Re:I Spent A Coin (And I Liked It) — How I Bought Lunch in M...
by mmatants on Sunday June 26, 2011 @01:38PM
(#2698502)
Gold coins have no intrinsic value, either. Gold is just another divisible and non-perishable carrier of human-assigned value.
Re:I Spent A Coin (And I Liked It) — How I Bought Lunch in M...
by baddox on Sunday June 26, 2011 @04:40PM
(#2699024)
Your definition of "intrinsic value" is clearly different than mine. If no human-assigned value is intrinsic, then nothing has intrinsic value, and your definition becomes non-functional.
When I said that gold coins have intrinsic value (the same is true for copper coins, etc.), I mean that regardless of what nation minted the coin and what value appears on its face, it will always be worth at least its weight in gold.
Re:I Spent A Coin (And I Liked It) — How I Bought Lunch in M...
by ars on Sunday June 26, 2011 @06:38PM
(#2699330)
Change 'recognized' to 'stored' in your second paragraph. If people don't store it, it's not a currency, even if they use it.
No one willingly stores unstable currencies. The only time people use unstable currencies is if they are forced to by law, or if they are speculating.
When you hear people talk about "the stability of a currency" they are talking about fluctuations of a few percent, not 10s of percents.
A currency is simply a medium of exchange that is widely recognized, where "widely" is subjective. Most modern currency also is notable because it has no intrinsic value (gold coins, for example, have intrinsic value). I think bitcoin certainly qualifies as a currency, albeit an unstable one.