Bitcoin Forum

I was thinking, what if the US or some other country, similar to what Canada did, but not so idiotic... created their own cryptocurrency?

Could you create a cryptocurrency that only the creator could inflate?

The government could then control the amount of currency in circulation, dictate all the transaction fees (and collect them), automatically collect taxes, eliminate all (unauthorized) counterfeiting, track every single transaction, allow or disallow any transaction thereby controlling all money in circulation, and perhaps many other benefits to the state, and perhaps benefits to users of the currency as compared to traditional/physical fiat currency.

Perhaps this is what Canada was trying to do with MintChip.

What do you think? Could something like that be a stepping stone to more tyranny? Is something like that capable of increasing the efficiency of an economy?

I think the most important quality is the ability to print as much money as the central planners see fit. So I guess thats the most important question I'm asking in this post.

Anything is possible.  If there's nothing else we need to learn from this experiment, it's the concept of freedom of currency.  When the state has a monopoly over a commodity (in this case, worthless bank notes, not even redeemable for any kind of commodity), they're going to make it progressively worse.

It's possible to create a digital currency in which you can add or subtract how much will be in circulation.  However, Bitcoin isn't the right basis for this, unless you make it law that every user must upgrade their software each time the US makes a new rule.  They should probably create their own version of it that doesn't require community consensus.

The Op meant something other than Bitcoin.

And I gave him an answer for something other than Bitcoin.

Anyhow......

@OP,
I once was researching who's other than the polar bear (http://www.mint.ca/) creating crypto-currency, I found no other.

It might be too easy for a large country to 51% attack a crypto with a low hash rate. Instead, I've always advocated registering Bitcoin addresses with a government. By paying a fee to register them, they could be declared (by fiat) a higher value within that country and even FDIC insured. Taking them outside the registered system would of course lower the value back to Bitcoin's nominally traded price.

Make no mistake. If ANY country adopts crypto, it will not be called Bitcoin. Statecoin, maybe......

Except nobody is going to adopt Patriotcoin.  Unless we really have regressed that far as a society.