On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Andy Bradford <amb-pl...@bradfords.org> wrote:
> Thus said Jonathan Duncan on Fri, 17 Jan 2014 11:33:51 -0700:
>
>> On the topic of crypto-currency, and perhaps currency in general, I
>> am wondering about the benefits of having multiple currencies in
>> circulation versus a universal currency.
>
> Competition in markets is good for consumers, why should not competition
> in currencies also be good for the consumers of money?
That sounds like a pretty vacuous argument to me. Also, currency is
not "consumed"; it's a tool to facilitate the exchange between
producers and consumers in a market. Can you make a reasonable
argument for why a variety of currencies would facilitate the exchange
between producers and consumers in a market better than our current
system of national currencies or even better than a single universal
currency? I'm not saying there are no such arguments; there probably
are some good ones to be made, but the one you gave was not an
example.
>> In the real world, we see examples of both.
>
> Do we? I don't know of many States that allow multiple ``legal''
> currencies to circulate in competition one against another...
Depends on how narrow you want to be with your definition of currency
and what you mean by "legal". If you mean "sanctioned by the state
for the payment of taxes and other legal obligations", then you're
probably right. If you mean "not illegal to use for private trade in
limited markets", then I think arguments could be made.
--Levi
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
