And if that happens, you probably need a World Cryptocurrency Bank, and an International Cryptocurrency Fund as well.
Wow, things are going to get fun!
Wow this is such an advancement in banking and finance!
While this view of Bitcoin might sound like it is a betrayal of Bitcoin's original vision of fully peer‐to‐peer cash, it is not a new vision. Hal Finney, the recipient of the first Bitcoin transaction from Nakamoto, wrote this on the Bitcoin forum in 2010: Actually there is a very good reason for Bitcoin‐backed banks to exist, issuing their own digital cash currency, redeemable for bitcoins. Bitcoin itself cannot scale to have every single financial transaction in the world be broadcast to everyone and included in the block chain. There needs to be a secondary level of payment systems which is lighter weight and more efficient. Likewise, the time needed for Bitcoin transactions to finalize will be impractical for medium to large value purchases. Bitcoin backed banks will solve these problems. They can work like banks did before nationalization of currency. Different banks can have different policies, some more aggressive, some more conservative. Some would be fractional reserve while others may be 100% Bitcoin backed. Interest rates may vary. Cash from some banks may trade at a discount to that from others. George Selgin has worked out the theory of competitive free banking in detail, and he argues that such a system would be stable, inflation resistant and self‐regulating.
What's funny is it started the same way your clever little remark did but it didn't end the same way.
I think the really sad part here is you think that revisiting an old problem will lead us to the exact same old solution despite decades of advancement.
I mean yeah. Traditional banking is very lucrative, especially at lower reserve requirements and capital investment regulations.
I know you're trying to be cute, but the SPDI charter that Kraken Bank has prohibits fractional reserves. Kraken must hold your deposit.
> If Kraken Financial had been in full operation in March 2020, it may not only have ended up insolvent by mid-March but would likely have been subject to a bank run. In practice, it has more in common with a prime money market fund than a bank.
Sounds about right
They don't source this claim at all, they just assert it and expect you to follow along.
It's always easy to craft a just-so-story that sounds reasonable. We could find theories all over the internet about why existing banks today should collapse any minute. What matters is the expertise and credibility of the source.
Assuming you are believe the US dollar is a paper note "backed by nothing." Many people strongly disagree with this statement.
This is a meaningless statement. Please explain explicitly how you think nuclear weapons ensure that the dollar has some trade value.
The US government doesn’t offer nuking privileges at a fixed price, to my knowledge.
The government systems of the US extract 35%-40% of the economy in taxation & spending obligations (inflation). Unbacked? That's ~$7+ trillion of annual tax revenue ($8+ trillion of annual spending) from the world's largest economy.
It's one of the more ridiculous myths endlessly circulated by the delusional goldbug types for pretty much the entire past century. When confronted with the facts of reality about how taxation actually works and the fact that fiat isn't actually unbacked, they always instantly run away from their premise (and I say this as a fan of gold as an inflation hedge).
Fiat is backed by a lot of guns pointed at the taxpayer's collective head, ensuring the ability to collect tax revenue from the nation's productive output; whether a given taxpayer likes it or not, whether they agree or not, whether they resist or not, it simply does not matter, the guns (along with the reach of the regulatory body) ensures compliance. In 99%+ of cases they don't even need the guns, they merely need you to understand they're always there as an option. The only thing a goldbug can do when confronted with this fact of reality, is argue that it's immoral to hold a gun to the taxpayer's head to extract taxation, which is a moot argument ultimately: your neighbors all support that virtual gun being held to your head to collect the taxes.
Those guns have very broad public support generally, meaning most of the population - in most every country on the planet - supports tax collection, by force if necessary. They may disagree on nuance, or about what the ideal rate of taxation is, however the public very strongly supports collecting taxes. There's a reason every functional nation & government uses a fairly typical tax collection system: the public broadly supports the concept and will tolerate it. And if you refuse to pay taxes, the public is generally ok with sending in the guns to make you pay your taxes as needed. The public ultimately knows they benefit in various important ways from tax collection, even if everyone simultaneously grits their teeth about paying taxes.
It's probably more reasonable to argue that the US Dollar is supported even more strongly than if it merely had gold behind it and not the guns of tax extraction. The US Government has the ability to take enormous arbitrary sums from the population (see: Covid spending), via the Fed and its capacity to 'print' as they deem it necessary. The USD has more economy behind it accordingly than it would with just gold behind it; it has probably 50%-60% of all possible economic activity behind it as needed, which is a high-end figure for what the governments of the US can perhaps take out of the economy before prompting an extremely negative social reaction. Gold could never come remotely close to matching up to that kind of financial backing.
Having backing (support) is not the same thing as saying that the dollar would retain more or less value over time if it had a gold requirement behind it however, those are two entirely different matters. The USD simultaneously has massive backing behind it, and it's going to endlessly be devalued by the fiscal mismanagement in DC.
There is actually a coherent way in which the dollar is backed by guns, but it’s the enforcement of the petrodollar system - nothing to do with taxes.