Your idea of creating a separate illusion will not work , as you have given the vendor & regular people no reason to fall for your illusion , except for your understanding , that since the bankers are creating an illusion , you can too. Illusions don't work that way, Vendors & regular people actually have to really believe your illusion, which the bankers used the gold standard in the beginning (A physical asset) , your illusion does not offer a Physical asset , so it will never fool anyone.
What 'physical asset' does Bitcoin offer? It is a
virtual currency, not a physical asset. If what you're saying is true then why would anyone ever use Bitcoin? Think back to when it was first introduced - someone took a leap of faith and decided to use it. Or do you think it sprang into existence overnight complete with bitcoin exchanges, bitcoin ATMs, a few millions users, and an equivalence value against the dollar, sterling, etc?
FYI: Flaws in your specific illusion, is it fails to consider two primal issues. 1. Physical Resources are not Unlimited. 2. Your Illusion fails the believably test, because you are not initially backing it with a physical resource.
This thread is not about my proposal. It is about bitcoin. Nevertheless...
1. What my proposal actually does is remove cost considerations in relation to recycling and environmental concerns, thus making it possible to maximise the resources that are available. It also allows for massive input into R&D to develop new and innovative technologies to address these issues.
2. See above. When Hal Finney performed the first bitcoin transaction, did he do so because bitcoin was a physical asset or backed by a physical asset? No he did not. He took a leap of faith and used the software, which was all bitcoin was at the time. Was Hal Finney a fool? If I employ your logic then it becomes impossible to conceive how bitcoin has got to where it is right now without assuming that each and every bitcoin user is a fool.
Even BTC is being backed up by False Fiats (Dollar/Yuan) on the exchanges, But people still believe in Fiat as long as someone else takes it. You want your illusion to match the others , you got to back it up with something others consider has worth.
Again, think back to the early days. Bitcoin may be backed up by fiat now, but was it backed by fiat right from the start? Was it backed by anything more than the early adopters'
belief that it might have some future utility?
You still haven't answered any of my questions. I'll give you the short version again. My contention is that the reason people aren't abandoning fiat in favour of bitcoin is that a) the benefits bitcoin offers do not actually correspond with their wants and needs, and b) bitcoin doesn't offer them anything more than what existing monetary systems offer, i.e. it is the existing systems in an alternative form rather than an actual alternative. Do you disagree? If so, why?
HS