USD allows worldwide trade and, arguably, progress; while cryptocurrencies at the current stage are too volatile. I don't understand this need for beating "the enemy"; both centralized and decentralized financial systems are going to cohabit in the near future and we are fortunate enough to reap the benefits of both.
I'm pretty thankful for having a centralized authority issuing and maintaining a stable currency; if we look back a couple hundred years... well, I don't want to go back to that.
Compare the rise in purchasing power of bitcoin for the last 8 years to the decline in purchasing power of the USD over the last 100 years. Which form of "stability" do you prefer? Have you considered the increase in cryptocurrency value could just be a measure of the decrease in fiat currency?
When language like "the enemy" is used, it's because there's a moral/ethical argument being made. I didn't include this in my original post, but you might find it interesting:
Comparing a couple hundred years ago (or even 20 years ago, prior to the Internet), is comparing apples to oranges. The USD was not the first world reserve currency. There were 6 before that (I did a presentation on the influence of bitcoin which goes into this a bit more, if interested).
I think it would be more accurate to say you're thankful for the benefits of good, functional money which you currently credit to central banking authorities. My argument (and the videos I've included in my post are part of my supporting evidence) is that those central authorities are actually making things much worse. The rise in value of cryptocurrencies since their invention seems to support my claim that it is much, much better money. It better fits the definition of money as a ledger.
I've look into that and Bitcoin seems pretty uncorrelated to all traditional assets... just moves on its own :D
I didn't mean a moral/ethical argument but the psychological division between us and them.
I was comparing it particularly to the decentralized banking system in the US before the FED. I think it's dogmatic to deny some of the benefits that centralized authorities provide... just for example, if you lose your keys you lose your Bitcoin, but if a centralized authority like Coinbase is providing you access to the wallet, then you can recover it!
But right now cryptos don't fit the main use of money, both storage of value and medium of exchange. I don't find useful to look upon long periods of time while talking about payment methods but day-to-day volatility :)
We have a completely different view of the benefits of centralized authorities. I think mine is based on reasoned evidence and historical precedent. If you don't own your private key, you don't own your bitcoin. History shows over and over and over again how dangerous it is to trust central authorities with your wealth. There are much, much better ways to securely store and backup your private keys than trusting them to someone else. Central exchanges create a huge target for hackers and have a horrible track record for avoiding security issues. I mention some of the steps you can take as an individual in episode 3 of UBF.
Agree to disagree :)
I personally know too many people who lost their bitcoin investment when MtGox went down. I can not agree with centralized thinking for a decentralized system. Opposing the view you have was why Bitcoin was invented in the first place. I hope you recognize this and take responsibility for those who may lose again in the future based on information they get from you.
I agree we disagree, and I'll still argue your perspective can (and has) harmed people. I think we can do better and teach people personal responsibility when it comes to cryptocurrency.