31–40 of 61 posts
gold has $7 Trillion and I fail to see how gold is a better store of value, I fail to see why would anyone buy gold bullion for example, is just a piece of metal.
I couldn't tell from the article - how do they define 'market cap'? Nr of currently mined coins * current value? Because if so, how does that make sense - nobody knows how many coins are 'lost'. Is there anyone watching e.g. how many coins haven't moved wallet since, say, 2013? Like, satoshi's coins - does it make sense to include those in any metric? (maybe they're using an entirely different definition in which cas…
Daily transaction volume might be a better indication though..
I'm a bit weary. Say this cryptocurrency thing does take of and it's not a bubble. Then wouldn't this have similar effects that quantitative easing would have? I understand quantitative easing as 'printing money', because I'm not an economics person. But if this would take off and get a strong foothold at the prices that we're seeing now (bitcoin almost 10K in dollars), then didn't some subset of techies print a lot…
QE works by increasing the money flow trough real economy (the part of the economy that is concerned with actually producing goods and services rather than the part that consists of financial services such as banks, stock markets).
Bitcoins is the opposite. It's speculative asset that moves money into financial realm.
gold has $7 Trillion and I fail to see how gold is a better store of value, I fail to see why would anyone buy gold bullion for example, is just a piece of metal.
imho the biggest difference is: gold is currently the preferred reserve by the world governments, which hold 30k tons, including the government with the largest military in the world. There is a chance that those in power will put a bit of effort to keep it more or less stable.
gold has $7 Trillion and I fail to see how gold is a better store of value, I fail to see why would anyone buy gold bullion for example, is just a piece of metal.
Well, gold owes it's continued existence to the continued holding of the laws of physics. Practically, I suspect Bitcoin relies on the reach bitcoin mining networks. If, eg, China's bureaucrats go mad and split China off from the main internet for a decade, what happens to bitcoin? I've been led to believe the serious mining pools are Chinese. Gold doesn't care about that sort of thing at all, it just keeps existing.…
People don't sell, they only "hlod" (it's no coincidence that the rallying cry for the numbnut bitcoiners is a typo), and the market is incredibly thin, driven up by people's willingness to buy smaller and smaller slices of the wretched things.
Downside will always be limited, as sell-offs can always be stanched by whales holding up prices and people's training to hlod and hlod and hlod.
It's such a headfvck, and all these bog-country paddies telling me in the wide suits on youtube about the future of internet currencies, convinces me that spivs and idiots will chase the value of bitcoin up for a long time to come. Bleeuuuurrrgggghhhhhh.
I'm a bit weary. Say this cryptocurrency thing does take of and it's not a bubble. Then wouldn't this have similar effects that quantitative easing would have? I understand quantitative easing as 'printing money', because I'm not an economics person. But if this would take off and get a strong foothold at the prices that we're seeing now (bitcoin almost 10K in dollars), then didn't some subset of techies print a lot…
But it feels like maybe you're right. I think existing money is essentially being devalued every time someone decides to spend their USD on bitcoin, demonstrating that a new thing that came out of (more-or-less) thin air now has value, and thus those who own it can 'claim' dollars, and thus there are less dollars for all the people who don't yet own bitcoin. Which means they are getting poorer.
My head hurts. Can someone smarter than I figure this out?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
imho the biggest difference is: gold is currently the preferred reserve by the world governments, which hold 30k tons, including the government with the largest military in the world. There is a chance that those in power will put a bit of effort to keep it more or less stable.
and they store it because there is a market for it, because people find it valuable, if the millennials don't get why a piece of metal has value, there isn't much governments can if no one buys their shiny metal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
imho the biggest difference is: gold is currently the preferred reserve by the world governments, which hold 30k tons, including the government with the largest military in the world. There is a chance that those in power will put a bit of effort to keep it more or less stable.
and they store it because there is a market for it, because people find it valuable, if the millennials don't get why a piece of metal has value, there isn't much governments can if no one buys their shiny metal.
I'm a bit weary. Say this cryptocurrency thing does take of and it's not a bubble. Then wouldn't this have similar effects that quantitative easing would have? I understand quantitative easing as 'printing money', because I'm not an economics person. But if this would take off and get a strong foothold at the prices that we're seeing now (bitcoin almost 10K in dollars), then didn't some subset of techies print a lot…
Quantitative Easing injects new money into the economy, devaluing money. But my bitcoin is only worth $10,000 USD if that's the amount you agree to pay me for it. And you will pay me using existing money. So there is no new money being injected and so it would seem there is no devaluation of old money. But it feels like maybe you're right. I think existing money is essentially being devalued every time someone decide…
BTCs exchange rate is dependent on someone else offering money. If there's a market panic, the price quickly drops due to a race to beat other orders.