You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Knowledge of History + Economics = Disbelief in Government
The scale absolutely matters. If I can't use my medium of exchange to buy something because it's only accepted by certain members of my small community, then it's hardly a "medium". Obviously there is no such thing as a money that buys absolutely anything anywhere, but there has to be a critical mass reached where the money can buy everything necessary to keep a society's economy moving. None of these community moneys even come close to that. Especially: you couldn't pay taxes with them.
Let me ask you then: what must this magical minimum scale be for something to be called money? Would the currency used in small countries like Andorra, Liechtenstein, or Vatican City not be called "money" just because you determine the community to be too small?
This scale you talk about is completely arbitrary and subjective. If a currency is used as a means (i.e. medium) of exchange, it is a medium of exchange. Your perception of it doesn't change how people use it. If they think it's convenient to use a currency, they do it. Thus it becomes money.
EDIT: Oh, and taxes has nothing to do with this.
I honestly don't know what the scale would be. People have been asking that about bitcoin since its inception. "At what point are enough people accepting this where we can call it money?" It has made massive strides, and it's still not there, yet. You can't hold BTC and expect to use it as money in the same way you can with fiat.
So yes, scale matters. And you're right: my perception doesn't change it.