>>510167569
>Hard currency doesn't fail.
Completely delusional. Debasing silver coins by reducing their weight or their purity so you can create nominally larger numbers of them is a form of fiat currency.
>Hard money enforces iron discipline.
LoL, no. And even if that were the case, why would you prevent real economic activity to be financially profitable? Which, mathematically, is impossible without perpetual geometric expansion of the supply of legal tender?
>interest rates
Why even allow lending at interest?
>Hard money DOES have some disadvantages
Money itself has disadvantages and we need to move past it.
>we could easily switch to a free market gold backed money that was completely independent of the government.
Any capitalist economy built on it would fail or not even launch because no possibility for profits. Or, happens each and every single time, additional amounts of money, backed by fictional gold, will be issued to mathematically enable the financial profits of businesses.
>Do you own or use Bitcoin?
Very little. I missed the boat.
>Have you heard of Goldbacks?
Yes. You cannot have a capitalist society based on them. Unless you'll allow/tolerate their debasement (reducing the purity or the amount of gold in them) or the issuance of fictional yet spendable amounts of them.
>An excellent example of the deflationary aspects of hard money.
Won't allow capitalism to exist. For the reason already previously stated for hundreds of times. The mathematical impossibility of generalised financial profits if the money supply does not grow geometrically in a sustained manner.
>Hard money requires saving IN ADVANCE.
Which reduces the circulating supply which makes it even less financially profitable to do anything.
>Fiat currency creates future debts. Eventually those future debts grow to unsustainable amounts that they inevitably crash the system.
So? Why are you telling me this? I want to move past currency/money/legal tender and capitalism altogether.