pull down to refresh

In a bygone world, currencies were backed by precious metals such that there was no use-case for forex markets like today. It was trivial to redeem the bank note for its weight in gold.
This type of system does not work very well when countries are at war (internally or externally) and so you see manipulation of money. Printing more than can ever reasonable be redeemed.
India has tried to regulate gold while the US (with executive order 6102) even actively confiscated it, and made ownership illegal. The moment this was complete, the government rebalanced and changed the cost of an oz of gold from $21 to $35. A far cry from the $1800 it is today. But it was a massive haircut for the people of the time.
The last 50 years or so has been an experiment of sorts. Countries had long experienced inflation whenever they printed more money than they could ever reasonably hope to back up with their precious metal supplies. But here for the first time ever, we were holding up the USD as a global reserve currency and backing it by ... nothing.
So wait, what does back the dollar? Well essentially it's backed by a debt cycle where people buy treasury bills (< 1 year) or bonds (> 1 year) from the US government and rely on the government to pay back the bond with interest. This essentially means the US government backs the USD by having a military strong enough to ensure that it can always service the bonds that it has issued.
The US government essentially just prints more money to service the bonds, and prints more money to fight wars. Similar to the monetary expansion that occurred so that we could fight in the Vietnam war. Countries knew that we were spending money that could no longer be backed by sufficient quantities of gold, causing France to come over with a (gun)boat-load of dollars to convert to gold. suspect that the emperor had no clothes on.
Enter the rest of the world. They don't have the luxury of being the world's reserve currency. So essentially everyone's inflation is WORSE than the dollar's. Because the dollar has the highest demand, so it is the least affected by inflation in comparison to other currencies. Even the pound, which used to trade against the dollar 1:4, is now almost on par with the dollar.
That's not even to say countries with rampant corruption that see the purchasing power of their currency drop like a hammer off a ledge. E.g., at it's inception the Indonesian rupiah was worth 1/4th of a dollar. Now it takes 15,000 rupiah for each dollar. In Sudan, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Turkey, Argentina and others, extreme inflation is the norm.
In the US citizens have credit cards, mortgages, PayPal, Venmo, 401Ks, financial advisors, (relatively) low inflation, LITERAL GLOBAL RESERVE currency status. So Bitcoin isn't needed. Some think. And for those at the top, they don't. They're busy profiting from the broken system. Their stock and real estate portfolios grow with inflation.
📸Hyperinflation of the German Papiermark, the currency of the Weimar Republic, between 1921 and 1923, primarily in 1923.
CountryNamePeriodStatusDepreciation against gold
ZimbabweDollar1980-2009hyperinflation99.999999999997%
VenezuelaBolivar1879-presenthyperinflation99.9999999%
ArgentinaAustral1985-1991hyperinflation99.99%
PeruInti1970s-1990shyperinflation99.99%
GermanyPapiermark1914-1924hyperinflation99.975%
TurkeyLira1844-presentmultiple economic crises99.92%
IndonesiaRupiah1949-presentmultiple devaluations99.73%
UKPound1694-presentmultiple devaluations99.32%
USDollar1792-presentmultiple devaluations97.05%
This type of system does not work very well when countries are at war
This assumes war is a worthwhile activity. From my perspective, sound money works great with respect to war, because it makes funding it nearly impossible.
reply
42 sats \ 1 reply \ @jeff 21 Mar
Along with other irrational pursuits.
The trouble is, the game theory and living on the same rock with countries that can fund war.
reply
That's true, but defensive wars are much cheaper than offensive and people are more willing to fund them.
reply
83 sats \ 0 replies \ @hueso 21 Mar
Argentina has done another 99.95% since 1991.
reply
Every article of this kind reaffirms Bitcoin, Bitcoin is the solution.
reply
It makes me think whether the hyperinflation is favourable to those who are holding digital assets or holding any investment directly linked to dollar.
I've been investing a substantial amount (the rules allow us to invest $2500 yearly) in the US markets for the last 10 years and my local currency has seen nearly 80% of inflation against dollar. I must acknowledge that doing investment in your local currency that is declining against dollar isn't a good choice for now.
reply
Completely
reply
Great write up! This is where it’s going. Bitcoin is hope!
reply
Eventually the machines going "brrrrrrr" are going to catch up with the USA. The people who are here are startint to stack sats, and others are stacking things that they believe will have value. Eventually the system falls apart, but l believe bitcoin will last.
reply
United Nations and IMF should decide the Bitcoin is legal tender for the World. That's the ideal solution.
reply
Do you know what does it means the term "legal tender"?
reply
reply
reply
I did a boo-boo in Zeus chat. Left the group for the moment. Got baited by a troll.
reply
shit's fucked
reply
I would add another perspective on top. Not only does sound money hinder wars, as you correctly assumed in my opinion, but the border of the monetary system is even the first place where the next war could start. Wars are not only made harder with hard money; rather, it's based on the monetary system's structure and how much power it provides to fight against another monetary system.
As we are all moving towards hyperbitcoinization, we have a monetary system without borders, where the next war could potentially unfold. There is no other monetary system that is "weaker."