.

[ChicagoSchooler]

.

[1713430105]

1713430105

[1713430105]

1713430105

[1713430105]

1713430105

[1713430105]

1713430105

[1713430105]

1713430105

[1713430105]

1713430105

[manselr]

In "The Denationalization of Money", Friedrich A. Hayek says that private monies should be allowed to exist and that the one with the most stable value would be most likely to win.

In defense of Bitcoin, many suggest that the frequent, large price inflations and deflations are preferred over a currency with stable value.

Was F.A.Hayek wrong?


Side note: he also says that indexation is not a substitute for price stable money.

I would much rather deal with BTC's volatility considering the pros/cons of the alternative (centralized national money).

[L]

For normal day use and for people who live paycheck to paycheck I'll assume the most stable one is the preferable.

I think bitcoin is still a very speculative market and this is very attractive to investors and risk seeking people, not "normal" folk, anyway this is all very new and very hard to make accurate predictions.

[oblivi]

I would much rather deal with BTC's volatility considering the pros/cons of the alternative (centralized national money).

How about a decentralized one with continual price stability?

Decentralization and stability of price in a short period of time is impossible due the very fundamentals of a free unregulated market such as Bitcoin's. The only way Bitcoin can reach stability is when there is so many people using it that a whale dumping tons of coin would be like pissing on a sea of pee.
When Bitcoin reaches mainstream usage it will naturally stop being so volatile. I don't believe in alternatives to Bitcoin, everything that's needed Bitcoin has it.

[twiifm]

Private money has always been to allow to exist.

But the only money the state accepts for taxes is legal tender.  Because of this no private money can compete with states money

[johnyj]

Private money has always been to allow to exist.

But the only money the state accepts for taxes is legal tender.  Because of this no private money can compete with states money

States money does not have power against another nation, it is the currency war we are experiencing right now, eventually all those currencies will depreciate faster and faster fighting each other, while the universally accepted bitcoin will become the last stable ground of value

[johnyj]

In "The Denationalization of Money", Friedrich A. Hayek says that private monies should be allowed to exist and that the one with the most stable value would be most likely to win.

In defense of Bitcoin, many suggest that the frequent, large price inflations and deflations are preferred over a currency with stable value.

Was F.A.Hayek wrong?


Side note: he also says that indexation is not a substitute for price stable money.

Value is never a stable thing, since supply and demand are changing all the time, stable value is just a wishful thinking. People look at the price label and feel that the price does not change, call that stability, but that is because the value of fiat money and those goods are all dropping at the same speed

Current large price swing of bitcoin is partly caused by extremely low liquidity due to low value, and partly due to large advances in mining technology. After the advance in mining technology has stabilized at more predictable speed, then price volatility will drop

[cysive]

I would much rather deal with BTC's volatility considering the pros/cons of the alternative (centralized national money).

How about a decentralized one with continual price stability?

Decentralization and stability of price in a short period of time is impossible due the very fundamentals of a free unregulated market such as Bitcoin's. The only way Bitcoin can reach stability is when there is so many people using it that a whale dumping tons of coin would be like pissing on a sea of pee.
When Bitcoin reaches mainstream usage it will naturally stop being so volatile. I don't believe in alternatives to Bitcoin, everything that's needed Bitcoin has it.

I personalty believe Bitcoin stabilizes in price when it equalizes the things traded with it. If that never happens, then it never will.

When a unit of labor perfectly trades for a pound of chicken or a gallon of gas, with no supply or demand imbalances caused by the currency itself, then that currency will be perfect.

That's probably an untenable goal, but whatever comes closest will win.

That's probably what Hayek was after. A larger pool of Bitcoin may help that happen, may not.

-C

[Possum577]

No, fiat is still preferred over digital currency. And stability is just one of the reasons (perhaps the most important).

[Amph]

he should keep i mind, that bitcoin stability is tie with it's adoption, and it's adoption isn't finished yet

they always talk like bitcoin will never be stable, i kinda hate that

[Monetizer]

I believe bitcoins swings are what is helping it gain initial popularity right now as people all want to learn more and make some money if they can. In the future however I am sure many people would rather bitcoin become more stable so it can be used better as a currency.

[picolo]

In "The Denationalization of Money", Friedrich A. Hayek says that private monies should be allowed to exist and that the one with the most stable value would be most likely to win.

In defense of Bitcoin, many suggest that the frequent, large price inflations and deflations are preferred over a currency with stable value.

Was F.A.Hayek wrong?


Side note: he also says that indexation is not a substitute for price stable money.

There is no other crypto that is big, efficient and very stable

[Exther2]

In "The Denationalization of Money", Friedrich A. Hayek says that private monies should be allowed to exist and that the one with the most stable value would be most likely to win.

In defense of Bitcoin, many suggest that the frequent, large price inflations and deflations are preferred over a currency with stable value.

Was F.A.Hayek wrong?


Side note: he also says that indexation is not a substitute for price stable money.

He's not aware of Bitcoin power. Stability will be shown once Bitcoin gets global adoption and acceptance, so the usage too.
By global I mean everywhere e.g. Google, Microsoft, PayPal, Amazon, eBay etc.

[dothebeats]

In "The Denationalization of Money", Friedrich A. Hayek says that private monies should be allowed to exist and that the one with the most stable value would be most likely to win.

In defense of Bitcoin, many suggest that the frequent, large price inflations and deflations are preferred over a currency with stable value.

Was F.A.Hayek wrong?


Side note: he also says that indexation is not a substitute for price stable money.

Though bitcoin's price is somehow volatile, the concept that lies within the Bitcoin protocol is advantageous compared to a centralized national currency. Give bitcoin time to see adoption, stability will soon follow. But we cannot deny the fact that because of the lack of users, bitcoin tends to be more of as an investment vehicle used by people who has the $$$ in order to get a hefty profit.

[dothebeats]

In "The Denationalization of Money", Friedrich A. Hayek says that private monies should be allowed to exist and that the one with the most stable value would be most likely to win.

In defense of Bitcoin, many suggest that the frequent, large price inflations and deflations are preferred over a currency with stable value.

Was F.A.Hayek wrong?


Side note: he also says that indexation is not a substitute for price stable money.

He's not aware of Bitcoin power. Stability will be shown once Bitcoin gets global adoption and acceptance, so the usage too.
By global I mean everywhere e.g. Google, Microsoft, PayPal, Amazon, eBay etc.

Well, global isn't only bound to the large players of tech. By global, it means that even little merchant use and implement bitcoin as their payment option.