It's not money because there's no associated liability.

Right, not intrinsically. Sometime tokens are IOUs e.g. redeemable stablecoins, where the issuer promises to swap the token for bank money. But for tax purposes most jurisdictions still treat them as commodities AFAIK, to my point earlier.

And fiat isn’t that different either: central bank currency are technically liabilities, but there’s nothing concrete you can redeem them for beyond more of the same money…

▲

EGreg 10 hours ago | parent [-]

This is what a lot of people get wrong. Money doesn’t have to have liabilities, only fiat currencies do. Commodity money eg gold or silver are valuable in and of themselves, for instance. The government sues signiorage there.

However, individual liabilities are a great way to introduce currencies into circulation. Start with eg loyalty points at a restaurant or credits redeemable aboard a ship etc. We are working on that: https://community.intercoin.app/t/local-community-currencies...

A city can skip all that and just issue a UBI to all its citizens in its own currency, and start accepting taxes and fees in that currency. Read this: https://community.intercoin.app/t/rolling-out-voluntary-basi...

▲

hgomersall 4 hours ago | parent [-]

All money ever has had an associated liability. Commodity money absolutely relied on the face value as the basis of the commodity value. Any metal/face value disparity could lead to cross border arbitrage (making use of counterfeiting), but intrinsic to the process is the associated liability of the issuer. Otherwise you're just trading assets.

	▲	EGreg 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Seigniorage doesnt create liability But commodity money doesn’t require seigniorage