And I was pointing out that Fiat's "intrinsically useless object" get's its "value" from State decrees and management
It has historically built up market sentiment and structures... structures that fail time and time again. You only cite the better examples (euro, USD & GBP).... whilst conveniently evading the basket case currencies - a list of which is on hand in any given year. Their plight is brought about through centralised mismanagement. Even the euro project is flawed but there isn't a maturity in your viewpoint to acknowledge this.
ironically, it is the very absence of such State involvement that have BC folk giving the BTC intrinsically useless object values of $10,000 or $20,000.
Decentralisation is a key aspect of bitcoin. Nobody can interfere with it in the same way as FIAT.
As regards the jibe about valuation, we've been over this. We're in a price discovery phase with Bitcoin. The currency itself has not evolved fully as yet - nor its ecosystem. However, at no point will you acknowledge this. It doesn't make for maturity of thought and rationale but then if you're so caught up in your entrenched position...
It is I admit a bit of a confidence trick
That many FIAT currencies started out as Gold backed and once market sentiment was established, they pulled the backing out from under it? I agree.
I get my confidence in the euro from the fact that the central apparatus of one of the largest and most developed economic blocs on earth is committed to maintaining that confidence and has succeeded for nearly 20 years and shows every sign of succeeding over the medium future, if long term inflation linked euro bond yields are any guide.
It has been pointed out to you at length that the euro project is flawed. Furthermore, whilst the larger economy blocks are stable, that's not the case elsewhere. BTC doesn't recognise borders and has a use case wherever there is state mismanagement of the economy and the respective FIAT currency.
Satoshi's holy grail was to create a currency that did not need such central management of its value (which indeed would be an impressive achievement) but s/he recognised that this required bitcoins to have some intrinsic value . S/he squared the circle by arguing that if it was used as a currency then it would have achieved intrinsic value. IMHO that is very flawed logic and was borne of wishful thinking, as clearly Satoshi was not thick. Fiat has no such pretensions - it accepts that it has no intrinsic value. Its use as a currency is derived from other attributes.
Nonsense. In terms of Intrinsic value, they're both the same. In terms of 'other attributes', they both have a very different set of them. Furthermore, you approach this subject as if it's a winner takes all scenario..that one must win out. That's not the case. Crypto's do certain things better and have a use case.
But we are going round in circles. You started this latest cul de sac by giving us fake news about the Rand to condemn all Fiat.
You have some nerve to point the finger re. talk of going round in circles & cul de sacs given that you have taken a number of threads off topic to pursue exactly that....regurgitating the same argument.
On the fake news jibe, it doesn't say much for either one of you to hold me accountable for the media. You both know perfectly well I took that article and the direct quotation at face value. You're suggesting that I knowingly spread fake news. That says a lot about the extent of your entrenched position and immaturity in this discussion.
If the article is inaccurate, no problem. The point still stands though - Certain states have gone to the printers in mismanaging their FIAT currencies in the past.
Rather like Mr Trump retweeting some isolated muslim outrage to attack all muslims.
Contemptible. As regards the 'isolated' aspect, there's a whole list of failed FIAT currencies past and present. Furthermore, you can be sure there's another one in process as we speak. That puts paid to your 'isolated' nonsense.