Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

State-backed paper works so much better than gold-backed currency that it's difficult to find economists who advocate returning to the gold standard without being regarded by their colleagues as quacks.

Gold currency can hardly be described as apolitical. It has been a major political issue in every country that adopted it. Political issues have included debasement and forgery of coins, bimetallism, deflation vs inflation, the legality of citizens owning bullion, the exchange rate between gold-backed paper money and actual gold, ships sinking while carrying loads of gold, countries stockpiling and transferring large amounts of gold back and forth under the Bretton Woods system, etc.

Any "apolitical" system of currency will become political as soon as it is large enough for governments to take notice of it and start trying to regulate it. Any cryptocurrency that has disputes about governance or forking also has politics.




I think by "apolitical," they are referring to Bitcoin's property of being censorship resistant, not claiming that politics do not apply to it at all. I prefer to call it a "people's currency."


Everything you just listed here seems to have been solved by Bitcoin, including forking politics - which leaves the users in control (albeit with some political influence from lead devs) ultimately this appears to be a fair power distribution as it is economic nodes deciding the current consensus on the rules set - not miners. (For your list - no forgery, no metal debasement, no long term inflation and infinite divisibility, why shouldn't you be able to own real money? Why shouldn't market set exchange rates? No sinking ships, country stockpiling and transferring is all fair game but custody is easy for anybody to take an maintain.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: