Quote from: Jason on December 30, 2010, 03:20:46 PM

If a government currency is always more insecure than a non-government currency, then how do you explain the e-gold fiasco?

E-gold **FIASCO** ?

Check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Gold

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Gold

In April 2007, the US government ordered e-gold administration to lock/block approximately 58 e-gold accounts, owned and used by The Bullion Exchange, AnyGoldNow, IceGold, GitGold, The Denver Gold Exchange, GoldPouch Express, 1MDC (a Digital Gold Currency, based on e-gold), and others, and forced G&SR (owner of OmniPay) to liquidate the seized assets.[15] In addition, a few weeks later, e-gold themselves were indicted with 4 indictments [16] . However, e-gold is still in business, though not accepting new accounts.
(...)

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Gold

E-gold was tried with violation of 18 USC 1960 in UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. E-GOLD, LTD, District of Columbia court. The court found against E-gold, ruling that "a business can clearly engage in money transmitting without limiting its transactions to cash or currency and would commit a crime if it did so without being licensed."[19] In July 2008 the company and its three directors pled guilty to conspiracy to engage in money laundering and conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business.[1] The company faces fines of $3.7 million, however, the guilty plea is part of a plea bargaining process in which the DA dropped most charges. Regardless, the company has vowed to continue operations following the new Federal KYC guidelines. One upside of the court case for e-gold users is that the judge has rejected any charges of fraud regarding the e-gold user agreement and has confirmed the veracity of the company's gold reserve audit.

If by "fiasco" you mean being raided by government, then fiasco it is, indeed.
Government really hates competition.