Hacker News Reader

Comment by xyst | Hacker News Reader

Random thought: since the US dollar hasn't been backed by a physical asset in decades, does it really make sense to prosecute a person(s) for "stealing money." Stealing implies you have taken something of value and requisitioned it for ones self, but since money has no actual value was it really stolen?

Especially in the digital age, the numbers you see in your bank account are just 0s and 1s sitting dormant in some server farm.

View on HN

> since money has no actual value

Ah, the intrinsic value debate (which your entire argument hinges on) never gets old.

Setting that debate aside, money has market value -- it's not backed by gold, but it's backed by the power of the government, by the trust of the citizens, and by very strong social expectations. A storekeeper is more likely to accept your money than your gold.

This holds true not just of a storekeeper in the US, but in many other countries as well.

The US invested a great deal of both soft & hard power ensuring this is the state of the world.

If dollars have no value, you should be willing to give away any dollars you have to anyone, no matter how they are using them, right?

Dollars don't have a direct value in gold, but there are people willing to take your dollars and exchange them for gold, it's just a ratio that varies over time, along with the value of gold and dollars.

> but since money has no actual value was it really stolen?

I assume you wouldn't mind sending me your bank account details via email to prove your belief that "money has no value?"

The fact that 'stealing money' is harshly prosecuted is just one factor that contributes to its value as a currency.

As long as you can still buy things of real value using money, the money itself has value.

US dollars clearly do have value though. It's foolish to claim otherwise.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com