Comment: Your comparison

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Bitcoin competitors (see in situ)

Your comparison

about geocities is not a good one IMO, because geocities is just one enitity, one stock. Bitcoin is a protocol, just like IP is the protocol which the Internet runs on. Guess what, there are flaws with IP and many ways it could be made more efficient given how the Internet is used now versus when IP first started. Do you really think the Internet is going to change from people using IP addresses anytime soon? Highly, highly, unlikely.

Litecoin started October 2011, so that's almost a year. Bitcoin started January 2009, which is less than 4 years ago.

I didn't say dollars would have been like gold; I said they could have been a better money system. Guess what? Congress does have the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof. That means Congress can create paper dollars. The catch is that the States can only make gold or silver legal tender. That means a national currency couldn't be legal tender unless it was gold/silver. Congress could do either. They could create totally paper dollars, but they couldn't force anybody to accept them. That's the key. Their paper currency would have to get value from people assigning value to it voluntarily, i.e., be a free market currency.

Yes, that national paper might be a better money system than gold if managed correctly (limited inflation). There are problems transacting gold in practice. Gold is heavy, and soft metal which wears down on pocket linings/skin; it's hard to make change for; and possible to fraud with lead/tungsten and shaving; and hard to transfer over distance.

I love gold, and think the world should use it as the foundational store of wealth... but then exchange it into other currencies better suited to transactions as needed. Dr. Paul advocates competing currencies.