We counter everything they say, then ... silence. Proving our points.
Can't we just be honest about it, instead of holding grudges or sour grapes from not recognizing what this is after ~500 deaths and resurrections?
I could dig back years in this thread and find all of your various absurd Bitcoin price predictions, but I'll spare you the embarrassment.
Gold is a store of value and it has occasionally in its history had 30 - 60% drawdowns. Store of value is measured by long term performance not short term performance so it’s not clear to me exactly what point you are trying to make here.
You could also dig back years and see all of us are correct in the direction of BTC over time, the only important thing, not short term guesses (which don't matter unless you are trading them and losing BTC or USD as a result). You'd think someone would know this. But you don't, because you're on the wrong side of all of this, and have been "if you dig back for years" and look at it all.
Precisely.
I just dug back for years and saw that scorpion indeed has been wrong about BTC for ... ever. Embarrassing, if you ask me.
Gold has had long term bear markets (1980-2001 was brutal) but is not nearly as volatile as Bitcoin, which has plunged 80% numerous times over its short history.
You have been comically wrong in your predictions for the past five years, a time period over which Bitcoin's price is basically flat. You would have done much better, while assuming much less risk, buying stocks and gold over that time frame. All of your arguments for Bitcoin are based on looking at its price appreciation starting pre-2021. But that is totally irrelevant when you are advocating that people buy in today. Bitcoin is a terrible investment unless you have a time machine.
Bitcoin's entire value proposition lies in its brand, which has been hugely tarnished over the past few years. We have ETFs, we have corporate treasury companies, we have the President of the United States and his sons directly involved promoting Bitcoin. And yet... this is the best it can do? Currently sitting around $65k? Who else exactly is left to buy the bag at this point? No one is interested. It's hilarious to think where Bitcoin would be if Michael Saylor wasn't almost singlehandedly propping up the market with his Ponzi scheme company. $30k? $20k? We're probably getting ballpark with those numbers.
The growth of USD stablecoins will end up killing off Bitcoin for good over the next decade, rendering its sole remaining use case (fast global transactions outside the banking system) utterly obsolete. Thus the great irony: Bitcoin, which maxis have been championing for years as the killer of the U.S. Dollar, will fade into irrelevance as USD-denominated stablecoins make the mighty dollar more powerful than ever before, extending its life as the global reserve currency for decades to come. Bitcoin will be remembered as nothing more than a footnote in financial history, regarded as an amusing sideshow that made and lost people fortunes over its short life before its final, spectacular implosion, but which at least gave birth to the stablecoin idea, which will ultimately prove much more enduring and revolutionary.
The fact that you were just better off buying stocks hits pretty hard at this point. I genuinely hope it turns around for you guys as I know more than one guy here who was pinning their future plans on btc but I think a little humility about the situation goes a long way here.
this is if you bought the absolute top in 2021 and did nothing else until now...very misleading
weekly DCA, from August 2021 according to grok:
Rough estimate (assuming $100 weekly DCA, ~240 purchases):
Total invested: ~$24,000.
Average cost per BTC: Likely in the $30,000-$45,000 range (weighted lower due to 2022 buys).
Accumulated BTC: Approximately 0.6-0.8 BTC (more if heavier buys in lows).
Current value at ~$69,000/BTC: ~$41,400-$55,200.
Approximate return: +70% to +130% total (or annualized ~12-20%), with profit ~$17,000-$31,000.
This is conservative; actual could be higher due to buying more in the deep 2022 dip. Lump-sum buy in Aug 2021 (~$40k-$47k) would be roughly flat to +50% at current prices, but DCA outperforms lump-sum in volatile/declining-then-recovering periods like this.
stablecoins are not permissionless...they are just fiat on less efficient rails
At least you admitted that you are just taking the 2021 high as your starting point, lol
You keep saying this but still don't understand fiat or BTC, which is why you keep stating this kind of thing, which actually makes no sense. Debased dollars (no matter what kind) are NOT going to be desired, continually, compared to actual money. If that were the case, most wouldn't be buying PMs right now, which you won't mention (anti fiat that's why).
Again, timeline and pick your starting point (or stock). Will you all be back in Q4 or Q1-2 next year? That's the more important question.
Indeed, he always sticks to the misleading guns, it's all he's got.
It's a power law for a reason, scorpion. Again, regression .95 or so
you can't argue math - well, maybe you'd be the type that would try with all those feelz over there (or sour grapes)
Who cares? Stablecoins are actually useful as a currency, unlike Bitcoin, which is why people want them. Almost all of Bitcoin's demand stems from speculation on price appreciation. A vanishingly small percentage of people actually transact with it regularly as currency.
First of all, most people are NOT buying PMs (perhaps they should be, but they aren't). Secondly, stablecoin dollars will be (and are already) in very high demand overseas for all of the reasons that you guys love to tout Bitcoin in those scenarios: unstable local currencies, repressive governments, inflation, etc... People aren't buying stablecoins as investments, they're buying them to facilitate commercial activity in a more stable and fluid denomination than their native currency. The fact that stablecoins will inflate is immaterial and working as designed. They are disposable currency, not hard money or investments. And I understand perfectly well how and why you consider Bitcoin to be hard money (the hardest ever!), I just disagree on that assessment and think it's more of a fad - unlike gold, which has proven its enduring appeal for literally millennia.
Yes stablecoins solve a specific problem: poor people with third world currencies that want USD.
That's good for them, but it isn't exactly revolutionary.
Yes stablecoins are used in trade, but they are much more important as a means of saving (for Venezuelans, Brazilians, Turks, etc.)
Transacting with stablecoins is not the innovation: Venmo, Apple Pay, and Zelle can do that faster and cheaper. Its the access to USD to save in that 70% of the poors living with basket-case currencies want. The USD looks amazing compared to the Bolivar.
Bitcoin is the same. It is less transactable (for most things*) than Zelle or Apple Pay. Most of its usefulness is as way to avoid fiat debasement compared to USD. Just like compared to the Bolivar, or SA Rand, USD is better to save in.
* But if you need something like certain medications during Covid or products from sanctioned countries, bitcoin is much more transactable than USD.
So to poors in Brazil, the USD looks like it holds its value well.
To those of us living in the USA, its easy to see the superiority of bitcoin compared to USD
Last edited:
Latest NYT FUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/26/opinion/crypto-trump-bitcoin-clarity-genius.html
We have one question. What took so long? Outside of crimes and scams, the technology is useless, and its economics are even worse.
The answer is that crypto was held aloft for months by a period of euphoria that followed the extraordinary support the industry gained in the Trump administration. The crypto bros who spent millions getting Donald Trump elected seemed to get virtually everything they might want: a longtime industry investor elevated to White House adviser; one type of crypto given the imprimatur of the federal government; the near annihilation of effective regulatory scrutiny; invitations to White House dinners hosted by Mr. Trump.
But instead of cementing crypto’s legitimacy, the administration has only pulled back the curtain on the fundamental worthlessness of its assets. At a time when investors have grown skittish about riskier assets, the value of Bitcoin has fallen nearly 50 percent since October, dropping to below $70,000, proving it was only a matter of time before crypto faced the critical lens it always needed but never truly received.
When we entered the White House in 2021, crypto was lobbying up faster than any industry we’ve ever seen. Eager to shape its regulatory future and enter the world of mainstream finance, the industry hired an army of lobbyists to draft laws and regulations giving its notoriously volatile currencies the backing and legitimacy of our government. By doing so, its major investors believed, they could elevate the “systemic importance” of crypto so that they could be made whole from any future crash via a potentially taxpayer-funded bailout. One of the industry’s main facilitators, Senator Cynthia Lummis, a Wyoming Republican nicknamed the Crypto Queen, received over $50,000 in campaign contributions from the crypto industry and investors just weeks before sponsoring a pro-crypto bill.
In our role as government economists, we initially kept an open mind about crypto’s potential merits. From 2021 to 2022 we sat in dozens of meetings in which crypto firms and their backers assured us that the blockchain, the technology underlying crypto, would do everything from increase access to the financial system to replace the internet as we knew it.
Yet when we asked independent experts about these claims, we encountered sharp pushback. If this technology is that revolutionary, why weren’t any of the giant tech firms using it? Were they too shortsighted to see the technological revolution unfolding before them? Or was the technology — which we learned was essentially a painfully slow and expensive database — just not that special?
As economists of the Council of Economic Advisers, we aired our concerns in the 2023 Economic Report of the President. Crypto is at best a form of private money, which has a long history of ending up in financial ruin. At worst, it is a speculative and highly volatile asset with almost no practical use, whose backers were (and still are) constantly trying to embed it into the financial system, both to increase its adoption and, should the market nosedive, stick taxpayers with the bill.
Given our research and the collapse of the major crypto firm FTX due to fraudulent activity of its founder, Sam Bankman-Fried, the Biden administration adopted a cautious approach that included increasingly aggressive regulatory efforts to curb scams and frauds. Many other prominent crypto firms also collapsed in that period, leading to a huge sell-off of Bitcoin and similar currencies.
This period — referred to as “crypto winter”— could have led to a deeper evaluation of whether crypto was delivering its promised benefits. Instead, the industry concluded that it had to control more of the rules that govern crypto’s standing in financial markets. That, in turn, meant they needed to buy a lot more political power. So, in 2024, they lavished over $100 million on pro-crypto candidates including Mr. Trump.
He swiftly made good on his vow to be a friend of the industry. He helped push through legislation that brought stablecoins firmly inside the regulatory perimeter of the U.S. banking system. And with the longtime crypto investor David Sacks working as Mr. Trump’s “A.I. and crypto czar,” he endorsed a range of other actions to bolster the industry and foster crypto’s broad adoption. Now, Senator Lummis and her Republican colleague Bernie Moreno of Ohio, who was elected with the help of the industry, are pushing to set up a government-funded reserve whose sole purpose appears to be to juice the value of Bitcoin.
The administration is also working to pass a bill known as the Clarity Act. Not only would it give the government’s regulatory blessing to an additional set of cryptocurrencies, it would allow small cryptocurrencies to pitch themselves to ordinary investors without any of the consumer protections that commonly accompany such securities — a recipe ripe for disaster.
Naturally, the administration’s moves initially sent crypto values soaring, with the price of Bitcoin rising almost 20 percent in the 10 months after Mr. Trump’s 2025 inauguration.
Yet all of that financial and government support, accompanied by a period of soaring crypto values, still failed to win over consumers. The share of Americans holding crypto has been stuck at around 30 percent for the past four years. Demand is so slack that the owners of the heavy-duty hardware that mines new crypto are increasingly turning it into A.I. data centers. At the same time, investors worried about an A.I. bubble are increasingly ditching riskier, more speculative assets — the more speculative the asset, the earlier it was punished. That explains why Bitcoin started plummeting three weeks before tech stocks began to wobble. Clearly, despite its many wins in Washington, crypto has made little progress on its attempts to be integrated into the real economy.
Of course, the industry may simply have erred in tying its fortunes to Mr. Trump. He and his family have already harvested an estimated $1.4 billion from various cryptocurrencies. As Paul Krugman has argued, these crypto geniuses may have bought themselves the wrong president.
There will be freshmen entering college this year who were born after Bitcoin’s debut. Yet in all this time, with the exception of individuals using it to wire money to recipients in other countries, crypto seems to have mainly proved itself adept at facilitating criminal activity. Just this week, the crypto firm Binance, whose founder was pardoned by Mr. Trump in October for violating money-laundering laws, fired or suspended several employees who found that $1.7 billion in cryptocurrencies “had flowed from two Binance accounts to Iranian entities with links to terrorist groups,” The Times reported.
No one can say with certainty what crypto will be worth in the future. But with what we view as the most crypto-friendly administration, and friendly members of Congress, its boosters have run out of excuses. They may now also be running out of time.
Crypto Is Pointless. Not Even the White House Can Fix That.
Since its peak last fall, Bitcoin, the world’s largest cryptocurrency, has lost almost half its value. Nearly $2 trillion of wealth has evaporated from the global crypto market since October.We have one question. What took so long? Outside of crimes and scams, the technology is useless, and its economics are even worse.
The answer is that crypto was held aloft for months by a period of euphoria that followed the extraordinary support the industry gained in the Trump administration. The crypto bros who spent millions getting Donald Trump elected seemed to get virtually everything they might want: a longtime industry investor elevated to White House adviser; one type of crypto given the imprimatur of the federal government; the near annihilation of effective regulatory scrutiny; invitations to White House dinners hosted by Mr. Trump.
But instead of cementing crypto’s legitimacy, the administration has only pulled back the curtain on the fundamental worthlessness of its assets. At a time when investors have grown skittish about riskier assets, the value of Bitcoin has fallen nearly 50 percent since October, dropping to below $70,000, proving it was only a matter of time before crypto faced the critical lens it always needed but never truly received.
When we entered the White House in 2021, crypto was lobbying up faster than any industry we’ve ever seen. Eager to shape its regulatory future and enter the world of mainstream finance, the industry hired an army of lobbyists to draft laws and regulations giving its notoriously volatile currencies the backing and legitimacy of our government. By doing so, its major investors believed, they could elevate the “systemic importance” of crypto so that they could be made whole from any future crash via a potentially taxpayer-funded bailout. One of the industry’s main facilitators, Senator Cynthia Lummis, a Wyoming Republican nicknamed the Crypto Queen, received over $50,000 in campaign contributions from the crypto industry and investors just weeks before sponsoring a pro-crypto bill.
In our role as government economists, we initially kept an open mind about crypto’s potential merits. From 2021 to 2022 we sat in dozens of meetings in which crypto firms and their backers assured us that the blockchain, the technology underlying crypto, would do everything from increase access to the financial system to replace the internet as we knew it.
Yet when we asked independent experts about these claims, we encountered sharp pushback. If this technology is that revolutionary, why weren’t any of the giant tech firms using it? Were they too shortsighted to see the technological revolution unfolding before them? Or was the technology — which we learned was essentially a painfully slow and expensive database — just not that special?
As economists of the Council of Economic Advisers, we aired our concerns in the 2023 Economic Report of the President. Crypto is at best a form of private money, which has a long history of ending up in financial ruin. At worst, it is a speculative and highly volatile asset with almost no practical use, whose backers were (and still are) constantly trying to embed it into the financial system, both to increase its adoption and, should the market nosedive, stick taxpayers with the bill.
Given our research and the collapse of the major crypto firm FTX due to fraudulent activity of its founder, Sam Bankman-Fried, the Biden administration adopted a cautious approach that included increasingly aggressive regulatory efforts to curb scams and frauds. Many other prominent crypto firms also collapsed in that period, leading to a huge sell-off of Bitcoin and similar currencies.
This period — referred to as “crypto winter”— could have led to a deeper evaluation of whether crypto was delivering its promised benefits. Instead, the industry concluded that it had to control more of the rules that govern crypto’s standing in financial markets. That, in turn, meant they needed to buy a lot more political power. So, in 2024, they lavished over $100 million on pro-crypto candidates including Mr. Trump.
He swiftly made good on his vow to be a friend of the industry. He helped push through legislation that brought stablecoins firmly inside the regulatory perimeter of the U.S. banking system. And with the longtime crypto investor David Sacks working as Mr. Trump’s “A.I. and crypto czar,” he endorsed a range of other actions to bolster the industry and foster crypto’s broad adoption. Now, Senator Lummis and her Republican colleague Bernie Moreno of Ohio, who was elected with the help of the industry, are pushing to set up a government-funded reserve whose sole purpose appears to be to juice the value of Bitcoin.
The administration is also working to pass a bill known as the Clarity Act. Not only would it give the government’s regulatory blessing to an additional set of cryptocurrencies, it would allow small cryptocurrencies to pitch themselves to ordinary investors without any of the consumer protections that commonly accompany such securities — a recipe ripe for disaster.
Naturally, the administration’s moves initially sent crypto values soaring, with the price of Bitcoin rising almost 20 percent in the 10 months after Mr. Trump’s 2025 inauguration.
Yet all of that financial and government support, accompanied by a period of soaring crypto values, still failed to win over consumers. The share of Americans holding crypto has been stuck at around 30 percent for the past four years. Demand is so slack that the owners of the heavy-duty hardware that mines new crypto are increasingly turning it into A.I. data centers. At the same time, investors worried about an A.I. bubble are increasingly ditching riskier, more speculative assets — the more speculative the asset, the earlier it was punished. That explains why Bitcoin started plummeting three weeks before tech stocks began to wobble. Clearly, despite its many wins in Washington, crypto has made little progress on its attempts to be integrated into the real economy.
Of course, the industry may simply have erred in tying its fortunes to Mr. Trump. He and his family have already harvested an estimated $1.4 billion from various cryptocurrencies. As Paul Krugman has argued, these crypto geniuses may have bought themselves the wrong president.
There will be freshmen entering college this year who were born after Bitcoin’s debut. Yet in all this time, with the exception of individuals using it to wire money to recipients in other countries, crypto seems to have mainly proved itself adept at facilitating criminal activity. Just this week, the crypto firm Binance, whose founder was pardoned by Mr. Trump in October for violating money-laundering laws, fired or suspended several employees who found that $1.7 billion in cryptocurrencies “had flowed from two Binance accounts to Iranian entities with links to terrorist groups,” The Times reported.
No one can say with certainty what crypto will be worth in the future. But with what we view as the most crypto-friendly administration, and friendly members of Congress, its boosters have run out of excuses. They may now also be running out of time.
No, I have to agree with the NYT (except when they mention bitcoin in the same sentence as crapto)
Crapto is pointless and just a scam...not FUD: truth
"Blockchain technology" is not revolutionary...its a scam...just look at Sam Altman and "worldcoin" physiognomy doesn't lie.
Now the usual crypto victims can gamble more fairly on DraftKings or Polymarket, and get at least a fair chance vs the rigged crypto casinos...thats why there was no "alt season"
Last edited:
The first part is honest, and I salute you, as it accurately assesses your point of view. The problem is that before this you again held BTC to standards you don't hold gold to. Yet it has outperformed gold over its history; you have to cherry pick a recent time frame to even try to make an argument for gold over BTC. And functionally for a modern person or economy it makes zero sense compared to BTC.
No, it's just levels of losing. Scorpion acts like he doesn't understand that.
Yes, we were also proven right (again) when we who are "maxis" didn't find out the hard way that alts generally don't make any sense and were destined to poop out. For reasons we've stated a million times already.