> Historically, money backed by weak reserves has always lost against money backed by stronger reserve assets.

Can you say more about where this has actually happened, and how it's applicable in this situation? (I'm actually curious)

I'd recommend https://www.lynalden.com/broken-money/

USD is backed by literally nothing. LITERALLY NOTHING.

https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages...

> Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity, and receive no backing by anything

> USD is backed by literally nothing. LITERALLY NOTHING.

that is not quite right. historically USD has been backed by the USA military

Let's be real, fiat currencies are essentially backed by Uranium 235 and defense industry engineering capabilities. (both as it relates to turning the U235 into large amounts of energy in a small amount of time and producing other things like aircraft carriers)

funnily enough you CAN actually redeem the banknotes for these things but most people don't typically enjoy the experience

also known as "an offer nobody can refuse"

agree. the USD dollar is backed by the threat of violence which is how I understand what it means to be an empire; in contrast with a 'civilization' (though it seems as though empire is the early stage of civilization, it boots things up)

And the US military is backed by debt, it's turtles all the way down. Force is not a reserve asset.

I don't think there's anyone who actually thinks that using the debt fueled dollar as reserve is the best position. And digital scarcity is not a thing unless you are talking about pokemon cards. Bitcoin is not backed by anything other than crime, money laundering & financial derivatives.

> Bitcoin is not backed by anything other than crime, money laundering & financial derivatives.

Then short it.

???