If a for-profit company is running the currency, the users of the currency are in a loosing position. Remember, the for-profit company wants profit, so good luck fighting with them about the currency.
"hundreds of global currencies" sounds like a good idea to me too, as long as they are out of the hands of for-profit companies.
Funny. The USA seems to have the complete opposite view to yours! :D
The Federal Reserve is just about as close to a private company as any, running your entire economy. Certainly it's a for profit venture. But then that's profits funneled away from public coffers, and not to it.
Sure, the Fed has a pretty clear mandate from the Congress, deputizing them into a certain public role, but other than that, they receive little to no ‘advice’ on how to do things, and stand free to make private profit for a small cartel of privately owned banks.
The reason for this non-public setup is so that Congress won't simply print more money at will, which would be far worse.
But unlike just about all public agencies, stock holders get to keep a fair amount too. Not to mention that a great deal of tax money goes towards servicing interest on loans. On top of that; well, let's not mince words: "Quantitative easing" is essentially theft.
I agree with you, just wanted to let you know that "running your entire economy" is not accurate as I don't live there. We would all be a little better by not assuming things about people :)
If a for-profit company is running the currency, the users of the currency are in a loosing position
True, but exactly the same applies to a state running the currency, with even more evidence of malfeasance and manipulation. State currency loses significant value every year by design, and the management of it is really opaque.
I’d rather a cooperative mutually owned currency to either corporate or state control.
If you're imagining a mutual organisation of millions of people who are theoretically on equal standing and have a say in governance as far as possible, wouldn't that look rather like a state? What's the practical distinction you're drawing between a cooperative mutual organisation and a state?
In general I guess you don't exactly get to choose willy-nilly which state you want to belong to, but you can make a choice to trying to get out of your current one, at least usually.
No you don’t, and that would be the difference. Our system is still remarkably feudal - obligations are assigned at birth and citizenship is an obligation, not a choice.
Of course if you’re rich or privileged there are many options.
"hundreds of global currencies" sounds like a good idea to me too, as long as they are out of the hands of for-profit companies.