Thread

Zero-JS Hypermedia Browser

Relays: 5
Replies: 1
Generated: 01:54:12
The Deep Structural Flaw of the "Bitcoindollar" System: Why Hard Money and Soft Money Cannot Merge. Many are excited about the idea of merging Bitcoin's hard monetary properties with the global liquidity of the U.S. dollar system — sometimes called the "Bitcoindollar System." However, this vision contains a deep structural flaw: you cannot permanently merge hard money and soft money without eventually destroying one or the other. Here’s why: 1. Hard Money (Bitcoin) and Soft Money (Dollar) Are Anti-Systems Bitcoin is a closed, scarcity-enforced, decentralized system with no room for discretionary expansion. The dollar is an open, elastic, human-governed system based on trust, credit, and political power. These two systems react oppositely to economic stress: Bitcoin tightens naturally (scarcity rules). Dollar expands artificially (printing, credit expansion). Trying to integrate them sets up a deep contradiction that cannot resolve peacefully. 2. Scarcity vs. Elasticity: Economic Feedback Incompatibility In times of recession: Bitcoin cannot "stimulate" liquidity because it is strictly scarce. Fiat needs emergency liquidity injections to survive. If Bitcoin anchors a dollarized system, governments lose their core tool: printing liquidity. If governments remain interventionist, Bitcoin principles must be compromised. 3. Practical Scenarios Break Down Quickly If Bitcoin becomes a major reserve, crisis responses are crippled. If stablecoins are Bitcoin-backed, volatility collapses trust and reserve ratios. If Bitcoin is for saving and fiat for spending, Bitcoin naturally drains fiat economies over time. There is no permanent stable equilibrium here. Either Bitcoin undermines fiat gradually, or fiat authorities crush Bitcoin to preserve their system. 4. Gresham’s and Thiers' Law Under free choice, people save in the sounder money (Bitcoin) and spend the weaker one (dollar). Over time, fiat currencies are hollowed out as stores of value. This forces inflationary collapse, regime change, or monetary reset. 5. Philosophical Incompatibility Bitcoin prioritizes individual sovereignty. The dollar system prioritizes top-down societal management. Merging these is not just an economic contradiction, but a philosophical impossibility. 6. Conclusion: No Sustainable Bitcoindollar System At best, a "Bitcoindollar" phase may act as a temporary bridge. But ultimately, either: Bitcoin displaces fiat, or Bitcoin is neutered into a centrally controlled, compromised form. The endgame is a clear winner — not a hybrid. The future is not a fusion of Bitcoin and fiat. It is a transition — and a battle — between two entirely different visions of money and freedom. nostr:nevent1qqsza9ns7qlcrf93mp78dr5ck0dd9lm8kz9kcjwf7l48v8emndu485qpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtczyrgkvu5n6ha3s8qsljjdtwur8fwjzsjg4r38e0u5m66ej5pc3ecqgqcyqqqqqqgph6jdw
2025-04-28 14:50:51 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓
Login to reply

Replies (1)

This is a serious and well-reasoned critique of the #Bitcoindollar thesis BUT the critique is valid if the Bitcoindollar is viewed as a final system. I never claim that. To the contrary the conclusions in my book is that this is a system that buys time for fiat, absorbs global demand for monetary stability, and ushers in a Bitcoinized world without the immediate collapse and the reset of the fiat system which would otherwise cause dramatic consequences for the masses (including a global war) and the usual power elites would emerge again to dominate a Newly born “Bretton Woods” monetary system with some fiat variations such as CBDCs, IMF SDRs or else (gold IOUs would be the same). For me the Bitcoindollar is the only way to a gradual #Bitcoin dominance in 10-20 years time while avoiding sudden collapse of the fiat system, so that also the power elites who hold the keys to this system will adapt. At least this is my hope. Therefore the fusion isn't the future. The siphoning is. And the U.S. may try to ride it as much as possible. The Bitcoindollar system is a transitional strategic framework, not a permanent monetary equilibrium. In the end I agree with you. But your observations were so well thought-after that they deserve a more detailed response. Therefore I would answer one by one and put that into a short article here using “Highlighter” and I will refer to your Post and link it. Thank you, this is the kind of productive engagement one needs when writing on such topics. Also, If you want to receive a free copy of my ebook just contact me via Nostr messages and give me your email to send the ebook file. I would love you to comment the book here on Nostr. 🙏 🙏
2025-04-29 09:52:40 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply