- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Anything that has a variable worth is not functional as a trade item. Today's average home costs less than in the 1960s compared to the ounces of gold required to purchase it. Gold does not hold a standard because it has been declared to; it has a value because of its physical nature, which cannot be changed or declared different by anyone or any institution.
There is no way to know how Bitcoin is controlled; how much is there? What would I receive if I were to demand my 'Bitcoin? If I accept Bitcoin as a payment and the value goes down, I have lost the value of my payment and have less to purchase my needed goods. Bitcoin only becomes valuable when I sell it for an unstable currency and then try to purchase an asset.
There is no way to know that it has not fallen to the control of institutions (governments) that cannot be controlled.
Precious metals will have severe limitations if governments declare it illegal to own them (as it did in the US during the depression), and all industrious entities can only trade for their needs with the government-approved fiat currency. The seriousness of this will be felt when the number of people individuals can trade with will be limited to a few. I have yet to discover a viable alternative other than a subsistence-level existence where anything I own does not entice the enslavers. ~ Chad Chadburn
It is true that Bitcoin varies with the usual currencies and with other measures of value. But which of them is 'correct'? They all vary compared with the others.
When you compare golds ability to purchase over a period of time the product becomes more valuable (I'd pay more for a 2023 pickup with A/C, power steering, electric windows, cd player, and many other features that didn't exist in 1955) yet the new one costs fewer ounces of gold than the earlier model. The problem is actually earning power has gone down but it is not realized because the sum total of income has gone up. My dad earned $6000 a year back in the 1950's with his service station. I would have to earn $342,000 a year to match his purchasing power when a new home cost $10,000. The best I ever did was $85,000, didn't make it.
Thanks for bringing some logic to this conversation haha.
Bitcoin has value because it requires proof of work (energy) to produce. This is the same reason gold has value, it is hard to produce! Fiat money can be created without the expenditure of energy.
Bitcoin can not be changed or declared different by any one nation. It is a commodity. Like lumber, wheat or gold.
Governments can declare Bitcoin illegal to own if they would like, but it have zero impact on Bitcoin. There is absolutely nothing they can do to stop it. This is why they are so afraid of it. This is why BlackRock is currently making a splash.
The "elites" win because they control the public opinion by controlling the media and the mainstream narrative. The arguments that are being presented here are an example of this.
I waited way too long to get involved in Bitcoin and I'll kick myself for the rest of my life. This commodity is worth dedicating the 5-10 hours of research it requires to understand it. Study the principles, study the philosophy. If you understand Rand, Objectivism, Austrian economics, and the bullshit system of fiat money- Bitcoin will click for you.
My entire goal of bringing Bitcoin up in this community is to encourage people to understand it. If you spend the 5-10 hours and you still don't get it, that's fine. The majority of the counter points I have seen here and completely unfounded and display a lack of knowledge.
The 13 min video I shared from the Atlas Society uses terms that should be very familiar to people in this community. The bridge isn't that hard to cross!
2. The 'get rich quick' scheme / wealth transfer mechanism that is built into it is antithetical to the idea of sound money.
3. It isn't very practical due to the limited transaction throughput and slow transaction speed. The lightning network was supposed to fix that but I have doubts about its ability to do this.
4. The 'limited supply' argument is stupid and problematic, you don't want your money to be limited in that way, as I understand it, you want your currency base to match the amount of physical wealth that exists in the real world, with limited supply you get extreme unnatural deflation during abdication, and inflation during abatement.
5. I'm not seeing people accepting bitcoin and using bitcoin, what I am seeing is people buying and selling bitcoin as a way to get rich quick (or lose everything trying). That is a failure of attainment of the original goal.
I have some designs of my own for a cryptocurrency that would solve these problems. Unfortunately, I don't see the cryptocurrency community being interested in that stuff. I think you guys are more about pump and dumps rather than producing actual value to society.
I was playing around with BitCoin when it was ~$100. I didn't buy into it. You know what? I am not kicking myself, because I understand those that got rich by doing that did so without producing anything of value. They just transferred value from someone else. These kind of schemes are wrong. The only way one should get rich is if they actually produced the equivalent amount of wealth. Everything else is just theft or fraud.
Things have 'value' because of the supply/demand dynamic, not because of any physical properties or the work it takes to produce. Physical properties and the difficulty of production have only an indirect effect on value. Physical properties may be desirable at the current time, so, that creates demand (increasing value). An increase in difficulty to produce decreases supply (increasing value). However, the primary factor is supply and demand, which are affected by multiple things, not just physical properties and the difficulty of production.
Not really any different than if I bought a million dollars worth of stock in xyz, and then went around screaming that if YOU don't invest likewise you will be poor forever.
Maybe it will work out for Saylor and SK. Maybe not. I'd hate to think the value of my nest egg was tied up in a single investment tied only to other people's opinion.
Edit add: I noticed the topic was down voted to zero so I gave it an up vote to make it one again. Although I don't speculate in bitcoin, the topic is worth discussion.
If you don't get it or refuse to see it, I'm sorry I don't have time for you.
Bitcoin is the largest computer network in the history of humanity and it doesn't care whether you contribute your energy or not. Same as Galt's Gulch.
All who understand are welcome, looters are not.
No argument from me that the Federal Reserve fiat currency is corrupt up to it's eyeballs, but bitcoin is NOT the solution. It's vaporware with a lot of hype. You can profit from it, but like many other speculative issues, have an escape plan.
1) The amount of possible BTC is limited (22mil)
2) Nobody can make or bring in other "FAKE" BTC and sell it to people because it looks/feels like the real thing.
3) You can MINE them, but that effectively costs a LOT of electricity. In fact, the mining "costs" of electricity are near the value of BTC by design of the algorithm.
It requires technology to transfer. And a bit of an education to use/understand.
But BTC has a BETTER value argument than the USD!
In fact, the USD is closer to a tulip bulb than BTC is. Because the USD is Fiat. it only has value because we price things in it, and we accept the non-stop inflation caused by relentless printing/devaluation.
The biggest challenge BTC will face... Is if everything were to be priced in BTC, as a replacement for the Dollar. 8 Decimal places to a satoshi is quite a "limit" on ALL assets in the world.
In fact, where the BRICS nations are going to find trouble creating their own "Gold Backed Security" to trade OIL... Is that the value of the OIL underground, compared to the amount of GOLD they will have to back their currency with, is a huge differential. It has been said that currently only the Dollar (depth of usage/availability) can cover that chasm.
Saylor calls it "Perfect Digital Property".
Compared to USD, Yuan, Ruble, Euro, or LAND in NY City...
I would rather have BTC. Especially if I was forced to hold it for 50 years. (Which asset would you prefer to hold, if you were forced to hold it for 50 years)?
2) Just because it is difficult (or impossible) to fake this type of vaporware doesn't change the fact it is still vaporware.
3) Expending enormous amounts of energy to produce more vaporware in reality produces nothing.
I picked the historical tulip speculation that took place in Holland centuries ago because it illustrates the point of how far psychological hype can push speculation in an otherwise worthless endeavor. I am not the inventor of using the tulip for such illustration as I've seen it referenced throughout my lifetime by others writing about the psychology of speculation. Bitcoin is a modern day tulip. If I were 30 years younger I may get on board for a ride, but will be ready to get off at a moments notice. Interesting you have to use USD (or other world currency) to buy in and, presumably, you will expect more USD (or other world currency) to get out.
The energy usage is what makes Bitcoin great. And the network is already more than 60% renewable and growing.
Anyway, the proof of work thing is only there for security, as I understand. It is there so that nobody cheats. Energy usage is NOT something that makes bitcoin great. Energy usage is necessary for the decentralized security. It is an inconvenient thing. Once you spend the energy, you can't use the resulting work in any other way than to submit a new block. You can't get the energy back. You can't 'store' the result and use it in the future.
So, my point still stands. The extreme amount of energy used isn't REALLY necessary for bitcoin to function. It can do just fine with way lower amount, as was the case in the beginning. The reason why so much energy is used is because there are way too many people mining.
What needs to happen is the crypto coins need to be tied to physical wealth. That way, the price stays stable and there wouldn't be a need for limiting anything. It would be limited by the universe itself.
I could make a new metal and call it "Golder" and it wouldn't change gold in any way.
"Golder" would do the same thing. It would decrease demand for gold (if it has similar properties to it), because people would have an alternative. Having alternatives in the business world is called competition. Competition lowers prices, everybody knows that.
Correct me if I am wrong and show why.
Uh, No. Just no. The Internet is orders of magnitude larger. And as far as individual distributed networks, there are botnets as big as Bitcoin. North Korea and China have used them to attack US infrastructure.
"All who understand are welcome, looters are not."
False dichotomy. One also points out that you don't attract flies with vinegar. Disparagement doesn't win friends or influence people on this forum - solid arguments do. If you want to cut yourself off from your best source of potential allies, keep up the rhetoric.
No one is questioning the corrupt fiat nature of the global monetary system. No one questions the evil of the Federal Reserve and its associated international banking moguls. No one here is trying to argue that inflation is anything other than theft. But every alternative must stand on its own merits. Attempting to berate - coerce really - this group into adopting Bitcoin? Methinks you might want to revisit your premises...
Who's the one berating? Check your premises.
I like the idea of a decentralized "crypto" currency, however, the current iteration is a no go.
Ayn Rand would likely appreciate the decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies, however, them being entirely digital and not backed by a physical commodity might be a point of contention for her. I believe this would also be the opinion of this community.
So, in order for crypto to be backed by Ayn Rand fans, it would need to be tied to something in the real world.
They will eliminate the competition... Even if that means
They pushed MILLIONS into it, in order to beat it up,
and prove it.
How many bank runs were FORCED in order to get the Federal Reserve Act passed?
This does not detract from what BTC is...
just how it is viewed by ignorant people.
And to make it a target of lawmakers.
BTW, there is a pending lawsuit, that could have a
forced "code change" that moves coins from one BTC
wallet to another...
If that happens. Then you are right. BTC is worthless.
Because it means they can control it.
They can steal it from you.
But that is not the fault of the current BTC design.
That would be the fault of the community for accepting such a ruling. I eagerly await this case.
When it FAILS (because companies will shut down instead of complying), then the price will skyrocket. Proving that it is beyond the reach of the court systems, or any SINGLE jurisdiction.
Edit add: I see you mention below, and I'll take your word for it, El Salvador has given the government decree. Now officially fiat.
If others don't like what I say I should just keep it to myself?
I have no interest in convincing anyone of anything. As I've said: "if you don't get it or refuse to see it, I'm sorry I don't have time to convince you".
Honest discussion can not exist with blatant disregard for truth. The counterpoints to this topic have been exactly that.
BTC is backed by Source Code.
An agreement that limits how many can be coined, and the process for coining them.
Hardly Fiat.
There is actually a semi-fair market place for determining the valuation. It is complex, and volatile. (especially with some heavy hands JPM manipulating it)
Fiat (paper) is backed by the demand for it created by:
- the fact that it is accepted everywhere as payment
- the need for it to repay currently existing loans
- the tax system
BTC is backed by the demand for it created by:
- pumps (for later dumps)
- the need to bypass banks
- the need to bypass government controls
Notice that source code is not on that list.
The question isn't "will government allow Bitcoin to continue? Will Bitcoin allow governments to continue.
Legislation does affect bitcoin demand. If a state outlaws it, a lot of people in that country is going to dump it. This will have an effect on its demand, as has been observed.
It is kind of hard to argue with a gun pointed at your head.
The way to disallow a government is to prevent it from receiving tax revenue. How does bitcoin do that? It might stop taxation by inflation, but not regular taxation.
If you THINK you can survive ANY system where the BANKSTERS control your assets/money... then you are wrong. This is how we got here.
BTC is NOT a get rich quick promise. It's a HARD MONEY promise built on Technology. Available to everyone around the world.
It SHOULD be the first step in removing the CONTROL systems the bankers have.
Once they cannot LOOT YOU... Then you have a virtual GULCH. That's the point.
Once you go this way, you are FREE.
As long as we pay in $s, we are fundamentally slaves, and inflation is how they steal from us.
On the other hand, try to access your Yuan once you get out?
China did NOT USURP private wallets, except at direct gunpoint (ie, they robbed the BTC people of their assets, and that is NOT the fault of BTC, but of the Government).
Current Banking is about Sanctioned Theft.
Yes, BTC has high fees, and other issues.
Much like our constitution... It lays down some laws, that are VERY VERY hard to change.
China cannot steal MY BTC.
The current argument is that the US Miners + China Minders > 50% and they can control everything.
EXCEPT, it's still up to the individual miners. Those are MINING POOLS. Of which there are usually more than one, being rolled up. if the primary movers and shakers REFUSE the code changes (to protect the system), they simply disconnect from that pool, and join a pool in another country.
That's a problem that is solved in MINUTES to HOURS once the first ruling comes down.
When the court ruling says "ZooMiners" you as a company must implement this code change on all of your mining equipment. MOST of that is independent miners who can decide to pull their mining machines (ie, it is still decentralized).
I was in the process of joining a big pool. This was the first thing I wanted to make sure worked as expected. They cannot forcibly upgrade my mining rig. My rig, my code.
And the first time everyone jumps ship, turns their miners off, or joins another pool. Then the Judge has to issue a new judgement. And I would personally move to another pool, until they realize they now have to do this for 100 Mining Pools, then 1,000, etc.
No ONE country has enough power to do it. That's the key. Decentralization. And if one does, the rats will run.
Ask yourself. If you had a miner, and your choices were shut it down, or apply a code change that was corrupted... Even if it cost you $5,000 to shut it down, and you had say $100k of BTC... I am guessing you would shut down your miner, and move it elsewhere.
The upcoming Bitcoin ETFs that will be approved is a WILD turn for the future of finance. I'll never support BlackRock, but they have the right to buy the commodity like anyone else.
This will bring trillions to the network. Good or bad.
As long as the code doesn't change, it's fine.
If someone in Japan wants to speak English, they don't change how I speak English. They can't change the definitions of words. They just use the same protocol. Same with the Bitcoin protocol.
Your point is false.
Bitcoin is the first property that can not be taken from you by force. You keep 12 words in your head and you can go anywhere in the world with your energy stored.
Again, these are all facts that are easily proven. Facts don't care about your feelings.
As much as you feel afraid of the future, it doesn't make you right.
100% sir.
Bitcoin requires the expenditure of energy to produce. It is a free market that encourages competition. Over 60% of the decentralized mining network controls their own energy.
Bitcoin is the closest thing to perfection that humanity has ever invented.
It is worth your time to research.
Who's in charge of Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is trustless.
Check your premises.
If there is any technological basis which might form a valid currency, Bitcoin probably has it nailed down. Given blockchain and Bitcoin's lack of a Board with power to arbitrarily compare, Bitcoin has this and no other cryptocurrency does. Point for Bitcoin.
Bitcoin has a limited supply. Point for Bitcoin.
Bitcoin requires technology to implement and access. It is 100% worthless without this infrastructure. Power out? You're out of luck. No connection to the interweb? You're out of luck. You don't have the software installed? Sorry again! Point against Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is fiat. Remember, you're not just buying a prime number, but the infrastructure that attaches an arbitrary value to that prime number. That's the definition of fiat currency, like it or not. Without it, Bitcoin is worthless. Point against Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is speculative. It isn't a currency. Yet. No nation has adopted it as legal tender. Even vendors immediately convert their Bitcoin transactions back to USD or some other recognized equivalent. Until this changes - either through law or through popular adoption - Bitcoin is just like Dogecoin or Bell Bottom Jeans or tulip bulbs: a fad. Point against Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is ephemeral. Sorry, but the power of physical gold/silver is real. Gold is incredibly valuable not only as jewelry but in computer chips due to its high ductility and electrical conductivity. Silver is similarly intrinsically valuable. Bitcoin has no intrinsic value and certainly no value except as a medium of exchange. Point against Bitcoin.
So according to my analysis, the score sits at 4-2 against.
How much supply of gold exists? How much will exist in the future? How many paper credits of gold of gold exist in relation to physical gold.
Using your logic, Gold is more of a fiat than Bitcoin!
"How much supply of gold exists? How much will exist in the future?"
Not sure what your argument is here. Value comes because of scarcity. Bitcoin has already said that it will cap the total number of coins at a fixed number. So both have a limited supply.
"Using your logic, Gold is more of a fiat than Bitcoin!"
In what way? As I noted, gold has real application value separate and apart from its use as a currency. Bitcoin does not. The real problem with fiat currency is inflation, is it not? How does one inflate gold?
I don't think that is completely true. Value comes from both, supply and demand. If something is scarce but there is also no demand for it, then the value would be low.
Edit: I think with gold there is demand for it that far outstrips its supply. It doesn't rust, so value of things made from it doesn't depreciate as fast. That makes the value of those things go up, because you are able to get way more use out of those things. Example: jewellery.
That statement along with most others on this thread are false. El Salvador and many other nations will move to a Bitcoin standard.
That's the answer to your "who cares" comment.
Gold is completely co-opted by mining regulators and colluding bureaucrats.
Bitcoin can not be changed, altered, co-opted.
It is digital gold with a fixed supply and has none of the challenges of gold (portability, authenticity, etc.).
By true believers? Nothing else?
By those who saw from where tyranny comes?
Also, in todays world, think 2008, when Satoshi discovered that the BIG players had offshore (unnamed) accounts with VAST sums of money set aside that they pillaged from so many honest people.
And the idea hit... What if EVERY DOLLAR the government spent was serialized, and stored on a public block chain, so we could actually see...
[Money from USAID -> Ukraine -> SBF -> Pelosi/Romney, et al]
That was part of the vision. If every transaction is on the public blockchain, you can see EXACTLY who STOLE WHAT.
That's the real dream.
Now, I will settle for a version where the bankers can't just HIDE the Millions paid to BIDEN through shell companies. (Something you cannot do with BTC, btw).
It's NOT about BTC, per se. It's about the accountability, and the inability to print more, to benefit the few, to hide the stealing of wealth, and to stop the onslaught of inflation.
To get the gist of the rest of your post, if the Biden crime family wants to hide transactions, then don't use bitcoin. However, it's slowly being revealed banks can't hide transactions either if someone really wants to dig.
I'll never sell my Bitcoin.
I don't understand this statement. Isn't the purpose of a currency to use it in trade - to "sell it" in trade for something you want or need?
"I'll never sell my Bitcoin." - If it's worth anything when you pass, I'm sure your heirs (or the State) will appreciate the strategy.
Making the sale is the only goal. Facts are not allowed to interfere.
Twisting the conversation is the primary rule.
Your statements are ignored.
Repeating the same pitch over and over is the method regardless of
any rational statements that disagree
That's what the dumping whales want you to do, keep giving them all your money and never sell.
2 opposing viewpoints can not both be true. There are no contradictions.
We can disagree and that's fine. I'll still help you fix the machine.