Dev Fund Proposal: Increasing Monetary base by 10%

[boxalex]

Doesn’t make it a difference IF there is an intention to burn or it could happen unintentional.

Hard to formulate this one as a non-native English speaker, trying to explain it with a real life example:

For any FIAT currency i’am aware of it’s forbidden to destroy it intentionally by law and i’am pretty sure this includes any mechanism that would favour such behavour.
Now of course someone could loss his money/currencies somehow but this would be unintentional and hence not be a break of law. I hope you get the idea.

Now by officially deploying a mechanism that would allow intentionally to lower the supply it would in principe no more different than deploying a mechnism that intentionally increases the supply.

@daira

Speaking as myself, I think burning money is generally a bad idea. I also think that deliberately introducing features that lead to less predictable issuance is not a good idea.

I fully agree to this by the way!!!

[daira]

@boxalex

For any FIAT currency i’am aware of it’s forbidden to destroy it intentionally by law and i’am pretty sure this includes any mechanism that would favour such behavour.

That depends on the jurisdiction. In the Euro Zone, “Member states must not prohibit or punish the complete destruction of small quantities of Euro coins or notes when this happens in private. However they must prohibit the unauthorised destruction of large amounts of Euro coins or notes.” In the US, destroying US bank notes or coins is normally illegal, but could in principle be protected by the First Amendment if the intent is as a speech act. In practice, laws against destroying money are largely symbolic and widely recognized to be unenforceable.