A world in which centrally banked money is optimally managed is comparable to a world in which bitcoin is effectively global legal tender, and a world in which all central banks value stabilize versus bitcoin. Each scenario is an expression of Ideal Money
-
-
3) If they cant print money, all their existing debt pyramids collapse. Even if they don’t collapse, they don’t have as much monetary power at their disposal anymore for stability management.
-
exactly, national currency with only limited ability to print is fine.
-
More importantly, and towards the original tweet there. For the important reasons, bitcoin as the global currency or all national money printed in stable relation to each other and/or bitcoin each produces the same favorable result.... let us enter dialogue as civilization...
-
Juice what are your thoughts on Stablecoins?
-
They don't attend to the same problem as stabilizing our nation fiats. This is a key and subtle point. It is not "stable purchasing power" it is inter-national stability which is the proper MEANS.
-
why do you believe international stability more important than stable purchasing power? is this something to do with balancing game theory among nation states?
-
When you spend time with the problem you realize such a result is "good enough" and its not impossible to design and implement whereas stablecoin's are because we cannot otherwise measure "value" hence my observation which you seem to understand to some extent:pic.twitter.com/UDKHzmiMxb
-
But you should want to ask "WHY is it a good enough result?" I have only opened you up to this observation, if you can confirm its truth, you will see what I see in Nash's proposal for global international stability of our major currencies.
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
If there will be only BTC - how you do fractional reserve banking which is needed to provide liquidity? The answer is - you di this with other currencies. And you do it locally as fractional reserve requires trust.
-
Yeah, but if you are a merchant or a business, why would you accept or hold a 300b mcap (higher-risk) gov fiat currency as opposed to 50T hypersecure hyperlgobal Bitcoin? Why use something that is "backed by Bitcoin" instead of Bitcoin itself? It makes no sense
-
Unless it is your own token that you promised you will take at ratio 1/X BTC, just like you can do right now with many merchants that accept miles/giftcards etc...
-
why go back to the need for *trust* if the whole point was to eliminate trust? why give monetary power back to people again if we now have global trustless distributed consensus algorithms instead?
-
It is pointed out by experts in the field, bitcoin is not a trustless system, it is trust minimized and trustworthy. Yuri has the correct sentiments, if banks print money with value stability w/respect to bitcoin, then it is trustworthy money. Banks aren't evil.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.