Bitcoin and Crypto Thread

[Northern Pilgrim]

Yeah but

You know, this is peak clown world as you have been wrong on every one of your predictions thus costing several men around here (including yourself) lots of money. The odd part is that I, "The guy who doesn't understand money," was right, bitcoin is jew controlled trash and the future is in 3-dimensional objects (timbered land with swift flowing creeks) and collectibles.

Anthony Scaramucci's son just bought Logan Paul's top rated Pokemon Card for 16.5 million dollars, saying this in the process:

"I just will say that if you believe in currency debasement, which our family does, this is a frontier that has a liquidity mismatch... Bitcoin and gold are well exposed, but the world of collectibles, the prices are going up for a reason."

In addition, and on that note, the oldest known pair of wearable Levis just sold for 250K so it looks like you Bitcoin Bros have been on the wrong side of the "coin" on this one. You should have, like myself, invested in collectibles, not sh*tcoin.



Correction, the value of this collection is now at about 200K, more than double it was last year.

The problem with that is you have to actually SELL the Levis to realize the value. With bitcoin you would have to also SELL to realize the losses.
So both sides in here are basically arguing with a brick wall.

Personally, I can see the merit of both but hold more of a 3rd position.As some have said, if your portfolio consists of at least say 5-10% bitcoin, same for self held precious metals and stocks, why not invest a few grand every year in quality tools and such from the local pawn shop as Purp has suggested? If you can get out of town into a rural property and build it into a survival type location, why not?
Why not do this AND bitcoin?

 

[chance vought]

You know, this is peak clown world as you have been wrong on every one of your predictions thus costing several men around here (including yourself) lots of money. The odd part is that I, "The guy who doesn't understand money," was right, bitcoin is jew controlled trash and the future is in 3-dimensional objects (timbered land with swift flowing creeks) and collectibles.

I think you mean currency, not money. Dollars are no longer money: the base layer of dollars is government debt; not gold, not anything else. A promise to pay in the future. Pay what, exactly? Dollars printed in the future, that are backed by more promises to pay in the future. That isn't money.

Could I trade my bitcoin for less cuckbucks now, vs 4 months ago? Yes, but WHY WOULD I??? No one who has ever held bitcoin has lost money UNLESS THEY SOLD IT. It's all so tiresome, the same points are brought up over and over again. You and @scorpion are afraid of market volatility, that's fine, but that doesn't mean bitcoin doesn't work or won't work. Bitcoin isn't volatile: fiat is: see chart below.

Correction, the value of this collection is now at about 200K, more than double it was last year.

Priced in gold, though? That's the problem, we don't have money and no real way to value anything. This is what bitcoin fixes.

 

[scorpion]

The basic fallacy underlying the stance of Bitcoin maxis is this idea that, because fiat currency is flawed, Bitcoin must be a superior form of money. But this does not at all logically follow. Because "A" is imperfect, does not necessarily imply that "B" is superior to "A" just because it is different.

Fiat currency performs a totally different function than gold, stocks, Bitcoin, or other assets. It is not meant to store value over time. It is meant to be spent. Its purpose is to facilitate commercial activity and labor exchange, which are the true basis of wealth in any economy. Thus, all these comparisons and criticisms that Bitcoin maxis apply to fiat are completely and utterly irrelevant. It is a total bait and switch.

The idea that Bitcoin is "sound money" or indeed even the "most perfect form of money ever invented" is nothing more than an opinion. When maxis talk about Bitcoin operating by consensus, they are referring to the operations of the protocol itself, but what they should really be referring to is the fact that Bitcoin's value is entirely driven by consensus. It only has value if people believe it has value.

Bitcoin maxis claim this is perfectly fine, and some go so far as to state that there is no such thing as inherent value, and that all value is entirely relative. But this is flat out false. Consider this analogy: if I put a prime Mike Tyson or Jon Jones across the ring from some average journeyman fighter, the result of that matchup is a foregone conclusion. This is because the value of Tyson or Jones as a fighter is NOT relative. It is absolute and demonstrable. Now, imagine if instead of Tyson or Jones, I put one of those "no-touch" martial arts masters in the ring with regular fighter. What do you think happens next?

Obviously, the fake master will get destroyed. This is because his skills are not real and objective, they only exist via consensus in the minds of those who believe in him. Similarly, Bitcoin only has value to those who believe in it. And just like the reputation (aka value) of the fake martial artist can be destroyed in an instant when reality inevitably asserts itself, so can the reputation (value) of Bitcoin. When you have an asset whose entire value rests on a cult following, not only will its price be inherently unstable (what we have clearly observed with Bitcoin over its entire lifetime) but its ultimate destruction is already baked into the cake. It's just a matter of time.

 

[chance vought]

The basic fallacy underlying the stance of Bitcoin maxis is this idea that, because fiat currency is flawed, Bitcoin must be a superior form of money. But this does not at all logically follow. Because "A" is imperfect, does not necessarily imply that "B" is superior to "A" just because it is different.

Bitcoin is superior across time
Bitcoin is superior across space.
do you have any evidence to the contrary?

Fiat currency performs a totally different function than gold, stocks, Bitcoin, or other assets. It is not meant to store value over time. It is meant to be spent.

It "performs a different function" because it cannot function as savings! Bitcoin can do both...we have a bifurcated system where you can't save in fiat, so have to gamble in the wallstreet casino in order to "save" ...why would someone choose fiat, that does not hold value, over something that does? Thats why it is spent: to escape from it

Its purpose is to facilitate commercial activity and labor exchange, which are the true basis of wealth in any economy. Thus, all these comparisons and criticisms that Bitcoin maxis apply to fiat are completely and utterly irrelevant. It is a total bait and switch.

Bitcoin can perform these functions without stealing from the users of it. Fiat steals from you every time you try to keep some as a buffer against uncertainty. That is why no one has savings, and everyone is on a knifes edge and we need helicopter money during covid.

The idea that Bitcoin is "sound money" or indeed even the "most perfect form of money ever invented" is nothing more than an opinion. When maxis talk about Bitcoin operating by consensus, they are referring to the operations of the protocol itself, but what they should really be referring to is the fact that Bitcoin's value is entirely driven by consensus. It only has value if people believe it has value.

All value is ordinal, and subjective.
Individuals can ordinally rank what they desire...the "market" or group cannot. Individuals can value something relative to something else.

Bitcoin maxis claim this is perfectly fine, and some go so far as to state that there is no such thing as inherent value, and that all value is entirely relative. But this is flat out false. Consider this analogy: if I put a prime Mike Tyson or Jon Jones across the ring from some average journeyman fighter, the result of that matchup is a foregone conclusion. This is because the value of Tyson or Jones as a fighter is NOT relative. It is absolute and demonstrable. Now, imagine if instead of Tyson or Jones, I put one of those "no-touch" martial arts masters in the ring with regular fighter. What do you think happens next?

Mike Tyson is not a market good. Make an analogy using 2/market goods.

Obviously, the fake master will get destroyed. This is because his skills are not real and objective, they only exist via consensus in the minds of those who believe in him. Similarly, Bitcoin only has value to those who believe in it. And just like the reputation (aka value) of the fake martial artist can be destroyed in an instant when reality inevitably asserts itself, so can the reputation (value) of Bitcoin. When you have an asset whose entire value rests on a cult following, not only will its price be inherently unstable (what we have clearly observed with Bitcoin over its entire lifetime) but its ultimate destruction is already baked into the cake. It's just a matter of time.

Why do people value fiat, then. Where is the so called intrinsic value?

 

[Blade Runner]

You know, this is peak clown world as you have been wrong on every one of your predictions thus costing several men around here (including yourself) lots of money.

No it didn't. You can't even come up with one claim, or shred of evidence, since I'm a hodler. I've said repeatedly that even though I've guessed where it would go, the only thing that matters if if you put money down on those time limits, and I did not. So stop lying.

You should have, like myself, invested in collectibles, not sh*tcoin.

All time classic clown world stuff here.

because fiat currency is flawed, Bitcoin must be a superior form of money.

Do you even pay attention to anything we write or do you just keep making things up because it's fun to you/you have no real argument. We've not made that argument once. Fiat is flawed. Period. BTC has characteristics that make it superior money, that's what we have said. For the 50th time. You're just making stuff up, stop it.

Bitcoin maxis claim this is perfectly fine, and some go so far as to state that there is no such thing as inherent value, and that all value is entirely relative.

I've literally repeated this argument also, and again you re-state something incorrectly. Are you even aware of this? Are you intentionally doing it or just lack reading comprehension? I think this at least the third time you've said it. So for the 4th or 5th time:

Humans assign value to things. Is this value based on nothing? NO, it is based on the characteristics of said thing, mainly its utility. Just like oil. Just like gold. The utility of those may go away for reasons we've stated, but that will take time since they are currently still considered quite useful.

Thats why it is spent: to escape from it

He has to know this. That's why the argument keeps being repeated and makes no sense.

Why do people value fiat, then. Where is the so called intrinsic value?

We've outed them thousands of times on this thread for holding certain things to a standard (BTC) that they don't hold to others (gold, fiat). Another example is right here.

 

[Blade Runner]

By the way, I believe that BTC will maybe have a bull run in this "winter" market, but about a week if that, but then we're moving down again for some more pain. I don't think the pain really goes away until the latter part of the year. So don't say I don't predict it going down, either. And don't say I lose money unless you're going to say I make money when it goes down, too (if that happens with this prediction - bad March April probably with continue chop through Q2-3).

 

[scorpion]

Quoting myself:

The basic fallacy underlying the stance of Bitcoin maxis is this idea that, because fiat currency is flawed, Bitcoin must be a superior form of money.

Is everyone following? Ok great, so far so good. Let's see how Blade Runner responds.

Do you even pay attention to anything we write or do you just keep making things up because it's fun to you/you have no real argument. We've not made that argument once.

Ok, so according to Blade Runner, he has never made this argument once!

THE VERY NEXT SENTENCE IN HIS POST:

Fiat is flawed. Period. BTC has characteristics that make it superior money, that's what we have said.

Are you intentionally doing it or just lack reading comprehension?

Pot. Kettle. Black.

QED