(1) Domestically, the US Army does not enforce law or make sure the dollar is the "coin of the realm." That would violate Posse Comitatus act. US domestic law enforcement enforces laws, domestically - including legal tender laws. I agree you can apportion some of the strength of the US dollar to its legal system, which makes sense, as the currency is an emergent property of the state. However, shifting to BTC instead of USD will simply reallocate the expenditure not reduce or remove.
Counterfeiting is an issue broadly. A small one. Of course, the expense of a Bitcoin transaction (literally 60 days of power for an average US household and 1 iPad of e-waste) far, far, far outweighs the expenditure of the secret service whose job it is to act on counterfeiting. AML and KYC rules, and a counterfeit detection pen will prevent this fake money from turning into a digital representation.
The army isn't generally called in to stop counterfeiting because nation-states have basically zero incentive to counterfeit on a large scale. What good are a few fake paper bills, when the Treasury would just cut you off from the entire world financial system?
(2) How do you explain that countries that do not have armies at all, like Iceland, are able to issue their own fiat currency with value?
(3) If you cannot draw a direct line between switching the currency and reduction in military spending, does it really make sense to apportion value that way?
Counterfeit USD is a small, inexpensive problem because of US military might. The biggest guy in the playground never actually needs to fight.
Imagine for a moment the world suddenly adopted the Nicaraguan Córdoba as the common reserve currency. How long before it gets printed everywhere? Who is going to stop it? And how far do you think Nicaragua's AML/KYC regime would actually reach?
Iceland's currency wouldn't work as a world reserve either, for pretty much the same reasons. You can get away with being small and isolationist if your currency isn't that important.
Make no mistake, "cut off from the entire world financial system" requires the threat of violence. Banks get fined, countries get sanctioned, warrants are issued for people that have never set foot in the US. I don't know exactly how to apportion the cost of that enforcement, but I know you can't ignore it.
> Counterfeit USD is a small, inexpensive problem because of US military might. The biggest guy in the playground never actually needs to fight.
[citation needed]
> Imagine for a moment the world suddenly adopted the Nicaraguan Córdoba as the common reserve currency. How long before it gets printed everywhere? Who is going to stop it? And how far do you think Nicaragua's AML/KYC regime would actually reach?
Why would any state on earth illegally print Nicaraguan money when they can instead print their own legally? What's the goal? Is this really the easiest path to achieve that goal?
> Make no mistake, "cut off from the entire world financial system" requires the threat of violence.
It really doesn't. In this case the carrot is way bigger than the stick.
Please tell me, what stops North Korea (or Iran, or any other US-hostile nation) from printing as many USD as it likes? Don't tell me "risk of being cut off from the US financial system"; they already are. Furthermore, NK already tries:
> Why would any state on earth illegally print Nicaraguan money when they can instead print their own legally? What's the goal? Is this really the easiest path to achieve that goal?
You seem to have just asked "Why would any state on earth illegally print the world reserve currency when they can instead print their own legally?" That seems pretty self-evident, but you can look to Venezuela or Zimbabwe for answers.
(1) Domestically, the US Army does not enforce law or make sure the dollar is the "coin of the realm." That would violate Posse Comitatus act. US domestic law enforcement enforces laws, domestically - including legal tender laws. I agree you can apportion some of the strength of the US dollar to its legal system, which makes sense, as the currency is an emergent property of the state. However, shifting to BTC instead of USD will simply reallocate the expenditure not reduce or remove.
Counterfeiting is an issue broadly. A small one. Of course, the expense of a Bitcoin transaction (literally 60 days of power for an average US household and 1 iPad of e-waste) far, far, far outweighs the expenditure of the secret service whose job it is to act on counterfeiting. AML and KYC rules, and a counterfeit detection pen will prevent this fake money from turning into a digital representation.
The army isn't generally called in to stop counterfeiting because nation-states have basically zero incentive to counterfeit on a large scale. What good are a few fake paper bills, when the Treasury would just cut you off from the entire world financial system?
(2) How do you explain that countries that do not have armies at all, like Iceland, are able to issue their own fiat currency with value?
(3) If you cannot draw a direct line between switching the currency and reduction in military spending, does it really make sense to apportion value that way?