> but pointing out how fiat is largely based on fiction as well ("faith" written next to a stone mason eye in a pyramid) is not tolerated.
Or maybe it is just not useful, and acts as a distraction. Getting into another 'why fiat backed by the USA works while monopoly money from the boardgame (or cryptocurrencies) does not' is pointless because no one who makes that argument really cares about the difference, they just want to point out that 'everything is made up'.
"Everything is made up" is probably one of the more important arguments to be made, and we'd all be better off if it was taken more seriously. It's difficult to reckon with and it's noisy, but that doesn't make it any less true or valuable.
I think it's especially important when trying to figure out regulation, taxes, and broadly how we deal with rich people in the world.
The belief that money is concrete and real helps cement unworthy powerful people. It's good to chip away at it.
Look, I literally have a degree in economics from an Ivy league university, and I promise you I didn't come close to actually understanding any of it until many years after graduating -- by including the "it's all made up part."
Really, video games and thinking about video game design helped me get it. Because it's a design, and not something like science or nature. It's not that real or unexpected consequences don't happen -- of course they do. But it's exactly like what happens in game dev, because someone tweaks rules.
Yes, exactly. I disagree that it's a distraction. It is to point out that there are a plethora of issues with crypto but pointing out issues with faith-based currency doesn't separate crypto from fiat. As a fan of crypto I see these issues as very glaring:
- one of the main advantages of crypto is lack of centralized regulation, which is also why no one stopped FTX from having back doors to loot the vault
- if one can print their own coins at will (like FTT), its value is at the whim of the printer
- inflation is not necessarily a bad thing. It can be used responsibly.
- a credit card has almost no risk and can crank out transactions as much as necessary
- fiat is accepted all over the place whereas crypto as a transactional currency is more similar to trading gold and cowhides
We have seen how many bad actors control USA fiat and are deemed "too big to fail". That is a failed system and we have seen its ugly face plenty of times. Much of crypto challenges that. How successful it is so far is up for debate.
Or maybe it is just not useful, and acts as a distraction. Getting into another 'why fiat backed by the USA works while monopoly money from the boardgame (or cryptocurrencies) does not' is pointless because no one who makes that argument really cares about the difference, they just want to point out that 'everything is made up'.