The issuance of money must clearly depend on an institution that does not depend on the state, but as happens in the United States. They belong only to the Federal Reserve. There should be a global currency. to govern the unions created to regulate the exchange rate of the currency. Certainly, I think it is necessary for the state to introduce legal tender, because it provides legal certainty, because in case of violation, I know that I will sue and, in our case, they will give me pesos that I can exchange for goods and services, since they are accepted as a means of payment on the market. However, it does not take anything away from Lanpsoibilidad that I pay someone with something else (car, well, jewelry). It is perfectly legal. It is also true that money did not create anyone and that it was born of a spontaneous order and that if at some point there was no more money, people would automatically look for another means of payment. “Are there examples of the use of non-legal monetary currency? Is it worth considering it as one of the sweets they give you in the kiosk for more than negligible value? ». To answer your Juan Pablo question, I can give you a recent example, and that is Bitcoin. A virtual currency that has value and is increasingly used by individuals as a means of payment or even to buy and sell currencies.
So much so that it is common to hold a meeting in a Starbucks or a public place with a Wi-Fi signal and transfer the Bitcoin. On the other hand, I don`t think it can be compared to candy in a kiosk. I do not think that two different things can be comparable, and if they could be, we would have the problem of how much we can do it. In short, I believe that, if commercial transactions are to be framed within a regulatory framework that protects them and looks after their participants, spontaneity in commerce should not be changed either by the state or by laws that only hinder them, which are ultimately aimed at ensuring that the politician in positions of power exploits this for himself. or yours. Sweden introduced paper money in 1661 by the hand of money changer Johan Palmstrich, who provided banknotes as receipts for those depositing gold or other metal at the Stockholm Bank. There are no restrictions on public expenditure. Any action that restricts them violates the law on forced tendering, legally and with liberating force. All this is well illustrated by the historical occasion when the term “legal tender” became widely known and was treated as a definition of money. The infamous legal tender cases heard by the U.S. Supreme Court after the Civil War dealt with the question of whether creditors should accept current dollars to pay their claims for money they borrowed when the dollar was much higher.13 The same problem became even more acute at the end of the great European inflation that followed. until the First World War, when even in the extreme case of the German mark, the principle of “the mark is the brand” was applied to the end, although later some efforts were made to offer limited compensation to those most affected.14 All banknotes printed with the convertible inscription as legal tender are still in circulation and serve as a means of payment.
It is clear that the monopoly of money is part of the security a state needs to manipulate its voters, control the market and the way it shrinks. Bitcoin is a clear example of what would happen if no state or central bank controlled its spending, those who use this means of payment agree to use it without the intervention of a state that forces them to comply, the same transaction makes them apply. I am approaching a link to work with the limited knowledge about some of these new cryptocurrencies, although it is not the only one, it is the most used and that covers more today, but there is more.