Read the white paper, it explains that very well. Only about a third or so of the entire distribution is coming via free coins. The rest is reserved for investors and charity organizations. It is the same with Steem: value is given by the outside investors buying and trading the coin.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
That's the portion I don't get and the white paper doesn't address it very well.
I don't understand how it's possible to issue a "currency" if the currency doesn't have an economic incentive around it. The only way mana would become a currency is if it displaces another. In that sense what makes mana better than steem from a usage stand point? (my view is that it doesn't).
The white paper suggest that it will attempt to displace local government currencies.... That's a order so tall, that it would cripple the global economy, which uses the usd as the reserve currency.
Thank you for your comment @motoengineer.
What makes the USD better than the JPY? Or the Euro?
People use what they have. Manna is given to anyone who signs up and verifies. The token's value rises as the number of people with the token increase as well as those who use it.
Based upon your conclusion, no cryptocurrency has much value since there is very little usage, as of now, with any of them.
One big difference between Manna and other currencies is that we are putting it directly into the hands of poor people. Every other currency requires buying in or doing something for it.
So suppose you give it to poor people, amount the poor, they would accept it and trade it for inter poor people services (that's really rude way of putting it, but you get the point). That creates its own closed economy, but money flows from the poor people from volume.... I could see that.
It is probably more speculative than JesusCoin but with a very serious approach. Nobody knows what will ever happen to this but who cares? I already earned hundreds of free bananas.