In another theory, “money” is a good like any other, but with a very special utility set. For most goods, people seek the highest value at the lowest price. But when the utility of the good is actually its value, then you seek the strongest “value.” Tyler, you’re not trying to sell me a TV, you’re trying to sell me a cryptocoin. Why would I spend one thing that is worth $500 on something worth $400? And how did QuitCoin get to $400 in the first place? And so what if you build in “delfationary pressures?” Is that a good thing, or a bad thing, long term? What if you built in “inflationary pressures?” I suppose if money is a tool for credit expansion, one might have a certain opinion about it. But what if money should just be a good, used to store and transact value? What if regular people, who have no clue about economic theories, just have utility for storing and transacting value, really quickly, and don’t care to think about how governments finance themselves, since they are so ignorant as to believe that taxes account for all of that? What would money look like in a free market, if all it needed to be were money, and nothing else? If the “price” of money is what the market selects, as a composite view of many voluntary, non-coerced exchanges between individual buyers and sellers, then you use your weaker currencies to buy the stronger ones. Not the other way around. Once a currency becomes strong, it is hard to unseat it, and currencies become strong in free markets due to objective reasons for value. But we have to re-discover this.
