Re: overcoming ecash deployment problems (Re: all about transferable off-line ecash)
From: "Adam Back"
So this would be the argument for a closed supply of money in the system, like the digicash betabucks where they stated up from that they would only issue 1,000,000 betabucks. People trade them based on supply and demand.
Perhaps. Though at the time Wei Dai had some arguments at the time that if they were popular, they would be a good investment and people would have an incentive to hold on to them which would make them difficult to obtain, highly inflationary, and hard to use.
I have missed that one; however, it is wrong - if people hold them, then they become MORE valuable, and thus you have high deflation - the purchasing power of money grows - which is great. And if their value gets so big that subdivisions start to become necessary, one can always convert them to "new betabucks", each old one being worth a million new ones. End of problem. Mark
I think you are assuming things about rational economic behavior when a money system is subject to high deflation. Consider during periods of high inflation people don't like holding money, as it devalues too fast. They will hold interest bearing deposits instead. During periods of high deflation, they will hold cash if it is the most attractive "investment". The result will be shortage of cash, for people who actually want to use it to make purchases because investors will buy all of it. Perhaps there are some government monetary systems in history which had this problem. For example gold with sudden shortage of gold supply, or similar. Adam On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 05:31:28PM +0300, Marcel Popescu wrote:
From: "Adam Back"
So this would be the argument for a closed supply of money in the system, like the digicash betabucks where they stated up from that they would only issue 1,000,000 betabucks. People trade them based on supply and demand.
Perhaps. Though at the time Wei Dai had some arguments at the time that if they were popular, they would be a good investment and people would have an incentive to hold on to them which would make them difficult to obtain, highly inflationary, and hard to use.
I have missed that one; however, it is wrong - if people hold them, then they become MORE valuable, and thus you have high deflation - the purchasing power of money grows - which is great. And if their value gets so big that subdivisions start to become necessary, one can always convert them to "new betabucks", each old one being worth a million new ones. End of problem.
Mark
From: "Adam Back"
Consider during periods of high inflation people don't like holding money, as it devalues too fast. They will hold interest bearing deposits instead.
Agreed.
During periods of high deflation, they will hold cash if it is the most attractive "investment". The result will be shortage of cash, for people who actually want to use it to make purchases because investors will buy all of it.
Right. And a shortage of anything, cash making no exception, is solved automatically (if the market is left alone). The value of a monetary unit will rise until its price will be considered (by the cash holders) high enough - that is, until they will value something else more than the cash. Shortages are NEVER a problem if the market is left alone to clear it - they simply indicate an undervaluation of the commodity.
Perhaps there are some government monetary systems in history which had this problem. For example gold with sudden shortage of gold supply, or similar.
Once you put the gov't into the equation, all bets are off :) Mark
participants (2)
-
Adam Back -
Marcel Popescu