You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Ultimate Argument for Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency
Krugman and his ilk are never going to criticize or acknowledge the very thing that has given them unfair (and corrupt) advantage over everyone else.
I remain unconvinced about what Bitcoin and crypto are at the moment as it looks and functions in real-time exactly the same as the fiat currency masters. if something was going to challenge that system it would be nice if it actually looked and acted differently. Today Wall St. owns the cryptosphere so IMO Bitcoin lost when contextualized from a 2008 vantage point of usurping the current system.
Resteemed anyway.
I agree that the current cryptosphere is less than optimal. One of my earliest critiques of Bitcoin was that if the banksters perceived it as a genuine threat, there was nothing to stop them from just creating the necessary fiat currency from nothing to buy it all. That process does appear to be in process.
I don't think the cryptos success as a currency should be held against it, even if it does bear functional similarities to fiat, it is after all intended to provide a common means of exchange. That said, cryptos do provide faster and cheaper transfers than digital fiat and the funds in your wallet actually belong to you, something that cannot be said of the fiat dollars in your bank account.
This last consideration is an important one. Unfortunately many people labor under the misapprehension that the fiat currency in their bank account actually belongs to them. It does not. When fiat is deposited in a bank, it is legally considered an investment in the bank and becomes part of the bank's capital. The bank is under no legal obligation to return that fiat to the depositor, it does so however to maintain investor (i.e. customer) confidence and to facilitate its predatory business model.
Well said!
Thanks for your comment, if this line of thought appeals to you, my latest post The Faceless Leviathan is likely of interest.