When the Federal Reserve can create purchasing power out of nothing to soak up all the bad debt (especially US government debt) then there is all the "money" in the world to give to other countries.

As the saying goes, foreign aid is taking the money from poor people in rich countries and giving it to the rich people in poor countries.

When rate of change of value of currency per unit time is very high, in either direction, it becomes inconvenient to trade in the currency.

Well said.

If a currency gets "more and more valuable" then why would another currency become prevalent? Only a government can influence the market like that, which is kind of what happened with gold.

When gold became too valuable to back the dollar due to the inflationist policies required to fund the warfare/welfare state, Nixon (and his masters) removed the international gold backing from the dollar (just the final step in a long series to remove gold backing).

However, fiat currencies always fail because governments can never resist the temptation to inflate. If Bitcoin actually does come to a finite number of Bitcoins then it will be fundamentally different from such fiat currencies.

Yes, this is how economics works.

Many people fail to realize that a unit of exchange is a commodity that serves a purpose in the market place that isn't all that different from other commodities. It is subject to supply and demand, and government monopolies on a given a given unit of exchange can warp but never defy the laws of supply and demand.

Wow, this reasoning is so flawed that I can only imagine you are trolling.

What you describe as "deflation" is actually "inflation." How can something be "not worth the paper it's printed on" (a consequence of inflating the currency) when it is at the same time the currency keeps getting more an more valuable"?

You are describing opposite currency valuations.

Which is it?

"... will the new FTC rules end up helping children (by enhancing their privacy and, if industry pundits are right, reducing the amount of content available online for children - thus enhancing their attention spans?"

That question is absurd. There is far, far more than enough content currently available for children that slowing, or even stopping development, would do nothing to affect the attention span of children. (Even assuming a negative impact from all this "content" - which seems dubious to me anyway.)

When money increases in value over time, savers are rewarded.

When money decreases in value over time, debtors are rewarded.

Now do you see why our government favors inflation?

... against the biggest counterfeiters: the world's central banks.

"A multiplicity of laws is an embarrassment to justice."

We have become a nation of too many laws and too little justice.