Quote from: brg444 on December 19, 2015, 01:08:00 AM

Quote from: VeritasSapere on December 19, 2015, 12:46:54 AM

I'm confused Huh

First you argue...

Quote from: VeritasSapere on December 17, 2015, 05:33:32 PM

I think Bitcoin can do both, and that these different aspects of Bitcoin actually reinforce each other. I also do not think Bitcoin will become a world reserve currency without experiencing mass adoption as a currency for the people first, history also certainly supports this theory as well.

to which I reply...

Quote from: brg444 on December 17, 2015, 06:23:50 PM

It doesn't.

hdbuck, always the sharp guy, understands what is being insinuated...

Quote from: hdbuck on December 17, 2015, 09:31:14 PM

did "teh mass" ever had gold in any meaningful way?

hmnope.

By now I'd expect your are still clueless as to what it is I'm trying to lead you to so, to be clear, the argument goes:

Something does not need to be "mass adopted" for it to become a "world reserve currency".

It just needs to be the predilect form of money for relevant* economic actors in the society. Case in point: gold.

*masses != relevant

First of all I do not appreciate you quoting me saying something that I never said, please refrain yourself from doing this, you have done this before and it is libel, slander and fraud.

My argument is that commodity money in the form of precious metal coins, have been the predominant form of currency for the majority of our known history, this is true. Furthermore that Bitcoin will not become a world reserve currency without mass adoption first. Unless you seriously believe that the banks and current financial status quo will voluntarily give up their source of power thereby in effect weakening their position, it is safe to assume that most people will not give up their power, this is well established in political thought and psychology.

We can circumvent and undermine their systems of command and control instead by adopting Bitcoin, only then would the status quo have to adopt Bitcoin in order to stay relevant. In regards to history supporting my argument, it does. You are missing out on the fact that during the long transition phase where we went from precious metals being the predominant form of currency moving towards paper money, this paper was still backed by gold. It was only until the nineteen seventies that the gold standard was abandoned completely. This is why my historical example still holds true.

In other words, after precious metals ceased to be the predominant form of currency, paper backed by precious metals became the predominant form of currency in the world, in this case gold. Over time of course this asset was eroded, first by fractional reserve banking in the nineteen thirties and later by the complete abolishment of the gold standard in the seventies. Therefore the masses did have gold in a meaningful way, this asset has been stolen from the people. This is the bait and switch that has been played on us by the governments and banks. Bitcoin allows us to have a true asset based currency again, a return to sound money. Money for the people by the people.