> Interest on money loaned out is the only incentive required for putting money to "productive uses".
And what is the incentive to loan money in your system?
> Interest on money loaned out is the only incentive required for putting money to "productive uses".
And what is the incentive to loan money in your system?
What if Henry Ford evisaged his Model T being used as a temporary alternative for when your horse is unwell? Or a fairground ride? Bitcoin is what it is.
> And what is the incentive to loan money in your system?
Interest - the age-old solution. Offer me interest that both compensates me for not having use of my money and for the risk of getting it back, and we have a deal.
Non-deflationary currencies encourage hoarding which leads to wild swings in value. Deflationary currencies do much better. Look at the price chart of BTC vs XMR.
As it matures and gets close to it's ultimate value, volatility will naturally reduce.
Once it is used as the unit of account, everything else will fluctuate in value relative to bitcoin, which has more stable fundamentals than anything else on earth (fixed/zero issuance, liquidity etc), but this will be decades in the future when it's dollar value will be 8 or 9 figures in today's money
Yeah, so that can't happen unless it's used for actual trade more than it's hoarded, which can't happen unless it's inflationary.
There's nothing special about gold except that some people think that it's a panacea. It's not, it's still an industrial metal. "Fiat currencies which are collapsing in value" has no basis in fact. It's just mindless ideology at best and no better than a conspiracy theory.
There is something very special about gold. It has the best monetary qualities of any physical substance. It is only bettered by bitcoin which essentially dematerialises gold - stripping away it's physical attributes that hinder it (portability, scarcity, verifiability, divisibility etc).
Where's your evidence?
I can answer that question: you don't have any. Your vague anecdotes don't count as such. You need hard figures and there aren't any showing any such thing.
But back to your "argument". Google "anecdotal" and "non sequitur". But to save you time, here's a summary: you're not providing evidence, but instead a story that you created that attempts to support your augment. Then you deliver a series of non sequiturs, where your claims don't support your conclusion.
So again, please provide evidence instead of nonsensical and unsupported claims, then we can have an actual "good faith" discussion that I'm sure will be very helpful to everyone.
The only story is your condescending description of my reply.
So again, as I said, please GFY.