more people funneling in Bitcoins. And guess what happens when some-one wants to withdraw? Either you start funneling Bitcoins out of other's accounts, and they're left with the IOUs. And what happens when they want to withdraw, etc. It's possible, but difficult.That's why wallets were made, so people can be their own bank. And not have to go through the bureaucracy that comes with banks. And they can't be left with IOUs, ever. Either a Bitcoin is there or it's not.
If you can do FRB w gold you can do it w bitcoins. The difference is if people have wallets then they dont need to keep their deposits in a bank.
But loans would still exist and credit money would still exist. Banks dont really need deposit accounts these days to create loans.
For example if you lease a car, the leasing bank creates credit without any deposit accounts
To do this (that is create credit without a deposit), banks need a governing body called a central bank which works behind them actually creating new money on behalf of a lending bank. Without a CB, banks could only issue their own "private" money. Now guess what happens if this money is Bitcoin (that is there is no central bank).
I just showed example where credit is created w out Central Bank. Most if not all car companies has financial services. If they didn't youd have to go to commercial bank which then is connected to the Central Bank. But surely BMWFS dont have deposit accounts.
You can't create credit in national currency (emitted by a central bank under whatever name) without the central bank. I don't understand how car companies are related to all of this.
Why not just adopt Bitcoin itself as a main currency? You could even set up a fractional banking system based on top Bitcoin. The first government to do this is going to have a huge economic advantage for the rest of this century.
You know, it's REALLY difficult to do FRB with Bitcoin, since you are REALLY relying on having more people funneling in Bitcoins. And guess what happens when some-one wants to withdraw? Either you start funneling Bitcoins out of other's accounts, and they're left with the IOUs. And what happens when they want to withdraw, etc. It's possible, but difficult.That's why wallets were made, so people can be their own bank. And not have to go through the bureaucracy that comes with banks. And they can't be left with IOUs, ever. Either a Bitcoin is there or it's not.
If you can do FRB w gold you can do it w bitcoins. The difference is if people have wallets then they dont need to keep their deposits in a bank.
But loans would still exist and credit money would still exist. Banks dont really need deposit accounts these days to create loans.
For example if you lease a car, the leasing bank creates credit without any deposit accounts
To do this (that is create credit without a deposit), banks need a governing body called a central bank which works behind them actually creating new money on behalf of a lending bank. Without a CB, banks could only issue their own "private" money. Now guess what happens if this money is Bitcoin (that is there is no central bank).
I just showed example where credit is created w out Central Bank. Most if not all car companies has financial services. If they didn't youd have to go to commercial bank which then is connected to the Central Bank. But surely BMWFS dont have deposit accounts.
IMO cash is still safer than Bitcoin, cash cannot be traced by any means, Bitcoin could be traced with the correct knowledge. Probably a coin like Monero over i2p or so will be used as the next digital cash by the bad boys. Is this good or bad? I don't fucking know? as im a good guy.
Why not just adopt Bitcoin itself as a main currency? You could even set up a fractional banking system based on top Bitcoin. The first government to do this is going to have a huge economic advantage for the rest of this century.
You know, it's REALLY difficult to do FRB with Bitcoin, since you are REALLY relying on having more people funneling in Bitcoins. And guess what happens when some-one wants to withdraw? Either you start funneling Bitcoins out of other's accounts, and they're left with the IOUs. And what happens when they want to withdraw, etc. It's possible, but difficult.That's why wallets were made, so people can be their own bank. And not have to go through the bureaucracy that comes with banks. And they can't be left with IOUs, ever. Either a Bitcoin is there or it's not.
If you can do FRB w gold you can do it w bitcoins. The difference is if people have wallets then they dont need to keep their deposits in a bank.
But loans would still exist and credit money would still exist. Banks dont really need deposit accounts these days to create loans.
For example if you lease a car, the leasing bank creates credit without any deposit accounts
To do this (that is create credit without a deposit), banks need a governing body called a central bank which works behind them actually creating new money on behalf of a lending bank. Without a CB, banks could only issue their own "private" money. Now guess what happens if this money is Bitcoin (that is there is no central bank).
Canada was setting up a state run crypto currency called MintChip - I think it went on hold due to pressure from the US Govt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintChip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MintChip
If it were state run, it would be centralized, therefore it would be fiat, therefore it would be no different than cash. We could have per country cryptos that are decentralized, and bitcoin could be the international, but that wouldn't work for many reasons.
Thats correct. The big difference is they might reduce manufacturing costs of minting/ printing. And the clearing might be cheaper.
If we are talking about Eucador then they would want to have monetary controls on their currency to control inflation/ recession. Using BTC for them is like using USD, except its unstable and they can't import w it.
Id imagine Ecuador is similar to most 3rd world countries in that there is more mobiles penetration than landlines. They'll probably implement something like M Pesa
Also I dont they will phase out physical currency completely. What they're trying to do is wean off the USD as legal tender
Govt-issued cryptocurrency is just another form of fiat money!
If it were state run, it would be centralized, therefore it would be fiat, therefore it would be no different than cash. We could have per country cryptos that are decentralized, and bitcoin could be the international, but that wouldn't work for many reasons.
Thats correct. The big difference is they might reduce manufacturing costs of minting/ printing. And the clearing might be cheaper.
If we are talking about Eucador then they would want to have monetary controls on their currency to control inflation/ recession. Using BTC for them is like using USD, except its unstable and they can't import w it.
If it were state run, it would be centralized, therefore it would be fiat, therefore it would be no different than cash. We could have per country cryptos that are decentralized, and bitcoin could be the international, but that wouldn't work for many reasons.
Thats correct. The big difference is they might reduce manufacturing costs of minting/ printing. And the clearing might be cheaper.
If we are talking about Eucador then they would want to have monetary controls on their currency to control inflation/ recession. Using BTC for them is like using USD, except its unstable and they can't import w it.
If it were state run, it would be centralized, therefore it would be fiat, therefore it would be no different than cash. We could have per country cryptos that are decentralized, and bitcoin could be the international, but that wouldn't work for many reasons.
Hi,
I've been asking for opinions about a proposal that's come up here in Scotland. We're going to the polls in the next month to decide whether we want to split from England and become an independent country - basically the end of the United Kingdom that's lasted 400 years.
There's been plenty of discussion not only on whether we should, but whether we could (practically.) One of the major stumbling blocks is the use of GBP - the Bank of England has said a post-independent Scotland can't use it. Bit mean, but there you are.
So the question came up - If Scotland needs a new currency, why not set up a State-Run Cryptocurrency?
Here's my thoughts on the issue.
http://cryptocurrencymadesimple.com/should-scotland-set-up-a-state-run-cryptocurrency/
Also, it appears that Ecuador got there first:
http://cryptocurrencymadesimple.com/ecuador-nationalise-cryptocurrency/
Would love to here what you guys think.
I've been asking for opinions about a proposal that's come up here in Scotland. We're going to the polls in the next month to decide whether we want to split from England and become an independent country - basically the end of the United Kingdom that's lasted 400 years.
There's been plenty of discussion not only on whether we should, but whether we could (practically.) One of the major stumbling blocks is the use of GBP - the Bank of England has said a post-independent Scotland can't use it. Bit mean, but there you are.
So the question came up - If Scotland needs a new currency, why not set up a State-Run Cryptocurrency?
Here's my thoughts on the issue.
http://cryptocurrencymadesimple.com/should-scotland-set-up-a-state-run-cryptocurrency/
Also, it appears that Ecuador got there first:
http://cryptocurrencymadesimple.com/ecuador-nationalise-cryptocurrency/
Would love to here what you guys think.
The Ecuador cryptocurrency will exist in parallel to the existing currency.
It would be interesting to see if any country will ever get to having only a cryptocurrency.
Its interesting that USD has been legal tender in Eucador since 2000. They dollarized their economy because inflation was 96.1% in 2000! Dropped to 22.4% in 2001. That is unbelievable
This move is because they are straitjacketed by the USD. I hope it works out for them
Hi,
I've been asking for opinions about a proposal that's come up here in Scotland. We're going to the polls in the next month to decide whether we want to split from England and become an independent country - basically the end of the United Kingdom that's lasted 400 years.
There's been plenty of discussion not only on whether we should, but whether we could (practically.) One of the major stumbling blocks is the use of GBP - the Bank of England has said a post-independent Scotland can't use it. Bit mean, but there you are.
So the question came up - If Scotland needs a new currency, why not set up a State-Run Cryptocurrency?
Here's my thoughts on the issue.
http://cryptocurrencymadesimple.com/should-scotland-set-up-a-state-run-cryptocurrency/
Also, it appears that Ecuador got there first:
http://cryptocurrencymadesimple.com/ecuador-nationalise-cryptocurrency/
Would love to here what you guys think.
I've been asking for opinions about a proposal that's come up here in Scotland. We're going to the polls in the next month to decide whether we want to split from England and become an independent country - basically the end of the United Kingdom that's lasted 400 years.
There's been plenty of discussion not only on whether we should, but whether we could (practically.) One of the major stumbling blocks is the use of GBP - the Bank of England has said a post-independent Scotland can't use it. Bit mean, but there you are.
So the question came up - If Scotland needs a new currency, why not set up a State-Run Cryptocurrency?
Here's my thoughts on the issue.
http://cryptocurrencymadesimple.com/should-scotland-set-up-a-state-run-cryptocurrency/
Also, it appears that Ecuador got there first:
http://cryptocurrencymadesimple.com/ecuador-nationalise-cryptocurrency/
Would love to here what you guys think.
The Ecuador cryptocurrency will exist in parallel to the existing currency.
It would be interesting to see if any country will ever get to having only a cryptocurrency.
Why not just adopt Bitcoin itself as a main currency? You could even set up a fractional banking system based on top Bitcoin. The first government to do this is going to have a huge economic advantage for the rest of this century.
You know, it's REALLY difficult to do FRB with Bitcoin, since you are REALLY relying on having more people funneling in Bitcoins. And guess what happens when some-one wants to withdraw? Either you start funneling Bitcoins out of other's accounts, and they're left with the IOUs. And what happens when they want to withdraw, etc. It's possible, but difficult.That's why wallets were made, so people can be their own bank. And not have to go through the bureaucracy that comes with banks. And they can't be left with IOUs, ever. Either a Bitcoin is there or it's not.
If you can do FRB w gold you can do it w bitcoins. The difference is if people have wallets then they dont need to keep their deposits in a bank.
But loans would still exist and credit money would still exist. Banks dont really need deposit accounts these days to create loans.
For example if you lease a car, the leasing bank creates credit without any deposit accounts
Why not just adopt Bitcoin itself as a main currency? You could even set up a fractional banking system based on top Bitcoin. The first government to do this is going to have a huge economic advantage for the rest of this century.
You know, it's REALLY difficult to do FRB with Bitcoin, since you are REALLY relying on having more people funneling in Bitcoins. And guess what happens when some-one wants to withdraw? Either you start funneling Bitcoins out of other's accounts, and they're left with the IOUs. And what happens when they want to withdraw, etc. It's possible, but difficult.That's why wallets were made, so people can be their own bank. And not have to go through the bureaucracy that comes with banks. And they can't be left with IOUs, ever. Either a Bitcoin is there or it's not.
Why not just adopt Bitcoin itself as a main currency? You could even set up a fractional banking system based on top Bitcoin. The first government to do this is going to have a huge economic advantage for the rest of this century.
The problem is they can't control the money supply. In crisis, things like Greece would happen
But ism't the point of cryptocurrency that there's no central authority? All the freedome it can offer stems from that.
No the point is no Central Bank.
Here's the perfect example;
Paypal, from the American government.
Modern banking, just run by a system of banks, regulated by the government.
Do we need cryptos that are state-run?
That takes away from the decentralization aspect.
Paypal, from the American government.
Modern banking, just run by a system of banks, regulated by the government.
Do we need cryptos that are state-run?
That takes away from the decentralization aspect.
Jump to: