141–150 of 992 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, take the upsides of cash (e.g. don't need to open a bank, prove residence, etc.) and now add the ability to exchange it digitally without the pointless gatekeeping of large corporations like Paypal.
Who will be the largest Bitcoin vendor because they are trusted.
Still, note that you don't need Paypal to move Bitcoin.
Related: the current rise of Bitcoin prices has been peculiar to me, and seems to be a bit of a canary in an inflationary coal mine. We've injected trillions of dollars of fiat into the economy this year. It feels like the sky-high valuations of technology companies and Bitcoin are "shock absorbers" of sorts, or early signals of inflation-yet-to-come. If we assume the market is efficiently pricing these assets (like…
> If we assume the market is efficiently pricing these assets (like AirBnB's IPO) then it could very well be that the actual value of a fiat dollar has dropped dramatically Note that many other assets such as energy, financial, and real estate stocks, consumer goods, etc. are not experiencing sky-high valuations - indeed, some of those asset classes are down for the year. So it's not just fiat dollars that have dropp…
I'd invoke Occam's Razor to state that inflation due to increase in monetary supply is more likely to manifest as "overpricing" of one or two asset classes first. As opposed to a crash, where one asset class bottoms out and takes the other with it, stimulus and inflation, in theory, would cause the opposite -- would they not?
I haven't studied hyperinflation. So consider me inquisitive on the subject. But it's certainly happened before, and the dynamics seem like they have the potential to create a positive feedback loop similar to a crash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see the irony. The point is that Bitcoin has introduced an actual "digital cash" currency without institutional/governmental middlemen. That institutions can be built on top of that, and that some people want such institutions, doesn't change the novel utility of finally having a currency that functions like digital cash. It's like saying it's ironic that people use physical USD for anonymous p2p transactions…
No one treats Bitcoin as a currency. It’s treated as an investment vehicle. And the reason behind that is obvious. Something whose value may double in a month or whose value may halve within weeks is a terrible currency. If I expect it’s value to increase then I would be a fool to spend it. If I expect it’s value to drop I would be a fool to accept it. Cryptocurrencies are anything but currencies.
Completely agreeable, albeit it misses a point: Governments can't print more of it. That's it really, everything else is noise. I can sympathize with btc (I wish we still had a gold standard, or a standard based on the price of common goods) but I don't see much the other benefits. On top of this, governments could ban btc.
I mean, the 21 million cap is just a line of code no? No reason why if enough people agree to it they could just print more. Or they could fork and print more no? I find it strange that people speak of bitcoin's scarcity as if it were a physical thing.
Related: the current rise of Bitcoin prices has been peculiar to me, and seems to be a bit of a canary in an inflationary coal mine. We've injected trillions of dollars of fiat into the economy this year. It feels like the sky-high valuations of technology companies and Bitcoin are "shock absorbers" of sorts, or early signals of inflation-yet-to-come. If we assume the market is efficiently pricing these assets (like…
Your armchair analysis is on the mark. in a fiat dominated world, any market distortions caused by monetary mismanagement (money printing through QE, asset inflation) is not visible as everything in the market is priced in the same underlying asset (USD globally). Since bitcoin is outside this system it is actually holding up a mirror to the increasing worthlessness of the USD and other mismanaged fiat currencies.
> the increasing worthlessness of the USD
I think you must be using words different from what I take them to mean, which means you can draw radically different conclusions from how I read them.
If everything in the economy is tied together, such that $10 is still an hour of work at a grocery store, and $10 still buys you a lunch or three gallons of milk, and $10 still buys you 4 gallons of gas, etc etc, then I don't see how you can say that there has been some kind of "secret" sky-high inflation over the past few years that is only detectable "from the outside."
Inflation is defined by the purchasing power of money within the economy. If that's not changing, inflation isn't happening.
Pointing to a single asset whose price is fluctuating wildly and insinuating that that is the only real source of truth, and that literally everything else is hiding the true cost of living seems to be just showing what you want to believe.
(Note, I'm not saying that there's been no inflation. It's been about 2.5%/yr over the past 20 years. But simply that the notion that it isn't visible from "inside" the economy is contradictory.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's just the reality of cash, no less in digital form, so it would be naive to think Bitcoin wouldn't inherit the same uses of USD (speculation, money laundering, fraud). It's just not very damning. Though I'm sure various people in the government/Visa would love to ban USD cash with the same demonization.
Not the reality of cash as cash doesn’t change value like Bitcoin (in either direction), it’s also usually not scarce, and always much easier to use.
Related: the current rise of Bitcoin prices has been peculiar to me, and seems to be a bit of a canary in an inflationary coal mine. We've injected trillions of dollars of fiat into the economy this year. It feels like the sky-high valuations of technology companies and Bitcoin are "shock absorbers" of sorts, or early signals of inflation-yet-to-come. If we assume the market is efficiently pricing these assets (like…
I think you're right. The economic stimulus is mostly going in rich people's pockets which happen to like the idea of BTC and Tesla. They're likely worried about inflation, so they need to invest the money. And that's how you get BTC and Tesla's meteoric rise.
Even if the returns of btc were poor, it would still be a very attractive investment as uncorrelated assets boost the risk adjusted returns of a portfolio.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one treats Bitcoin as a currency. It’s treated as an investment vehicle. And the reason behind that is obvious. Something whose value may double in a month or whose value may halve within weeks is a terrible currency. If I expect it’s value to increase then I would be a fool to spend it. If I expect it’s value to drop I would be a fool to accept it. Cryptocurrencies are anything but currencies.
I use Bitcoin where ever possible, so your opening claim is wrong. I've been banned from Paypal. I've run into many verification issues over the last decade with banks because I have no proof of residency once my driver's license expired. Like physical cash, it doesn't need to be superior in all ways to be useful at all.
Just because a random guy barters bitcoins for goods/services, that by no means implies that bitcoin is anything close to money.
There is a very specific definition of what money is, and bitcoin's volatility alone rules it completely out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dollar is STILL the king of criminal activity, money laundering, kidnapping, ransom ... it will take awhile for the shift to happen.
I didn't say all criminal activity is done via bitcoin. But there are segments of crime like cryptotrojans and CP trading that seem to be almost exclusively bitcoin-based. Others, like internet drug ordering, are at least partially in bitcoin. Edit: replaced "any" with "all" in the first sentence
Its very risky to buy with bitcoin if you are in a jurisdiction that makes drugs illegal. I think still cash is king in those places.