Great debate.
Jon, you clearly won. However, you never answered his question about Bitcoin being a store of value. And that is key to Doug's stubbornness.
Let us all not forget that a key point with Bitcoin is that it's value started off as essentially zero. Thru free market trading, its value has risen to where it is today.
I'd say it's clearly not only a store of value but an appreciating one.
He did answer the question about intrinsic value, more than once. His response was that the intrinsic value of a bitcoin lies not in the bitcoin itself, but the Bitcoin system. I personally feel that his answer is difficult to support, but it is also difficult to dismiss. He also raised a valid question about the importance of intrinsic value when he made the point (which Doug Casey agreed with) that the intrinsic value of gold is only a small fraction of its value.
I also agree that the intrinsic value of a bitcoin lies solely in its utility as a medium of exchange. Where I differ with Doug Casey is his argument that if you take away trade, a bitcoin has no value. The flaw with this argument is that you cannot take away trade. It will always exist, so a bitcoin will always have intrinsic value as long as it is useful as a medium of exchange.
I also want to point out that their debate was not a competition, and there was no winner. Both sides presented their positions very clearly, and both sides acknowledged the strengths and weakness of their positions as well as the other's position. It was great to hear both sides without having to suffer through the FUD, fearmongering, and hysteria that usually accompany these discussions.
