Bitcoin is a Ponzi

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:32 AM UTC

frozenport wrote: post #341

scottyp21 wrote: post #326

> Nevertheless, investing in gold at the current price seems unwise, since its price is many times its "natural" price as commodity and so it is more likely to go down than up. This is a misconception and a fundamental misunderstanding of gold's primary utility for thousands of years. While it is true that gold's price reflects a significant premium beyond the "natural" market price, this has been the case for millen…

I also think investing in gold compared to let's say stocks is a sort of ponzi scheme in the sense of OPs article. So no price point. Until bitcoin intrinsically generates value I'm not putting money in it.

Post by rob74 » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:33 AM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #346

srge wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. And the argument crypto = ponzi is so wrong. What about other investment vehicles? Gold? Real estate? Stock market. Come on!

The article literally covers each of those cases and explains exactly why those are not Ponzi schemes while Bitcoin is ([edit] under "Common Objections" - which should really read "Common Whataboutisms"). > By that definition, stocks too are ponzis. No. Stocks have an external source of revenue, namely the profit that the company makes by selling its products and services to customers (not investors); and these profi…

Post by fay59 » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:34 AM UTC

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #300

tw04 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The social security administration could also be considered a Ponzi scheme, but it still provides tremendous value to a lot of people. The Social Security Administration is entirely solvent by itself. The only "ponzi scheme" comes from congress using it like a piggy bank. And despite all that, SSA is backed by the US government. Bitcoin is backed by... nothing. So it's basically the equivalent of the zimbabwe dollar…

Bitcoin is backed by the same thing that backs any currency: public's trust in it, expressed via a price achieved via a market consensus.

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:34 AM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #343

luka-birsa wrote: post #310

Why are such articles constantly popping up on HN? It's clear that the HN crowd does not like Bitcoin. So why keep reiterating similar arguments all over? There is zero utility in the article shared. It states some anti crypto views and that's it. Even the author concedes that this is according to his own definition and not based on real life legal tests (which have of course shown that Bitcoin is not a ponzi). Just…

There's great reasons not to. Unless we nip this in the bud, we face a potential repeat of the 1997 Albanian Ponzi crisis that brought about the total collapse of their economy. Everyone in Albania jumped in and started participating in a number of big Ponzi schemes. Their finance minister tried to stop them, so they threw him in jail. They then had a civil war about it, and the IMF had to drop in big bags of money.…

Post by MelonTree » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:34 AM UTC

pishpash wrote: post #323

MelonTree wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got involved in bitcoin after being blackballed from the (US) financial world while for 2-3 months while I was "investigated" in the most dystopianly opaque way possible. One day I lost the ability to transact. A few months later I got it back. Had it not been for good friends who could cover my expenses, I could have easily ended up homeless. And the most shocking part of it all, was that I was merely collateral d…

Wouldn't that only work if you had places (like your landlord) taking Bitcoin off the blockchain directly for payment? Otherwise, transacting still requires the cooperation of intermediaries subject to sanctions. Maybe you can launder through a friend, but... it doesn't seem any easier.