Topic: Why Do People Believe Bitcoin Will Replace Fiat? - page 13. (Read 16458 times)

We are already paying digitally for 95%, well I am. The only thing is the banks that get paid for this 'service'.
Bitcoin makes this service absolete.

Interesting logic, but I'm going to have to disagree with it.

Do you also believe that some people may live forever because some people are still alive now?

I think it's safe to say that, like humans, all fiat currencies eventually die.

The Irony is strong when I compare the above with your username.

I don't believe Bitcoin will be what replaces paper money and electronic government debt. I'm not even convinced that Bitcoin will be the survivor in the crypto coin wars. Most initial iterations of software are not the final useful form that becomes popular.

Something will eventually replace fiat maybe even in our lifetimes. I always figured it would be some form of ID at birth that can follow you around all your life. Maybe DNA account assignment or fingerprint/retina scanning. People can be assigned government credits by employers and deduct against them for things they want to buy. This would have the side benefit of eliminating many types of crime that revolve around untraceable currency.

Both? Note many of us don't support fiat nor democracies.


They were better. It is safer and easier to carry a paper note than gold coins or gold dust. The problem wasn't with gold backed notes themselves, but the lack of trust in people who were issuing them. Plus democracies that realized it's worthwhile for them to inflate money to give it away as social programs, in order for the voters to keep voting for them.



Has the horse and buggy failed? What about the fax machine? Or the musket? Good technologies and ideas survive, and get replaced, but still work. Gold still works. Fail implies "breaks and stops working." If you wait long enough, everything will get replaced by something better, but not everything "fails."

For example, should we assume that communism based economies don't fail, because North Korea, Cuba, and China still exist? Or should we take lessons from history that show every communist country has failed spectacularly, and those that still exist are completely broken, or, as China, have had to change themselves into more of a capitalist system? Also, we actually know the exact mechanisms that cause fiat to fail.

In my opinion Bitcoin will not replace all FIAT currencies, If crypto currency will replace FIAT one day It will not be Bitcoin. For the next 20 + years I don't see anything happening for FIAT.

That applies equally well to currencies or democracies

Many nations used to have commodity based currencies. Few (None?) do now.
So either they failed, or you think the fiat currencies that replaced them were better?


If you wait long enough, everything has a 100% failure rate, that is the point.
Eventually every star in the universe will run out of fuel.
Does that mean that stars have a 100% failure rate?

Most anarchists claim that Fiat will continue to coexist along side crypto-currencies at least as long as nation states exist(thousands of years - forever).

The argument is Bitcoin can possibly end wars, not end all wars.(Reduce certain types of wars dependent upon funding through debt). Any student of history recognizes nation states collapse on their own quite easily with or without Bitcoin. Bitcoin could accelerate certain nation states imploding as it allows ease of capital flight vs other commodities like gold.



Bitcoin is neutral , but at a protocol level has many characteristics which are anarchistic and facilitate anarchism. Bitcoin can be used by individuals and governments of any political ideology. Unfortunately, Bitcoin has properties which also undermine the ways in which certain governments fund themselves and "regulate" their citizens. There are many different ways Bitcoin could have been designed to have all the advantages of a digital and programmable currency without these properties that undermine nation states.

A separate argument is whether it is wise from a tactical approach to discuss Bitcoin's political implications. Personally, I think the argument is moot because Bitcoin has enough value where people will eventually be drawn to adopt it despite it being created by crypto-anarchists with political motivations.
 

Still being in existence is not proof that they will always be in existence, especially in light of dozzens that failed throughout history, versus the handful that still exist. Many of those that currently exist are extremely new too (Euro is about 20 years old, USD as a fiat is only about 45 years old). Commodity based currencies, on the other hand, don't fail, and just get supplanted by something better.

I don't know about democracies, since some failed and others have just been conquered and wiped out, but empires historically do have a 100% failure rate.

As for wars, that's not just "country was conquered," but likely includes "currency was used by country to pay for war, leading to high inflation and collapse. For USSR, the crappy economy was one of the reasons their currency failed, them printing and spending it like crazy to build up their war machine is another.

That same applies to "Democracies have a 100% failure rate"

And to take your source:

War and independence are not failures of a currency, but of a state. (Even if you consider Independence to be a failure?)
So 12+24+23 = 59% of fiat currencies did not fail due to their 'fiat-ness', according to your own source.
And does the 24% include, for example, the currencies that were abolished to form the Euro? Did the Deutschmark really 'fail'?

In fact, as I don't think their are any non-fiat currencies left (?), a more accurate statement would be that "100% of non-fiat currencies fail", surely?

+1   We don't yet know if they will all eventually be crypto. and there may well be an interim digital only phase .but I expect crypto to be the final outcome somewhere down the road.

Digital currencies will replace monetary paper it's already happening in countries like Sweden even as we speak
Banks are not taking money because it takes a lot of time to process and is less commonly used in the information age as more data is digitized we will likely see more uses for digital currencies and that is why I think it will replace fiat.

http://news.yahoo.com/sweden-cash-king-no-more-082544562.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-10/era-of-paper-money-dies-out-in-sweden-as-virtual-cash-takes-over.html

Well one of the reasons might be that the system that we have here is damaged from inflation.
The financial system is breaking down. What happens when the $ loses most of it value and you have 1,000,000 Bills?
I'm not saying that Bitcoin shall replace it, but I'd like to see it as an option.