undefined | Better HN

0 pointsslver4y ago0 comments

> So it's one rule for the government and another for the people.

Of course it is, otherwise it wouldn't be a government. People get really silly with this. Governments can define laws, enforce them and so on. They have many rules that apply to them and not to everyone else. That's the whole point.

0 comments

sushid4y ago

The US also has done the exact same in the past. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Reserve_Act

drclau4y ago

I agree with you on how governments often work. I can’t agree that’s the whole point, though. Why would it be? I’d be curious to understand why you think so.

allie14y ago

The whole point is to enforce rules that benefit the whole, at the cost of individual benefit.

Say you have 100 rials or 1M. Converting it to BTC might be good for you individually if you believe the local currency is going to lose value, but it’s not good for the collective as there will now be less demand and more supply of it. So the individual benefits at the cost of the group. Stopping that is the gov’s job.

This is a general comment, I am not familiar with Iran as a country and might be missing context.

leetcrew4y ago

this is a really unconvincing example, at least to me. despite the name, bitcoin doesn't function much like a currency. that is to say, someone who would otherwise hold $1mm cash would probably not want to convert that to bitcoin, at least not for legal transactions. so if a meaningful amount of people would rather use BTC than fiat, the problem is not that people are allowed to buy BTC. the problem is that the government has failed spectacularly at issuing a stable currency, which is one of its main jobs.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse