IMF Head Foresees End of Banking, Triumph of Cryptocurrency

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
The managing director of the International Monetary Fund has speculated that Bitcoin and cryptocurrency have as much of a future as the Internet itself. It could displace central banks, conventional banking, and challenge the monopoly of national monies. Christine Lagarde, a Paris native who has held her position at the IMF since 2011, says the only substantial problems with existing cryptocurrency are fixable over time.

In the long run, the technology itself can replace national monies, conventional financial intermediation, and even "puts a question mark on the fractional banking model we know today." In a lecture that chastised her colleagues for failing to embrace the future, she warned that "Not so long ago, some experts argued that personal computers would never be adopted, and that tablets would only be used as expensive coffee trays. So I think it may not be wise to dismiss virtual currencies."
 
Oh, that's what IMF stands for. I was thinking the Impossible Missions Force.
 
I mean, if we plan to live in a technological age, and seeing as how money currently holds no value other than what we say it does (IE: not backed by anything). This could actually be a very interesting future, money that's based on doing calculations to process information. it would now be valued by how much information needs to be processed, the more we process, the more our money is worth.
 
LOL im doubtful. way to much at stake nationally for nations to give up on their own currency
 
Good. Governments have too much control over money as it is. Money now, except for cash, is just another tool they spy on you with.
 
A form of it might, but it won't be the one that people are mining in their garages...that'll only be good for buying Viagra online from Belize. Get used to "Fedcoin" for any legit purchases.
 
A form of it might, but it won't be the one that people are mining in their garages...that'll only be good for buying Viagra online from Belize. Get used to "Fedcoin" for any legit purchases.

This. Blockchain technology will probably succeed, but it won't be "Bitcoin", it will be "USD blockchain edition". At least that's what I think. The government won't want to lose control of monetary policy tools in any capacity, so decentralization won't be something I can personally see endorsed by the government. I could also be wrong, but I just don't see it happening.
 
This. Blockchain technology will probably succeed, but it won't be "Bitcoin", it will be "USD blockchain edition". At least that's what I think. The government won't want to lose control of monetary policy tools in any capacity, so decentralization won't be something I can personally see endorsed by the government. I could also be wrong, but I just don't see it happening.

Agreed. Currencies are an assertion of power. If it isn't a recognized nation that certifies its own version of bitcoin, it will be a nation recognized by cryptocurrencies in the vacuum.
 
No, thanks. I'd like the money in my paycheck to hold a stable value over a long period of time. 1 unit of crypto being able to buy a new car one day and only being able to buy a gallon of milk the next sounds like an absolute nightmare.
 
cant buy gas or groceries or pay my bills with monopoly money as of yet so...

You do it every day, if you don't understand that you don't understand money in it's current form and monetary policy of the past few decades.
 
You do it every day, if you don't understand that you don't understand money in it's current form and monetary policy of the past few decades.
Monopoly money doesn't have this, last I checked.
upload_2017-10-4_11-1-5.png
 
Monopoly money doesn't have this, last I checked.
View attachment 38513

You understand that means nothing and has no backing what so ever? You understand the USD and most other world currencies are fiat right? The only value it has is that which is given by those who use it.
 
Agreed. Currencies are an assertion of power. If it isn't a recognized nation that certifies its own version of bitcoin, it will be a nation recognized by cryptocurrencies in the vacuum.

I think people need to separate "blockchain technology" from a particular cryptocoin. Investing in Bitcoin isn't investing in the technology, it's investing in Bitcoin. If Bitcoin was a company with technology that would be licensed, I could see it making sense. As a currency though, there's no need for it to exist. At least with government fiat money it's back by the fact that I need to have it to pay my taxes, and so does everyone else, or the alternative is jail. There's no need to own or transact in Bitcoin. Value would ultimately be defined by what it's worth like anything else, but when it comes to government issued currency, it's worth not going to jail, and that's pretty valuable to everyone.
 
I thought most central banks were privately owned?

They're not run by the particular government party in power, but they're very much entwined with one another, and moves made by the central bank can be used as a tool to manipulate the economic picture for a nation, which is the type of control a government will never want to give up. Case in point, look at countries in southern Europe. Greece is the best example. The Euro has been terrible for Greece. They have an expensive currency and Frankfurt holds the cards for how to adjust things like interest rates and currency valuation. Greece can't devalue its currency or lower its interest rate to try to drive business if Germany decides it's not going to do that. Notwithstanding the other issues Greece is facing, that's a major problem when economic hardship strikes. Knowing this, I can't see a single government saying "yes, we're going to transact officially in Dogecoin because wow, such currency, much value".
 
Back
Top