Tax on your future purchasing power is a problem, especially when it is double-digit. Even more when you have no visibility on the rule of the game and how it will evolve.
More broadly speaking, the current fiat system has negative effects on all societies around the world, it is an excellent idea to fix it.
There is exponential growth, exactly how all previous successful technologies are adopted. Bitcoin is trading as much value as Paypal every day, as an example.
It is actually a very good example, do you know what causes this crash? Accounting fraud. Exactly what cannot happen to Bitcoin because is an engineered monetary policy that can’t be altered without consensus of the ever-expanding network. And a lot of people see a lot of intrinsic value in this.
This does not make any sense. Art, Real Estate, Gold, etc.? Useful and, eventually, a good investment.
Store of value, medium of exchange, unit of account, mining has a buffer in energy production, collateral for loan, new bond system (El Salvador btc bonds) AND even a good investment for traders who wants to gamble.
Fidelity (like Goldman Sachs) announced this afternoon that they will offer loans with BTC in collateral. It is not because you don’t understand it that there is no market demand.
You know SEPA is only in Europe, and that a bank can stop your payment for some reasons outside of your control, right? Bitcoin has monetary properties that SEPA, Swift and co. will never ever have.
It’s a casino, everyone wants to be the house esp. those who knows the rules of the game
Agree to disagree, I still haven’t seen any evidence on how an hypothetical replacement would be an improvement compared to the disaster that the gold standard was economically. How would it prevent the same issues from happening?
Once again - how many people are using it for anything else than speculative trading? I can see that more and more people are trading cryptos - it’s nothing new, in late 90s they were trading dot-com stocks, in the first quarter of XVII century they were trading tulips. This doesn’t mean that Bitcoin will be adopted for anything other than trading.
Please, shed some light. How many people are gambling/trading, how many are holding for long-term, and how many are actually using it for payments?
This is a controversial issue and a side note, but I don’t consider the gold standard a disaster - the entire industrial revolution happened when the world was on the gold standard, and the Great Depression happened after most countries went off gold during I world war and returned to it in tinkered-version in the 20s. In any case, you may or may not attribute the causes of the Great Depression to gold, but I don’t consider the industrial revolution an economic disaster.
That’s the reverse of hyperinflation.
It’s not sustainable - even if it were to continue in this fashion against the USD, we’d have a nuclear meltdown of the financial system so hard to nobody will be concerned about virtual coins anymore - but rather arms and weapons.
While we don’t agree on much regarding the adoption of Bitcoin, that’s a great comparison.
…with zero reversibility and fraud protection.
Very few people - aside from criminals - asked for such thing.
Low-cost payment services are a thing today.
Agree.
No. They see intrinsic growth.
Different thing.
I reckon most actors aren’t in it for value - but for the growth in value. They’re speculators.
Satoshi Nakamotos Bitcoin wallet is supposed to containt more than a million coins. That’s more than 5% of total Bitcoin supply. It only takes someone pulling the trigger on that and mayhem will break loose.
Ask 100 random people on the street how many of these products or brands they’ll recognise.
…and for reasons in my control.
…most of which few people asked for.
Especially not governments. Sure, governments are currently grappling how to regulate the space, but I doubt they will prevent such an unregulated monetary structure to go mainstream.
Wasn’t it only UK on gold standard at the time? Tho you could argue that UK drove industrial revolution I guess.
Most other countries where using bimetallism which has lots of issues (because mint ratio is fixed, while the actual relative price of silver vs gold fluctuates).
Moderate inflation is not usually regarded as a problem, indeed many economists believe it is a good thing. No one expects their USD to maintain value long term that’s why people invest in stocks, bonds etc
Quote from one of the best researchers on the topic:
England adopted a de facto gold standard in 1717 after the master of the mint, Sir Isaac Newton, overvalued the guinea in terms of silver, and formally adopted the gold standard in 1819. The United States, though formally on a bimetallic (gold and silver) standard, switched to gold de facto in 1834 and de jure in 1900 when Congress passed the Gold Standard Act. In 1834, the United States fixed the price of gold at $20.67 per ounce, where it remained until 1933. Other major countries joined the gold standard in the 1870s. The period from 1880 to 1914 is known as the classical gold standard. During that time, the majority of countries adhered (in varying degrees) to gold. It was also a period of unprecedented economic growth with relatively free trade in goods, labor, and capital.
Yes, Great Britain was on gold during the entire Industrial Revolution (or much longer in fact) - other countries usually were on bimetallic or silver standards. In any case, they weren’t inflationary fiat money systems. On top of that, I don’t consider the period (so-called “Second Industrial Revolution”) from 1850 to 1914 an economic disaster either - it was a time of incredible economic development.
Yes, greenbuck lost a lot of value due to inflation after the US government went off gold, and after it got back on gold after the civil war, we know what followed - Gilded Age.
PS. My personal view on Gold Standard is that due to its rigidity it did exacerbate certain issues that the economies had in the 30s, but it didn’t cause these issues. They were pretty much the result of the world war, the death of global free trade, bad economic policies in general, and in effect unstable macroeconomic situation.
Whatever politics you support… this is not in favor of the guy who want to save for his early retirement. Yes, maybe it’s the VT and sustainable that way. I suppose the stats are in favor of gold or something else like bitcoin. I’m just in favor of the latter.
Nobody invests by putting dollar bills under their mattress… That’s not the goal of money to be a sound investment (and even that way the relationship between amount of money and inflation isn’t direct anyway, so I’m not sure what the graph would demonstrate).
If anything cryptocurrencies seems to have an infinite supply, new ones are popping up every day.
well, bitcoin has not. for other maybe you’re right.
at the end I don’t give a f.ck as long this year was financially better for me as the last 8 years of traditional investments combined. My CHF position is now bigger as the all-in investment in crypto in January. The only question remains (for me to evaluate): was the risk-reward ratio adequate. And is the risk-reward ratio for the next year still ok to be all-in crypto.
(Maybe this is what’s all about in the discussions above… but for me those are probably to sophisticated or too old-school like).
I went all in as the crypto part of my portfolio grew from 2% to 30% or more. Maybe re-balancing into the traditional ETF would have been a safer option. I did some risk assessment and for me the risk was worth to take it. Today, the amount I put into crypto I hold as CHF (and a little more). So if cryptos burst to 0 - which I don’t think it will happen - I would have lost a part of the performance of 2021 of the traditional portfolio.
Beside the talks about adoption and use cases, what do I expect for the further run of cryptos price wise? Will the bear market start in the next few months? Maybe. Where’s the floor? Will BTC go to 3.5k as it did in 2019? I don’t think so. It could go more to 20k. Anyway, I’ll buy those prices in expectation of the next bull run. And if I’m really wrong, I’ll go back into ETF in few years. It’s a risk, but I’ll take it again.
If tether is a scam, how would they exit it? Andy why?
Can they even exit scam at this point?
Wouldnt they just buy all the btc/eth etc at every possible price even if they know the price can crash 80-90% before USDT is going bust? Itn’t it better for them (and the exchanges) to keep the thing running?
You have not been able to articulate a single counter-argument that what was said to you in the thread appart from “at the end I don’t give a f.ck” but you are able to predict the floor of a highly irrational market. Sounds legit.
I have a small part of my portfolio in crypto so I’m not spitting on the technology. But seeing overblown passion with a clear lack of technical understanding or big picture is a scary prospect. And I would venture to say that you are not an exception in the crypto community. That scares me.
By reading and partipating to this forum, you confirm you have read and agree with the disclaimer presented on http://www.mustachianpost.com/
En lisant et participant à ce forum, tu confirmes avoir lu et être d'accord avec l'avis de dégagement de responsabilité présenté sur http://www.mustachianpost.com/fr/
Durch das Lesen und die Teilnahme an diesem Forum bestätigst du, dass du den auf http://www.mustachianpost.com/de/ dargestellten Haftungsausschluss gelesen hast und damit einverstanden bist.
