Pages:
Author

Topic: The world that all money have become crypto currencies issued by government - page 4. (Read 1806 times)

legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 4002
When a third party intervenes, what is the need for cryptocurrencies? I mean we do not need a lot of things like waiting for confirmations, mining, and other things.
P2P is the basis of cryptos, and without it, transactions are Digital money "based on blockchain" which is much slower than the current payment systems.
If you are trying to get the advantages of a misuse system, creating a government cryptocurrency is the best example.
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1179
A governmental issued cryptocurrency would just be e-fiat.
That's what I think as well. Governments only have to tokenize fiat, which will grant them more control over their financial system than ever before. It's a plus in terms of convenience, but fiat will become even more centralized.

Technically speaking I am dealing with digital fiat already with how I barely touch the actual asset in physical form. I use my debit cards or my banking app to settle transactions on a daily basis.

People in Asian countries in the same way aren't dealing much with actual fiat anymore, it's mobile payment apps that dominate the market, and these will continue to take over with how convenient and fast it is.

People themselves won't notice much of a difference between transacting with digital fiat or tokenized fiat, their apps will make sure of that. The only thing they need to do is unlock their wallet so they can send and receive money.
legendary
Activity: 3486
Merit: 1055
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
I am not sure if the national bank will release its own crypto, because so far there are many national banks that continue to contradict cryptocurrency, although it does not rule out the possibility that many countries that support crypto like Japan will implement it.
By the way, do you want to live in such a world? I do not want to live in such a world that I can be monitored by the goverment, no matter how convenient it is.
I personally don't mind living like that monitored by the government, because I feel enough concern if I have to deal with the bank, because the funds I get are almost completely and more than crypto. So if the government and bank will release their own crypto, then that is a very good step I think because I as a crypto user no longer need to worry about something, because so far national banks in my country are still opposed to cryptocurrency.
copper member
Activity: 2940
Merit: 4101
Top Crypto Casino
Increasing the risk of hacking? This is the main reason to see the banks spending million dollars in R&D.
Cybersecurity in which to be proactive is a must, a blockchain is supposed to be more secure than a database, more efficient, time-saving, and so on.

They don't really care about the cost to update infrastructures, it's part of the original investment plan (they think for the long run)and they have the business plan that comes with, money isn't lost anywhere).

Sure the small or medium-large companies may be not able to support the cost, but most don't really have any use of the blockchain technology. The ones that need are the large companies like supply chain, food industry, or financial institutions since they can get the most of the blockchain potential and they have a bigger interest to invest in the blockchain tech.
legendary
Activity: 1624
Merit: 2481
Crypto for governments is jus e-fiat, not real crypto.

This all depends on the definition of crypto..

For me, a cryptocurrency has to rely on public key cryptography. The exact variables (PoW/PoS/.., inflationary/deflationary, max supply, etc..) don't matter.

A governmental issued cryptocurrency would just be e-fiat. But if (for example) it is a fork of bitcoin with adjusted parameters and additional stuff, it still would be a cryptocurrency.
Ripple's foundation can inject 2 times the whole current circulating supply into the eco system. This is 0 decentralized and one entity has full control, but it still is a cryptocurrency (even if it's not a really good one). At least in my eyes.
brand new
Activity: 0
Merit: 0
Lots of points to be agreed or not agreed about. More discussions are needed in this regard. But there are some things that make me interested.
brand new
Activity: 0
Merit: 0
It is likely that countries will adapt or simply make their own crypto. If that happens, I'm quite sure that those crypto price will remain fixed. Its completely opposite of the crypto ideology. So, It's not a question of goverment surveillance , because we already are under it, rather a question of will it worth it?
brand new
Activity: 0
Merit: 0
Very interesting topic and many points to discuss here. And to answer the question, yes I do live in this kind world. There are merits and demerits in everything but decentralization feature is very intriguing.
newbie
Activity: 37
Merit: 0
Government issuing their own version of cryptocurrency might bring some form of stability to the internal market of the coin. On the negatives, it might not follow the true nature of the cryptocurrency and could be a variation of e-currency.
legendary
Activity: 2366
Merit: 1624
Do not die for Putin
Coins created by the government would not set a fixed supply, and even if they´d say the supply is limited, I would not believe them. Crypto for governments is jus e-fiat, not real crypto.
jr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 1
The fact is that most countries are trying to make their stablecoin, mostly supported by fiat money.
full member
Activity: 448
Merit: 121
self made Full member (^-^)v
It is said that central banks plan to release their own curypto currency in some countries,for example Japan.
I know it is quite extreme, but I consider the world that coin and bill currently circulated are abolished, and only the curypto currency issued by the central bank circulates.
I think there are some merits and demerits of this system.


Merit for goverment
· Promotion of utilization of blockchain and smart contracts in various infrastructures
· Reduce the cost of issuing coins and bills
· It is possible to prevent money laundering and crime because of catching a money transaction
· It is possible to confirm the history of deposits and withdrawals of funds and possible to reliably catch taxable objects
· Bribery can be eradicated

deMerit for goverment
· Increases a risk of hacking
· It takes cost to update various infrastructure such as payment systems
· Defining the total supply amount makes it impossible to measure to prevent deflation, and If it does not, it will become inflation
· When equipment is destroyed due to a disaster, it will not function as an exchanging means
· Bribery is eradicated

Merit for user
· There is no need to carry cash
· Reduce the cost required for payment settlement
· Easier transfer of assets in inheritance
· Since transactions are recorded on the blockchain, accounting and tax returns are simplified


I think there are other merits and demerits, so I'm happy if you suggest other ideas.

By the way, do you want to live in such a world? I do not want to live in such a world that I can be monitored by the goverment, no matter how convenient it is.
Pages:
Jump to: