A hard currency standard is the key to world peace

[zarus tathra]

Even if electricity isn't overdrawn, we'll still see energy prices rising. If the power company doesn't increase its prices, it'll be unable to pay for wages and fuel, which WILL increase in price when the printing presses start. It's still a good indicator that inflation is taking place. So even if there isn't a stress test, people will know one way or the other fairly quickly.

[Hakurei Reimu]

Even if electricity isn't overdrawn, we'll still see energy prices rising. If the power company doesn't increase its prices, it'll be unable to pay for wages and fuel, which WILL increase in price when the printing presses start. It's still a good indicator that inflation is taking place. So even if there isn't a stress test, people will know one way or the other fairly quickly.

The increasing price of electricity is not an "indicator" that inflation is taking place. It IS inflation, and it is not necessarily a big deal to your average person. I've lived with inflation my entire life, yet the dollar still commands my confidence.

As to the cost of the printing presses run by the Treasury, you still get the joules that the joulebuck notes have on their faces, regardless of how much it costs to print them. The only place it will be felt is in the increased budget of the Treasury. That tends to be well-insulated from most consumers.

Besides, in any practical, live currency, it costs much less to print a note than the note's monetary worth — because if your notes aren't worth the paper its printed on, you are in a state of hyperinflation.

[zarus tathra]

The increasing price of electricity is not an "indicator" that inflation is taking place. It IS inflation, and it is not necessarily a big deal to your average person. I've lived with inflation my entire life, yet the dollar still commands my confidence.

The "average person" is a docile, impotent creature, I don't use him as my standard frame of reference.

Besides, in any practical, live currency, it costs much less to print a note than the note's monetary worth — because if your notes aren't worth the paper its printed on, you are in a state of hyperinflation.

Okay? You're completely ignoring my larger argument and criticizing details of the program that I have not bothered to harden.

[Hakurei Reimu]

The increasing price of electricity is not an "indicator" that inflation is taking place. It IS inflation, and it is not necessarily a big deal to your average person. I've lived with inflation my entire life, yet the dollar still commands my confidence.

The "average person" is a docile, impotent creature, I don't use him as my standard frame of reference.

And yet you're depending on him to stress test the currency. Hillarious.

Besides, in any practical, live currency, it costs much less to print a note than the note's monetary worth — because if your notes aren't worth the paper its printed on, you are in a state of hyperinflation.

Okay? You're completely ignoring my larger argument and criticizing details of the program that I have not bothered to harden.

Because these details lie at the core of your argument. I cannot see where your joulebuck is actually used differently than the fiat dollar, other than in its redemption. It behaves exactly like the inflatable currencies you despise.

[zarus tathra]

Because these details lie at the core of your argument. I cannot see where your joulebuck is actually used differently than the fiat dollar, other than in its redemption. It behaves exactly like the inflatable currencies you despise.

I guess this is less about creating a new currency order than it is about changing people's expectations and culture with regard to the value of money.

[Hakurei Reimu]

Didn't work for gold. Why do you think it will work for joules?

[zarus tathra]

History indicates that new currencies rise pretty easily without government intervention.

The Liberty Dollar had like 100k users before it was seized. And Bitcoin is really, really popular even with the collapse of mtgox. So the demand is there for a new currency, even if it's not necessarily for joulebucks.

[Hakurei Reimu]

New currencies also tend to collapse just as quickly without that government underpinning.

The Liberty Dollar was seized because it was actually doing something illegal. They were unmistakably coins and notes intended to be used as a unit of account that was commeasurate with US legal currency. von NotHaus may have had a case that it was barter if the amount of Liberty Dollars in trade was negotiable on its own terms as in real barter, but practically it was being used as a substitute for the US dollar. It was pretty clear that Liberty Dollars weren't items of barter as von NotHaus, and the jury didn't buy that it was barter either.

Bitcoin, despite its promise, only seems to operate well in the black market. Everyone else treats it as a curiosity, as a collectable to own or in the hopes that it will replace other currencies. It's never going to be a real "currency" so long as that's true ('currency' in quotes because Bitcoin has no material representation as a currency must have — probably the only reason why the Feds haven't cracked down on it as they did with the Liberty Dollar). Not to mention that it's basis in value is even more pointless than joulebucks or even the gold standard — the calculation of solutions to a problem that has no practical value whatsoever. I could spent a lot of energy masturbating as well, but nobody is going to pay me for the results of that activity... well, not without looking creepy.  

[zarus tathra]

The Liberty Dollar was seized because it was actually doing something illegal. They were unmistakably coins and notes intended to be used as a unit of account that was commeasurate with US legal currency. von NotHaus may have had a case that it was barter if the amount of Liberty Dollars in trade was negotiable on its own terms as in real barter, but practically it was being used as a substitute for the US dollar. It was pretty clear that Liberty Dollars weren't items of barter as von NotHaus, and the jury didn't buy that it was barter either.

So the Liberty Dollar was seized because it was being used as a unit of currency? How does that make its collapse not the fault of the US government? Why are you using a legalistic argument when we're supposed to be talking about an alternative system to the one we currently have?

Bitcoin, despite its promise, only seems to operate well in the black market. Everyone else treats it as a curiosity, as a collectable to own or in the hopes that it will replace other currencies. It's never going to be a real "currency" so long as that's true ('currency' in quotes because Bitcoin has no material representation as a currency must have — probably the only reason why the Feds haven't cracked down on it as they did with the Liberty Dollar). Not to mention that it's basis in value is even more pointless than joulebucks or even the gold standard — the calculation of solutions to a problem that has no practical value whatsoever. I could spent a lot of energy masturbating as well, but nobody is going to pay me for the results of that activity... well, not without looking creepy.

They're making physical bitcoins and people gladly pay a massive premium for them. And actually, the Feds did crack down on Bitcoin, seeing as they seized mtgox back in July or so. They just can't do it for everybody, since btc is way too decentralized.

[Hakurei Reimu]

The Liberty Dollar was seized because it was actually doing something illegal. They were unmistakably coins and notes intended to be used as a unit of account that was commeasurate with US legal currency. von NotHaus may have had a case that it was barter if the amount of Liberty Dollars in trade was negotiable on its own terms as in real barter, but practically it was being used as a substitute for the US dollar. It was pretty clear that Liberty Dollars weren't items of barter as von NotHaus, and the jury didn't buy that it was barter either.

So the Liberty Dollar was seized because it was being used as a unit of currency?

No, it was being used as if it were US currency specifically, as if it could pay off debt measured in US dollars as well as a real dollar. That's not allowed under US law, because it's a form of fraud.

The Liberty Dollar was never a currency in the first place because there's no obligation for anyone to accept it as payment for anything. If you want to forgive a debt because you accepted an amount of Liberty Dollars in barter, that's your business, but don't pretend that is what's actually dismissing the debt.

Bitcoin, despite its promise, only seems to operate well in the black market. Everyone else treats it as a curiosity, as a collectable to own or in the hopes that it will replace other currencies. It's never going to be a real "currency" so long as that's true ('currency' in quotes because Bitcoin has no material representation as a currency must have — probably the only reason why the Feds haven't cracked down on it as they did with the Liberty Dollar). Not to mention that it's basis in value is even more pointless than joulebucks or even the gold standard — the calculation of solutions to a problem that has no practical value whatsoever. I could spent a lot of energy masturbating as well, but nobody is going to pay me for the results of that activity... well, not without looking creepy.

They're making physical bitcoins and people gladly pay a massive premium for them. And actually, the Feds did crack down on Bitcoin, seeing as they seized mtgox back in July or so. They just can't do it for everybody, since btc is way too decentralized.

Okay, but Bitcoin is still not a currency, and the coins aren't either. There's no obligation for a Bitcoin, in any form, to be accepted as payment for debt, as would a legally recognized currency.

And that is the problem with a non-governmental "currency." The fact that a currency is recognized by a powerful institution willing to say that it has some definite value and does indeed pay for stuff is what makes a currency a currency instead of just an ordinary commodity and item of barter. The US government will accept a US dollar as payment for fees, taxes, fines and other duties; it will not accept Bitcoins in any form for that purpose. Other governments will similarly honor the value of their own currency. Who will back up a Bitcoin?

[zarus tathra]

I don't know what you mean by "obligation to pay for debt" in the case of the LBD. I mean, the holders can hassle their creditors all they want, but their creditors don't have to write off their debt, and nobody really pretends otherwise.

Okay, but Bitcoin is still not a currency, and the coins aren't either. There's no obligation for a Bitcoin, in any form, to be accepted as payment for debt, as would a legally recognized currency.

And that is the problem with a non-governmental "currency." The fact that a currency is recognized by a powerful institution willing to say that it has some definite value and does indeed pay for stuff is what makes a currency a currency instead of just an ordinary commodity and item of barter. The US government will accept a US dollar as payment for fees, taxes, fines and other duties; it will not accept Bitcoins in any form for that purpose. Other governments will similarly honor the value of their own currency. Who will back up a Bitcoin?

Obviously debt and taxes aren't the only things money is used for. And a government that refuses to collect taxes in the form of the most commonly used currency will collapse, like the Ming Dynasty when it refused to allow citizens to pay taxes in the form of copper coins instead of silver, which was in short supply at the time.

[Hakurei Reimu]

I don't know what you mean by "obligation to pay for debt" in the case of the LBD. I mean, the holders can hassle their creditors all they want, but their creditors don't have to write off their debt, and nobody really pretends otherwise.

"Nobody"? Are you sure about that statement? I don't pretend that the LBD could really pay off debt, and you don't either, but are you certain everyone knew that? There's no one who thought that a LBD actually erased debt and must be taken —by law— to erase that debt? That's an important function in a currency: that a creditor is obligated to take a legal tender in the payment of debt when offered. Debts usually grow with time due to interest, so it is in a creditor's interest to delay the payment of that debt as long as possible. A non-legal tender has a great potential for abuse.

Obviously debt and taxes aren't the only things money is used for. And a government that refuses to collect taxes in the form of the most commonly used currency will collapse, like the Ming Dynasty when it refused to allow citizens to pay taxes in the form of copper coins instead of silver, which was in short supply at the time.

Copper coins which were issued by the Ming government itself, IIRC. It's hardly the citizens' fault if a government fails to take its own coin as payment for taxes.

As to becoming more popular, yeah good luck with that. The more I read about Bitcoin, the more it reads like a scam than any sort of legitimate means of exchange. It's very structure actually discourages end users from exchanging Bitcoins directly, and as such, all transactions are carried out by what amounts to regular-old, joe-blow credit, without the all-important check that a real credit line has — a paper trail. Every time a wallet-holding "service" is compromised, everyone's Bitcoins are gone with no possibility for redress. It also disproportionately profits early adopters. Both are hallmarks of scams.

[Plu]

Every time a wallet-holding "service" is compromised, everyone's Bitcoins are gone with no possibility for redress. It also disproportionately profits early adopters. Both are hallmarks of scams.

On the other hand, if a bank fails you also lose all your money. And regular currency also disproportionately profits early adopters.

Personally I get the idea that the only difference between a scam currency and a real one is how many people believe it's not a scam. Bitcoin will operate just fine as long as people believe it's real. So will US dollars. Apply a bit of hyperinflation or lack of trust to either, and they'll fall.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Bitcoin will operate just fine as long as people believe it's real.

That's all good and dandy, but the problem is few people actually do believe it's real whereas nearly everybody can hold government issued currency in their hand, buy things at the corner grocery, exchange face to face for a pack of smokes or get on a bus or whatever. Try panhandling for bitcoins. You can do that with actual hard currency and might even be able to pay your rent that way if you're good, but with bitcoins?  :rollin:

[Plu]

Like I said; the only difference is the number of people who believe it's real.

Something doesn't become less of a scam or fiat just because more people think it's a real thing. That almost sounds like religion, don't you think? ;)

I'm also not saying that all currencies are bad, though. I'm just saying the difference between Bitcoin and US dollars is a lot smaller than you think, once you get outside of arbitrary criteria like "how many people really really believe it's a real thing".