Crypto currencies could not function as money due to their decentralized nature and limited supply and also being able to work only online.
These two types of money can not be classified as one type. Features and uses are completely different, the value of use is also different. You can not buy sporadically in rural markets with electronic money, only in cash. And you can not use cash to trade online because it needs numbers on electronics. Such simple. 
Topic: xxx (Read 268 times)
I think that crypto has the potential to replace the world currencies. But crypto needs to undergo some changes like it needs to adapt fast transactions without a large number of conformations and it also needs to decrease the transfer fee as much as it can as fiat currency does not have any transfer fees. Still, bitcoin and other cryptos are used as a mode of payment in many places around the world.
Yes it has a potential to replace fiat in the future but as of now, the main use of cryptocurrency is for online transactions because there are a lot of online stores today who are accepting cryptocurrency payment method.
I think a years later Cryptocurrency can fully perform its function to our society through empowering and upgrading with a higher posible to serves in our world. Cryptocurrency will used over all as a mode of payment and transactions after several successful different projects that helps all people and give them a good life.
I disagree on the fact that you say bitcoin's volatility makes it not a good store of value.
It is still a good store of value in the long run in my opinion because of the fact that it is decentralized and its supply cannot exceed 21 million as we all know. Of course, there are short term fluctuations, but that doesn't really make bitcoin any less of a store of value in the long term. Gold and silver can also fluctuate in the short term as well, but they hold their value way better than fiats do.
And bitcoin is pretty much just a more convenient and fair system than gold/silver, with better divisibility and fungibility (you don't need to verify the purity).
Is BTC perfect as a form of money? No. But it sure does fulfill the basic functions of money imo with its tech.
It is still a good store of value in the long run in my opinion because of the fact that it is decentralized and its supply cannot exceed 21 million as we all know. Of course, there are short term fluctuations, but that doesn't really make bitcoin any less of a store of value in the long term. Gold and silver can also fluctuate in the short term as well, but they hold their value way better than fiats do.
And bitcoin is pretty much just a more convenient and fair system than gold/silver, with better divisibility and fungibility (you don't need to verify the purity).
Is BTC perfect as a form of money? No. But it sure does fulfill the basic functions of money imo with its tech.
I'd actually say that bitcoin fulfill the function of money better than all fiat currencies in this world.
The reason is that I believe anything, to be considered money, must be a stable store of value in the long run. Fiat currencies have never retained its value, mostly because of the fact that there is a central institution that has control over its supply.
Bitcoin on the other hand is decentralised, just like gold. But it's much better than gold in the aspect of convenience and ease of transactions, which people certainly don't give enough credit to it for. Bitcoin is also much more fungible than fiat, since 1 btc is guaranteed to be equal to the next due to the anonymity. Banks may flag certain accounts, leading to the dollars stored in these accounts not be able to be sent to other accounts (we've seen this with at least one bank denying bitcoin exchange withdrawals)
The reason is that I believe anything, to be considered money, must be a stable store of value in the long run. Fiat currencies have never retained its value, mostly because of the fact that there is a central institution that has control over its supply.
Bitcoin on the other hand is decentralised, just like gold. But it's much better than gold in the aspect of convenience and ease of transactions, which people certainly don't give enough credit to it for. Bitcoin is also much more fungible than fiat, since 1 btc is guaranteed to be equal to the next due to the anonymity. Banks may flag certain accounts, leading to the dollars stored in these accounts not be able to be sent to other accounts (we've seen this with at least one bank denying bitcoin exchange withdrawals)
Cryptocurrency can always serve as an alternate to the local currency if the people whom are using it agree to transact with it as a form of payments. Its funny to say that even in the countries where the prohibition of cryptocurrencies, most cryptocurrency lovers are still using it to perform personal payments so far there is an agreement between the two parties.
Given its recent problems (volatility) there are doubts as to whether Bitcoin and its contemporaries can become fully-fledged currencies.
It is unlikely that the credit card faces an imminent threat to its dominant position in online payments.
However, even if Bitcoin itself does not become the internet of money, its technology could provide the platform for future online payments systems.
One possibility is that these might be developed through the major banks, and JP Morgan has recently filed a patent for an online payments system with Bitcoin characteristics.
But with the development and adoption of all internet-based technologies, we can only wait and see whether it takes off or not.
It is unlikely that the credit card faces an imminent threat to its dominant position in online payments.
However, even if Bitcoin itself does not become the internet of money, its technology could provide the platform for future online payments systems.
One possibility is that these might be developed through the major banks, and JP Morgan has recently filed a patent for an online payments system with Bitcoin characteristics.
But with the development and adoption of all internet-based technologies, we can only wait and see whether it takes off or not.
You have many truthful points on your article. I also think there isn't any way to stop Crypto-Currency anymore. The institutions will have to adapt themselves to it to continue existing. The centralized economies can't continue abusing the citizens anymore in the name of the poorest ones, the bankers, the elite's friends or who else is taking advantage from the average citizen's efforts.
But between the 3 money's functions listed, I think the only one Bitcoin doesn't fulfill at this moment is the Store of Value. Means of Payment is Ok, even for the currently conditions. It can be used as a mean of payment normally, the volatility can be avoided by exchanging the transacted coins to fiat after the negotiation.
But between the 3 money's functions listed, I think the only one Bitcoin doesn't fulfill at this moment is the Store of Value. Means of Payment is Ok, even for the currently conditions. It can be used as a mean of payment normally, the volatility can be avoided by exchanging the transacted coins to fiat after the negotiation.
I think that crypto has the potential to replace the world currencies. But crypto needs to undergo some changes like it needs to adapt fast transactions without a large number of conformations and it also needs to decrease the transfer fee as much as it can as fiat currency does not have any transfer fees. Still, bitcoin and other cryptos are used as a mode of payment in many places around the world.
There are many cryptocurrencies which currently allow transactions to be processed within a couple seconds, almost free.
Take Steem as an example. Its transactions cost nothing and are instantaneous.
I still agree with you though, on the fact that crypto has the potential to replace the world currencies, but that it has to undergo some changes first.
These changes, however, would include regulation, decreased volatility and more acceptance by merchants around the globe.
I'll go out on a limb and contend a double standard exists which contributes towards crypto currencies acclaimed volatility in contrast to the exaggerated stability of fiat money. There are no fundamental nor intrinsic reasons why fiat should inherently be considered less volatile or deemed more stable. Examples of this are the current venezuelan bolivar and zimbabwe dollars of ages past. Fiat currencies have displayed far greater negative price volatility than bitcoin has in its history.
One thing we can be certain of is bitcoin should theoretically be more stable than the US dollar or any fiat due to its printing being algorithmically limited. The impossibility of bitcoin and some alts being printed out of thin air without limit should make them less volatile and more stable however there are contributing factors and unknowns which prevent that from happening. Someday perhaps when bitcoin is a more established and known phemonea, it may be recognized as exhibiting greater stability than fiat for reasons mentioned above. Crypto currencies are in their infancy and markets have a ways to go before they reach maturity.
One thing we can be certain of is bitcoin should theoretically be more stable than the US dollar or any fiat due to its printing being algorithmically limited. The impossibility of bitcoin and some alts being printed out of thin air without limit should make them less volatile and more stable however there are contributing factors and unknowns which prevent that from happening. Someday perhaps when bitcoin is a more established and known phemonea, it may be recognized as exhibiting greater stability than fiat for reasons mentioned above. Crypto currencies are in their infancy and markets have a ways to go before they reach maturity.
I totally agree with you on your submission in the first paragraph. I have equally maintained that the reason why fiat is said to be relatively stable is because of the intervention of government in the market as they have the ability to create more money from thin air. To really know the weakness in fiat is to remove government intervention even the most stable currency in the world won't last three months without causing distortion to the economy of the country. Just like what happen in an African country sometimes ago without the intervention of government in the foreign exchange market, the local currency rate of depreciation was more that yearly inflation.
However, its not all bad for government intervention but the grouse I have is now judging fiat to be better than crypto currency due to stability factor which is clearly a misrepresentation because if the two are allowed to operate without intervention, crypto will exhibit more stability than fiat.
I think that crypto has the potential to replace the world currencies. But crypto needs to undergo some changes like it needs to adapt fast transactions without a large number of conformations and it also needs to decrease the transfer fee as much as it can as fiat currency does not have any transfer fees. Still, bitcoin and other cryptos are used as a mode of payment in many places around the world.
I think to be honest the value of bitcoin will not be able to fetch the value of normal country currency because it is not acceptable by any government it is widely accepted by the people in all over the world but also that uses on different minded people they will not understand what will the future of cryptocurrencies and then they will not predictable with the future of cryptocurrency.
I think that crypto has the potential to replace the world currencies. But crypto needs to undergo some changes like it needs to adapt fast transactions without a large number of conformations and it also needs to decrease the transfer fee as much as it can as fiat currency does not have any transfer fees. Still, bitcoin and other cryptos are used as a mode of payment in many places around the world.
One thing we can be certain of is bitcoin should theoretically be more stable than the US dollar or any fiat due to its printing being algorithmically limited.
I totally agree with your opinion on this. Crypto function now can not be said good because it is not stable from the price when compared with fiat money. to be good must be completely stabilized first.Now in the development stage, we wait what next.
I'll go out on a limb and contend a double standard exists which contributes towards crypto currencies acclaimed volatility in contrast to the exaggerated stability of fiat money. There are no fundamental nor intrinsic reasons why fiat should inherently be considered less volatile or deemed more stable. Examples of this are the current venezuelan bolivar and zimbabwe dollars of ages past. Fiat currencies have displayed far greater negative price volatility than bitcoin has in its history.
One thing we can be certain of is bitcoin should theoretically be more stable than the US dollar or any fiat due to its printing being algorithmically limited. The impossibility of bitcoin and some alts being printed out of thin air without limit should make them less volatile and more stable however there are contributing factors and unknowns which prevent that from happening. Someday perhaps when bitcoin is a more established and known phemonea, it may be recognized as exhibiting greater stability than fiat for reasons mentioned above. Crypto currencies are in their infancy and markets have a ways to go before they reach maturity.
One thing we can be certain of is bitcoin should theoretically be more stable than the US dollar or any fiat due to its printing being algorithmically limited. The impossibility of bitcoin and some alts being printed out of thin air without limit should make them less volatile and more stable however there are contributing factors and unknowns which prevent that from happening. Someday perhaps when bitcoin is a more established and known phemonea, it may be recognized as exhibiting greater stability than fiat for reasons mentioned above. Crypto currencies are in their infancy and markets have a ways to go before they reach maturity.
Jump to: