The Daily Signal - Are Bitcoin and Other Forms of Cryptocurrency the Future of Money?

Episode Date: March 9, 2022

Cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin and ethereum are popping up everywhere. But many Americans may not completely understand what they are. As governments around the globe struggle to legislate on this new digital money, it can be useful to know exactly what’s going on. Heritage Foundation research fellow Peter St. Onge, an economist, says he sees incredible possibilities for a future with various forms of cryptocurrency. "You could replace the entire insurance industry with a couple of lines of code, and then you could run those on something like ethereum, so the concept of cryptocurrency is astoundingly powerful," St. Onge says. "The main application most people are aware of is bitcoin, but there are many, many applications. We've only just begun with it." Unfortunately, governments seem intent on limiting cryptocurrencies. "There are a number of government agencies that have been trying to either harness bitcoin or to destroy it intentionally and they haven't really resolved who's the top dog on that hill," St. Onge says. "It has created an enormous amount of regulatory risk within crypto." St. Onge joins "The Daily Signal Podcast" to discuss what the future holds for cryptocurrencies and what you need to know. We also cover these stories: President Joe Biden announces a ban on energy imports from Russia. The Florida Senate passes the Parental Rights in Education bill amid distortions from the left. U.S. gas prices reach a historic high.  Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's the Nissan Black Friday event where you can... Wait, wait. Isn't it like a month long now? Nissan Black Friday Month? Does that work? It's the Nissan Black Friday Month event. On remaining 2025 Rogan Centra, get 0% financing. Plus, get $1,000 Nissan bonus on kicks models.

This Black Friday, you've got a whole month to catch all the exclusive offers waiting for you. See your local Nissan dealer or nisson.ca for details. Conditions apply. This is the Daily Signal podcast for Wednesday, March 9th. I'm Kate Trinco. And I'm Doug Blair. Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum are popping up everywhere. But many Americans may not completely understand what they are.

As governments around the globe struggle to legislate this new digital money, it can be useful to understand exactly what's going on. Heritage Foundation Research Fellow Peter San Ange joins the show to discuss what the future holds for cryptocurrencies. But before we get to that conversation, Let's hit our top stories of the day. President Joe Biden announced Tuesday that America won't be importing energy from Russia anymore. Via CNN? We're banning all imports of Russian oil and gas and energy.

That means Russian oil will no longer be acceptable at U.S. ports and the American people will deal another powerful blow to Putin's war machine. This is a move that has strong bipartisan support, the Congress, and I believe in the country. America's have rallied support, have rallied to support their Ukrainian people and made it clear we will not be part of subsidizing Putin's war. Senator Marco Rubio, who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, praised Biden's decision. Here's what the Florida Republican said in a video posted to Twitter. I'm happy that the president has announced a ban on Russian oil imports. We import about 200,000 barrels of Russian oil a day, and we can easily replace that by just producing 200,000 barrels a day more of our own.

oil. We can easily do that very quickly. We don't need oil from Iran. We don't need oil from Venezuela. In fact, Venezuela can't even produce enough oil at this moment. They're less than 1% of the global production. So part one of the plan is in place. We're not buying oil from Russia. Now we have to do part two, which is we should replace it with American oil, not Saudi oil, not Iranian oil, not Venezuelan oil. According to the White House, this will cost Russia billions of dollars in revenue from U.S. consumers. On Tuesday, the Florida State Senate passed the parental rights and education bill. Opponents of the bill have labeled it the don't say gay bill. The legislation aims to prevent

pre-K through third grade educators from teaching sexual orientation and gender identity to their students. Critics have claimed that the parental rights and education bill is dangerous and would hurt LGBT students. But Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a Republican, claims the bill is designed to prevent the sexualization of children. to make sure that kids are being taught age-appropriate materials. He also claims that the corporate media is being dishonest about the contents of the bill. Here's DeSantis during a heated conversation with a reporter on the bill on Monday, via local Florida News Channel, WFLA.

I asked me about federal rights and education, what critics call the don't say gay bill, is on the Senate. Does it say that in the bill? Does it say that in the bill? I'm asking you to tell me what's in the bill because you are pushing false narratives. It doesn't matter what critics say. Hold on it says it bans classroom instruction on sexual identity and gender orientation. For who? For grades pre-K through three.

So five-year-old, six-year-old, seven-year-olds. And the idea that you wouldn't be honest about that and tell people what it actually says, it's why people don't trust people like you because you peddle false narratives. And so we disabuse you of those narratives. And we're going to make sure that parents are able to send their kid to kindergarten without having some of this stuff injected into their school curriculum. The bill's passage in the Senate means it goes to Governor DeSantis's desk, where he is expected to sign the bill into law.

If you've been shocked at how high gas prices have been lately, you're not alone. I know I'm not excited for my next fill-up. According to AAA, gas prices are now the highest they have been since 2008. The average price per gallon for Americans at the beginning of this week was 406. the highest it's been since July of 2008. Prices have also skyrocketed in recent months. A year ago, the average price per gallon was $1.30 lower. And even just a week ago, gas prices per gallon were $0.45 cents lower.

A new poll from Quinnipiac University shows that in the event of a hypothetical invasion of the U.S., a majority of Republicans and independents would stay and fight for their country, while the majority of Democrats would flee the country. The poll reported that 55% of all Americans would stay in fight, while 38% said that they would leave. Amongst Republicans, 68% would stay, while 57% of independents said that they would stay. However, 52% of Democrats said that they would leave the country rather than fight,

the only group of the majority who said that they would flee. While Democrats were the most likely to say that they would flee the country in a hypothetical invasion, they were also the most likely to say that the U.S. should intervene militarily against Russia and their ongoing war with Ukraine. 88% of Democrats said that they would support a military response to Russia, while 82% of Republicans and 77% of independence would. Now stay tuned for my conversation with Peter Sain-Age about Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

As conservatives, sometimes it feels like we're constantly on defense against bad ideas. Bad philosophy, revisionist history, junk science, and divisive politics. But here's something I've come to understand. When faced with bad ideas, it's not enough to just defend. If we want to save this country, then it's time to go on offense. Conservative principles are ideas that work. Individual responsibility, strong local communities, and belief in the American dream.

As a former college professor and current president of the Heritage Foundation, my life's mission is to learn, educate, and take action. My podcast, The Kevin Roberts Show, is my office. opportunity to share that journey with you. I'll be diving into the critical issues that plague our nation, having deep conversations with high-profile guests, some of whom may surprise you. And I want to ensure freedom for the next generation. Find the Kevin Roberts Show, wherever you get your podcast. My guest today is Peter Saint-Aange, a research fellow in economic policy here at the Heritage Foundation. Peter, welcome to the show. Thanks for having me on, Doug. All right, so let's talk about cryptocurrency.

And I am, I think, probably not alone amongst Americans in not knowing what the heck cryptocurrency is. So can you just to start with explain what is cryptocurrency? Yeah, cryptocurrency is fundamentally, it's a currency that's based on something called a blockchain. And a blockchain is simply a list of who owns what. So it's called a ledger or a digital ledger. And that's a pretty simple thing. but it turns out that this guy, Satoshi Nakamoto, who we don't know his real identity,

he had the insight that you could run an entire monetary system using a blockchain. And he really didn't know if it would work. Nobody knew if it would work. He came out with a white paper in 2009 in response to the financial crisis at the time. And it turns out this thing works like a charm. You can effectively run an entire thing. currency system on roughly an Xbox worth of processing. It's absolutely stunning. So when you say an Xbox worth of processing, you're saying that there's not a whole lot of

tech involved in this process? There is surprisingly little in tech involved in. I think the original white paper is like two or three pages. There are thousands and thousands of people who have self-taught themselves, how to how to code various aspects. of crypto. That's part of the reason why there are so many cryptocurrencies, right? There are tens of thousands of them because, you know, you could take a couple weeks, teach yourself how to code one, and you're off to the races. Right. That's actually an interesting point, because it's not just Bitcoin anymore, which I think was the original cryptocurrency that everybody thinks of, but now there's things like Ethereum, there's things like Dogecoin,

which I think was a joke for a while, and then Elon Musk tweeted about it and it took off. what is the difference between all of these different currencies? So Bitcoin is a specific application of a blockchain, right? Which remember, blockchain is just a list of who owns what. But it turns out that if you put more details into each of those entries, you can do a whole lot more with it. Right. So the idea behind Ethereum is that you would have executable code in there.

In other words, each little entry, instead of saying, you know, account X owns, why, okay, that little entry would actually contain essentially a piece of software. And so by doing that, now the code is always very transparent. That's a very core concept in the community. But by doing that, you can then do all kinds of applications. You can, you know, you could run an insurance policy, for example, that, you know, if Orlando is freezing, then I, the orange grower, get paid $100,000, and then that can automatically execute.

It'll go out and search up what the weather is on weather.com. The software will decide if the contract was fulfilled, and if it was, then it gets paid to you. Now, keep in mind what that would mean, right? You could replace the entire insurance industry with a couple of lines of code, and then, you know, you could run those on something like Ethereum. So the concept of cryptocurrency is astounding, powerful, right? The main application most people are aware of is Bitcoin, but there are many, many applications. We've only just begun with it. I think in terms of a technology, blockchain is probably

comparable to a database, right? And of course, databases run the entire world, right? Amazon.com is a database with a pretty interface on front. So, you know, and then the question there, and, you know, in terms of why do most people think of crypto as only Bitcoin? I think it's a very important. I think it's largely just because regulators have gotten in the way. They've made it very difficult to establish a lot of these different business plans that fundamentally could be internet scale in terms of how they impact us. I want to get to that point about regulation and government response to cryptocurrency, but first, how has cryptocurrency impacted the current financial system and the markets that we're seeing right now? Right. Again, probably the biggest impact has simply been in currency.

the, you know, those sort of programmable functions, they still have pretty small reach. It's still a regulatory gray market. That's really scared a lot of them out. Now, in terms of currency, Bitcoin, of course, is the dominant cryptocurrency. And probably the biggest impact it's had, first of all, is just proof of concept that you can indeed run an entire financial system on almost nothing, which is kind of shocking. And of course, one that is completely decentralized. So nobody owns Bitcoin. You know, you don't have any Wall Street banks to bail out.

But probably in terms of real-world impact, the biggest, in my opinion, has been on the gold markets. Right. So gold traditionally was sort of the backup plan in case the dollar collapsed. Most people aren't afraid of that. But there is a substantial community people who are interested in that sort of currency insurance. And a lot of that, a lot of those people now have switched over to Bitcoin so that you're starting to see that when there's inflation, you know, news or, you know, when something happens in the economy that makes people concern that there's going to be inflation. A lot of that impact used to go to gold. Now it goes over to Bitcoin.

That's an interesting point you just raised because from my limited understanding of what cryptocurrency is, one concern that some people have brought. up is that it functions currently more like an asset, like gold, for example, than actual money. So, I mean, I looked at the numbers right now, and one Bitcoin is worth almost $44,000. So to own one Bitcoin, you would have to pay $44,000. Is that a problem if we want this to be a form of currency as opposed to just an asset class? Right. In the long run, it's not a problem at all. Bitcoin, each individual Bitcoin can be broken up to.

up into a hundred million units called Satoshi. So, you know, if a Bitcoin were worth a million dollars, then each of those units would be worth one penny. And indeed, he, you know, the designer probably chose $100 million with that intention. So it's not a problem. People would just stop thinking in Bitcoins than they would think in Satoshi. Now, the question of asset versus currency is interesting. So in the long run, Bitcoin is intended to be used as a currency.

but of course the question is how do you get from here to there? Okay, so if Bitcoin were the world currency, you can take all the money in the world and you can divide it by the number of Bitcoin, which will never be more than $21 million, and you get to a price of something like $5 million, right? And then you would have each Satoshi would be a fraction of a dollar. Good enough, but the problem is,

as you're getting from here where Bitcoin is only worth $44,000 to that $5 million, right? What would take Bitcoin to that price rise is people beginning, or more and more people beginning to think that Bitcoin will actually take over. Right. So the day before Bitcoin takes over, it'll be $4.999 million, okay? Because, you know, the market will be almost certain that it's taking over. Currently, the market apparently believes there's only like a 1% chance that Bitcoin will take over.

Therefore, it has a price of whatever, $44,000. Now, the problem, of course, is that those future expectations change all the time, right? So if Chairman Powell or, you know, Joe Biden or somebody says a good thing or a bad thing about Bitcoin, then that probability that Bitcoin becomes the dominant currency, that could go from, you know, 1% to 2%, it could go to half a percent. And that would make the value of Bitcoin double or half, right? So fundamentally Bitcoin's price today, is mostly coming from a bet whether Bitcoin is going to take over the monetary system.

Now, the vast majority of people, even Bitcoin fans, don't necessarily think that's the case. That's why it only has a 1% probability. But what that means is that Bitcoin is jumping all over the place because it's not a currency yet. If Bitcoin were to become a currency, it would not jump around. And we know this because that's what we saw with gold, right? So gold was used for hundreds of years. gold was extremely stable. It was far more stable than the U.S. dollar. But after gold was demonetized, right, so since, you know, particularly 1970, gold is all over the place. It doubles, it drops in half,

right? It's all over the place. So if you looked at gold today, you would say, oh my gosh, gold can never be a currency. It's all over the place. Well, sure. When something is a currency, because the demand is so large and stable, it levels out. And so that would be the case with Bitcoin as well. If it were become a currency, it would likely be more stable than the U.S. dollar is today. Why? Particularly if it becomes a currency, it doesn't fall into the trap that gold, oil, other resources that we've used throughout history as currency will fall into. Right.

The key is the supply dynamics, right? So U.S. dollars are printed. basically they'll print as many as they think the public will accept. So, you know, they're printed typically about 5 to 10% per year is the increase in the number of dollars in existence. In gold's case, that's closer to about 1% a year historically, right? So that's new gold mining. In Bitcoin's case, there's an equation built into Bitcoin that makes it grow slower over time. Okay.

And that equation currently, and you can't change the equation. If you wanted to change that equation, you would have to get every Bitcoiner, every person who owns Bitcoin would have to change it. And they would never do that because it would destroy the value of Bitcoin. So anyway, you have this equation. The equation grows at a very predictable rate. That predictable rate is currently lower than gold. So in other words, gold is mined faster than new bitcoins are created.

And every four years, it continues dropping in half. So eventually in 2140, there will never be any more Bitcoin created. So when you have that stable supply, right, most of what's happening with the dollar, most of the fluctuations, I mean, really it doesn't fluctuate, just loses value every year. Most of that is coming from the fact that so much of it can be printed. And there's really no constraint on how much can be printed. Right. Over the past two years since COVID, the money supply has increased by about 40%. which is pretty shocking in two years. That's about twice the pace of the worst of the 1970s when we had

double-digit inflation. So the fact that there is no fundamental constraint on how many dollars can be created introduces a risk and it brings fluctuations to dollars. What are we seeing in terms of how widely adopted cryptocurrency has become across the globe? Are we seeing that there are countries that are moving in the direction of cryptocurrency as official currency? There are. So starting with the U.S., adoption is about 10%. So about 10% of Americans either own or use crypto. That tends to skew younger, of course, right? So for older people, it's a little bit harder to grasp new technologies. This is true for anything. This is true for TikTok, and it's certainly true for Bitcoin. So people tend to trend younger. Now, you know, the U.S., of course, course, it's almost the worst case situation for Bitcoin, right? We have a fairly stable currency. Our government is not that repressive financially, but people in other countries have much more need for Bitcoin, right? So usage in Venezuela, Argentina, India, right? Countries that either have

high inflation that, you know, people want to protect themselves from, or countries that have oppressive governments who go after activists. So the main cases, for example, of activists getting funding through Bitcoin because governments can't control it. This was the case with a trucker convoy up in Canada, right? So they had trouble with various fundraising. The Canadian government is going after fundraisers directly, but, you know, Bitcoin, you don't have to ask permission. Bitcoin is like cash or gold in the sense that you can just use it.

You don't have to ask a bureaucrat for permission. We have this idea that cryptocurrency has some of the advantages over a fiat currency where it's not as volatile in terms of inflation. Are there security or stability concerns with cryptocurrency? One of the reasons that central banks exist, or at least the argument is that central banks exist, is because there's security concerns with having un-regulated money out there. Does cryptocurrency have that concern? From the beginning, that was always the question.

You know, nobody knew if this thing would work. That was, you know, sort of one of the concerns early on was is the thing going to get hacked. And there was a very famous security research, I believe Kaminsky. Anyway, there was a famous security researcher. And very early on, he was dismissive. He said, ah, this thing. And so he sat down and got a team of top security guys to try to hack it. They could not.

He actually flipped size and he said, this thing is amazing. One guy, Antonopoulos, he's likened Bitcoin to a sewer rat, right? It's been shot, stabbed, run over, burned, dowsing gasoline and thrown in a volcano, and the thing is still alive. So, you know, now, what, 13 years later, the security of Bitcoin, I think, has astounded all of us. Now, of course, you put that up against the security of the financial system, which is, horrific. There are thousands of bank thefts every year. There are hacks constantly. The solution that the banking system has is that it bribes government to give it various forms of insurance,

where the government is basically saying, if you lose all your money, I'm just going to go and create brand new money. Now, of course, creating brand new money is also known as stealing it from existing savers. So, you know, that's a cute way to provide security. But right, so in terms of pure security, sort of from a technical side, Bitcoin has been shockingly good and far better than, you know, the traditional database is used by legacy banks. And then, of course, the other question is, you know, really when you're saving something, the, you know, whether it's gold or anything, the kind of security you care about is yes, will it get stolen, what we're talking about here, but also will it lose its value, right? And, you know, paper money, even the U.S. dollar, it is a guaranteed

loser, particularly over the past 100 years. It has lost value year and year out. I don't believe we've actually had a year since the Fed was created where the dollar actually gained value. It is a guaranteed losing proposition. One of the things that you've done recently, You wrote a piece in February for the Heritage Foundation titled Biden's anti-crypto scaremongering threatens to impose surveil and control on all Americans. So first off, we talked a little bit about how governments respond to cryptocurrency. It's sort of a gray zone right now, so we're not sure how it needs to be regulated or whether it needs to be regulated. So first off, is the Biden administration particularly hostile towards cryptocurrency?

I don't know about particularly hostile. Trump was similarly hostile to cryptocurrency. Governments in general have a very good thing going with paper money, right? They can print up as much as they want. So, I mean, governments, almost every single government worldwide has been hostile to some degree or another. What makes the U.S. government unique, of course, is that we give it so much money that it has incredible capabilities compared to some of these other governments. So the U.S. government, you know, is capable of harassing new technologies or new monetary technologies much more than other governments. So, yeah, I mean, most of what they've focused on so far is regulatory restrictions.

You know, the trick with regulators in general is that they're often sort of dears in the headlight frozen by new technologies, right? it takes bureaucrats and regulators a while to get out of bed in the morning, there tends to be turf battles in the beginning where each individual regulators trying to keep that new thing as its own. We saw that with the internet, for example, right? So different, you know, whether it's the FCC or FTC, you know, various government agencies try to grab this new exciting thing and gain control over it. And we've been seeing that with cryptocurrency really from the start. So there are a number of government agencies that have been trying to either harness Bitcoin or to destroy it intentionally. And they haven't really resolved who's the top dog on that hill.

It has created an enormous amount of sort of regulatory risk within crypto. You know, if you outlaw wine, right, then only criminals will make wine, right? All those lovely vintners in California will all be a bunch. know, there'll be a cartel, they'll be a band of criminals. And the same thing has happened within crypto, right? Because government has never really sat down and proactively said, we're going to leave this thing alone, we're going to let it develop, see what it becomes. That's what they did with the internet, right? Because they haven't practically done that, there's an enormous amount of gray area within crypto that has really scared off a lot of, you know, sort of legitimate actors

who, you know, banks, for example, have been almost non-existent in crypto because they're afraid of getting their licenses pulled because some random regulator takes offense at something they did. Well, God forbid we boycott wine. We forbid wine again. But with that in mind, what should government policy towards crypto be then? If it's a gray area, what direction should governments go towards? I think certainly a hands-off approach. The Hippocratic Oath should always be, you know, should be up on the wall of every regulator's office. First, do no harm. You know, the early internet was probably delayed by several decades because there was a ban on commercial activity on the internet. And if you can't have any commercial activity, then, you know, things don't develop, right? You don't have entrepreneurs who put in the time to build services on that. So the The internet may have been delayed by 20, 30 years because of that regulatory ban. That finally was removed partly by Al Gore, hence his inventor of the internet. What he did was removed the regulation that was strangling the internet for decades. Again with the early internet, the FBI initially tried to ban using credit cards on the

internet. That would have been absolutely catastrophic. Early operators did gray area. They just went right in and they basically dared the government to do something of about it. Thankfully, they did and people quickly saw the benefit of it so that, you know, there was a public consensus to let this thing be and not kill it. But regulators always try to kill anything disruptive. When you go back to crypto, right, fundamentally, if you can replace an insurance company with effectively like a single database, or if you can replace Wall Street

with effectively a single database, that is extraordinarily threatening, right? The early internet mainly threatened Barnes and Noble, right? I mean, it's hard to even say who was threatened by the early internet. You didn't have incumbent industries who looked at the internet and said, whoa, I got to stop that thing. In crypto, you have those in spades. You've got Wall Street, insurance, you've got all of these industries that are potentially threatened. Wall Street knows how to call senators, right? Every individual state has their own regulators. Those are all, you know, you've got little crony fingers through all of this. So in a sense, Crypto needs a lot more protection than even the internet did because the potential, right,

the potential for allowing people to interact with each other one-on-one to trade assets, to make loans to each other, to start a business and, you know, get investors without having going through banks, right? That is enormously economically, you know, you could say it's more important than the internet, but it will absolutely be stopped if cronies can do it. Well, Peter, we are about to wrap up this interview. And I'm curious if you could describe maybe in a sentence or two, what is the future of crypto? I think governments are going to try to crush it.

They will not succeed because it's decentralized. And I think it may be 30 or 50 years out, but I think that crypto is going to have a massive impact on the world. It's going to switch power from the elite, from the power. to regular people. I think it's a big deal. That was Peter Saint-Age, a research fellow in economic policy here at the Heritage Foundation. Peter, I very much appreciate your time. Thank you, Doug. And that'll do it for today's episode.

Thanks so much for listening to The Daily Signal podcast. You can find the Daily Signal podcast on Google Play, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and IHeartRadio. Please be sure to leave us a review and a five-star rating on Apple Podcasts, and please encourage others to subscribe. Thanks again for listening. with you all tomorrow. The Daily Signal podcast is brought to you by more than half a million members of the Heritage Foundation.

It is executive produced by Virginia Allen and Kate Trinco, sound designed by Lauren Evans, Mark Geinney, and John Pop. For more information, please visit DailySignal.com.