<p>Bitcoin itself is thought of as a currency. Its an alternative currency to dollars, or pesos or pounds or yen... so its just one more currency. It does not make a big difference for central banks whether its out there or not, unless it becomes so prevalent that people use it more than they do regular currencies. But that's hard. Dollars are more stable in purchasing power in the long run than say Argentinian Pesos, and yet people use the Pesos in Argentina, in part for convenience and in part for legal reasons. So, just because bitcoin might have some advantages does not imply it will take over.</p>

<p>Electronic money issued by central banks instead of paper money issued by central banks has some implications.  Potentially has implications of the ability of central bank to expand or contract the money supply on a whim. If money was al digital, all consisting of records a the central banks servers or something like that, the central bank could just multiply everybody's holdings by 1.01 if it wanted money supply to increase by 1%. Easy!</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-19T17:07:35.623Z
Economically, Bitcoin is not a currency: www.nber.org/papers/w19747
dismalscience
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-19T18:18:13.080Z
I am sure you mean stability but without explanation "dollars are better than pesos" sounds like an American exceptionalism.
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-19T20:52:25.340Z
I agree, stability is a more neutral statement.
Fix.B.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-19T00:25:08.093Z
2016-05-19T20:52:34.823Z
2016-05-19T20:52:34.823Z
Fix.B.
<p>The independence of the central bank means that the bank is independent of the government. A mandate of the central bank is to ensure price stability. However any excess cash the bank prints is the property of the government. The government enjoys having extra income and were it allowed to exercise direct control it may push the bank to print more money. This would undermine the price stability mandate of the bank. Hence in most countries they give the central bank leadership that is independent of the government.</p>

<p>As Bitcoin is not issued by any government that I know of it does not in any way affect this. Perhaps if the government were to bribe the leaders of the bank in Bitcoin...</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-18T20:18:11.970Z
Firstly thank you. well what are the effecsts of digital money on themechanism and structure of centeral bank in general not its dependence. Or what is the effect of this type money on a country's economy? does there exist any avantage or disavantage?
studentp
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-18T21:58:17.243Z
@B11b This is a totally different question. If you cannot find something similar on the site (and I think a few exist) consider posting it.
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-18T22:04:09.557Z
okay I asked. I'm just trying to understand Bitcoin in the view of a country's economy and central bank. I searched topics on Bitcoin. But no thing I found. Please tell me your opinions. Thank you:)
studentp
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-05-18T22:34:42.323Z
@B11b I don't think you searched very hard. http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/4424/what-benefits-does-bitcoin-i-e-cryptocurrency-offer
Giskard
CC BY-SA 4.0
2016-05-18T20:13:15.663Z
2018-10-10T15:21:11.250Z
2018-10-10T15:21:11.250Z
Giskard
<p>How do such digital currencies such as Bitcoin affect the independence of Central Banks?</p>

<p>Thank you </p>

<macroeconomics><monetary-policy><central-banking><bitcoin>
The independence of Central Banks
studentp
# The independence of Central Banks

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-05-18)

How do such digital currencies such as Bitcoin affect the independence of Central Banks?

Thank you

**Tags:** macroeconomics, monetary-policy, central-banking, bitcoin


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2016-05-18. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

The independence of the central bank means that the bank is independent of the government. A mandate of the central bank is to ensure price stability. However any excess cash the bank prints is the property of the government. The government enjoys having extra income and were it allowed to exercise direct control it may push the bank to print more money. This would undermine the price stability mandate of the bank. Hence in most countries they give the central bank leadership that is independent of the government.

As Bitcoin is not issued by any government that I know of it does not in any way affect this. Perhaps if the government were to bribe the leaders of the bank in Bitcoin...

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Firstly thank you. well what are the effecsts of digital money on themechanism and structure of centeral bank in general not its dependence. Or what is the effect of this type money on a country's economy? does there exist any avantage or disavantage?  
> **username_3**: @B11b This is a totally different question. If you cannot find something similar on the site (and I think a few exist) consider posting it.  
> **username_0**: okay I asked. I'm just trying to understand Bitcoin in the view of a country's economy and central bank. I searched topics on Bitcoin. But no thing I found. Please tell me your opinions. Thank you:)  
> **username_3**: @B11b I don't think you searched very hard. http://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/4424/what-benefits-does-bitcoin-i-e-cryptocurrency-offer  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2016-05-19. Score: 0

Bitcoin itself is thought of as a currency. Its an alternative currency to dollars, or pesos or pounds or yen... so its just one more currency. It does not make a big difference for central banks whether its out there or not, unless it becomes so prevalent that people use it more than they do regular currencies. But that's hard. Dollars are more stable in purchasing power in the long run than say Argentinian Pesos, and yet people use the Pesos in Argentina, in part for convenience and in part for legal reasons. So, just because bitcoin might have some advantages does not imply it will take over.

Electronic money issued by central banks instead of paper money issued by central banks has some implications. Potentially has implications of the ability of central bank to expand or contract the money supply on a whim. If money was al digital, all consisting of records a the central banks servers or something like that, the central bank could just multiply everybody's holdings by 1.01 if it wanted money supply to increase by 1%. Easy!

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Economically, Bitcoin is not a currency: www.nber.org/papers/w19747  
> **username_3**: I am sure you mean stability but without explanation "dollars are better than pesos" sounds like an American exceptionalism.  
> **username_1**: I agree, stability is a more neutral statement.  

---

