Why does the state have a monopoly on money? (opens in new tab)

Because we don't want people like Giancarlo Devasini, Alex Machinsky, Sam Bankrun-Fraud, Vitalik Buterin, Changpeng Zhao, Saint Saylor and others to govern our money. That's why a lesser evil is used - the state.

Leaving the gold standard has been a disaster for the working class (i.e. anyone who has to work for a living)

https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

A monopoly was developed because it's easier, and I'm sure that's why there isn't anywhere in the developed world that successfully made use of multiple currencies, or private printing of the dominant currency. For example, the American colonies operated without standards for the first few decades and it was a huge pain in the ass for everyone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_American_currency

The article puts it very succinctly:

> As people like David Glasner have pointed out, the idea that the state monopoly on money is really about emergency financing for things like wars can also help us to understand why counterfeiting has historically been treated as treasonous.

Gave me a new perspective on money: as being a weapon of war. Of course it's not the only use of money but it does give food for thought.

In the past there was a thing called company scrip. It was a big problem. State issued money sure as been a lot better.

That said, states do not have a monopoly on money. Ever heard of Robux? Gift cards? Airline miles? Arcade tokens? Credit card reward points? There are a lot of other moneys in our society even if you ignore bullshit crypto coins.

Theoretically these other currencies are pegged to the dollar, but not really. Even gift cards, which have a value expressed in dollars, have a different value. Sometimes the value is increased because they are untrackable dollars that can be used for scams/crime. The value and desirability of goods and services offered by the company that issued the gift card also affect its value.

Would you trade a $1000 Apple gift card for a $1000 Applebee’s gift card? Would you buy a $1000 Apple gift card for $1000? Would you buy an Applebee’s gift card for $1000?

> The main point of that previous post is that although economists tend to dislike monopoly and extol the virtues of competition, there is surprisingly little criticism of central banks among these same economists.

I think professional economist don't have "likes" or "dislikes". Also this statement doesn't seem correct in another way. I think economists try to understand what setting yields the most wealth. If a monopoly yields more wealth than competition, then, economists will recommend a monopoly.

For example, the metric system is similar to a monopoly. It doesn't make sense to have multiple competing systems here.

Same with a currency as it's a unit of accounting. Having multiple currencies would have higher transaction costs because people would have to convert back and forth daily for comparison and making purchases.

There's also the perspective from MMT, where money is a license to pay your taxes. So having multiple ways of paying your taxes doesn't make sense in this view either.

Weird article, no mention of tax or convenience.

Why does the government have a monopoly on time?!

Technically, the state does not have the monopoly on money. The majority of the money supply is created by commercial banks through credit. But the commercial banks are so strictly regulated through capital requirements that the de facto decision about what purposes the banks are allowed to print money for is under centralized control. The ECB even thinks about using capital requirement rules to nudge banks towards green investments, which would be a departure from their mandate of monetary stability.

> When presented in that light, it is not surprising that it would be treated as treasonous.

And if presented in a different light, it'd be surprising. But the more imporant question is why would you need to present anything based on that or another theory instead of validating it with data from those who actually make those rules and categorize it as treason?