actually the way i see it evolving is that Bitcoin would take the place of gold similar to the gold reserve system we had up until 1971.
That is the way I would like to see it evolving and at one time had hoped to see it evolving, but cannot see a mechanism for that to transpire at this point in time (thus my thought experiments on 'bakcoin'.)
Essentially Bitcoin is just to good as an exchange currency and there is no practical way to stop people from using it.
I think that there is a possibility that within the space of hours, the problem Bitcoin could face is how to discourage users rather than encourage them, and do so in a way that preserves the reputation of the solution. If such an event happened it would correspond to a failure of other currencies and would occur at the time when the Bitcoin solution was needed the most.
actually you're right, Bitcoin is an excellent transactional currency as well as a store of value which makes it unique among monetary experiments and it's prospects so bright as far as i'm concerned.
I don't find this particularly unique to be honest. Probably it's more common than not. Shells with holes in them served the Native Americans admirably in their time.
I will agree that Bitcoin is a wonderfully capable exchange medium for our time...and I hope it pans out as a good store of value as well. I must reiterate that I see limitations about exactly how capable it proves if called upon to live up to it's potential demand.
gold has history as a store of value but lacks transactional flexibility and may have become obsolete with the advent of the Internet.
If anything, I see the lack of transactional flexibility as a positive for a reserve store of value. Things which can take flight easily tend to be easier to lose, and if one is dipping into one's reserves on a regular basis than one probably has other issues to deal with.
I would also argue that the Internet is significantly secondary to the telegraph and radio in terms of being a revolutionary step forward. All pale compared to the printing press, and that pales compared to writing language itself.
as i understand the old gold standard, individuals would lend their gold holdings to the nations that treated their fiat currencies with respect. if those countries got out of hand by resorting to the printing press, these same individuals would yank their gold holdings out of those countries thus decreasing it's reserves and providing a disciplinary hammer to those profligate nations. it was a self regulating system according to free market principles and worked well as far as i can tell.
I think that most governments have had plenty of money of their own obtained through selling resources, imposing tariffs, etc. Anyway, the gold standard can and has existed without government involvement, and with fractional characteristics. To me, a 'gold standard' simply means that the net worth of an entity is based on how much gold they control.
why couldn't the same system be set up with Bitcoin replacing gold?
Probably could, but it would take some sort of incentive. Something more compelling that 'cypherdoc hopes so.'
Gold is one of the few things that is even more simple than a stone ax. That is a very appealing characteristic to me, and probably to a lot of other people on the face of the earth as well.