First darknet markets, then CoinCards, now ShopinBit. nostr:npub1vr2nva0s0hhfulthjy8053rg9kruk5erzwaxdw85gjwkfytj994sgudzvx next?
Are we supposed to ignore this or just rationalize it with "muh Gresham' Law"?
Discussion
Gresham' Law per definition needs a State which allows different types of money.
What we see here is nearly the same. When people have two coins, they always hold the coin back which is more sound. This leads to a even faster devaluation
I wouldn't save in XMR.
Would you spend in XMR?
Depends on what I'm buying. The same answer as if you had asked "would you spend in BTC?"
Then what you save on is besides the point when discussing merchant adotpion. Replying with xmrbtc charts and variations of greshams law is just ignoring the real issue and the clear market signal.
It is an important point about the limits of exactly what is being said by that market signal.
No one is disputing that. All aspects are important. I see a gold/silver dynamic at play here.
Nothing wrong with using silver for payments.
My thinking was more like the era of gold and gold certificates. We will never see them pegged, but the gold certificates were probably never a true perfect peg either. Atomic swaps are already here at a floating rate.
So... "muh Gresham's Law". Bitcoin losing retail payments is not something to brag about IMO
i dont think you understand Gresham's law correctly.
but yeah, I get your point.
Make me understand
Gresham s law only applies in situations where one money commodity is trading at an artificially lower prize. I.e. when the state sets the price. but with bitcoin / monero we have a free market determining the prize.
You're absolutely right, didn't kmow about that takes. That just reinforces my original point that it is not a good excuse for bitcoin to lose market share on retail payments.
yep! that point stands! in free market - especially black markets - the participants want the best money possible - because they are free to demand it!
from wikipedia The law states that any circulating currency consisting of both "good" and "bad" money (both forms required to be accepted at equal value under legal tender law) quickly becomes dominated by the "bad" money.
so, a debased currency that is legally bound to a higher price than it would otherwise have on the free market. in this situation people get rid of their artificially overvalued coins first. understandably so.
and I misspoke on my previous post, artificially HIGHER prize/purchasing power