Topic: BITCOIN IS NOT A STORE OF VALUE - page 2. (Read 958 times)

Bitcoin has multiple utilities and store of value is one of its utilities.

If a person owns Bitcoin, then that person can use it for many purposes: investing, trading, payment method for grocery, merchant shopping and so on. Sometimes, because of many use cases the person will not clearly clarify what he uses Bitcoin for. Utility creates value and Bitcoin has it. Deflationary creates value and Bitcoin has it too.

Even if we accept Bitcoin as a store of value or disagree with this statement, fact is fact and people naturally use Bitcoin in their own ways. Some consider and use it as a store of value. Some others don't but in general, Bitcoin adoption is increasing that is good for Bitcoin investors.

Well, Bitcoin is a currency, like fiat currency where you can use to purchase a service or a product. Bitcoin became a store of value as people discovered how fairly volatile Bitcoin is in a long term perspective.
Whether you like it or not, Bitcoin has it's own value not as much as Gold's market cap, but it has value.
No reason for a debate or an argument here. Bitcoin is simply the digital gold.

I also think the same as you, maybe he just listened to the video and was influenced by what was said in the video, I think they made the video to make bad news about Bitcoin because he doesn't like the existence of Bitcoin. I do not understand what was in his mind, so he thought too far before Bitcoin was created, I think this is just a classic joke who wants to bring Bitcoin down.

We have seen the popularity of Bitcoin increasing day by day. Maybe a time will come when people will conduct all transactions in this Bitcoin.Gold, silver and all metals people may stop investing in them for a while, but no one can move away from Bitcoin.Very soon we will see more popularity of Bitcoin and editcoin will be valid in every country.The existence of Bitcoin will never be destroyed but rather its existence will be more spread out.

Hi,what do you think about the early merge mined altcoins like namecoin and i0coin and future values/usecases?How do you see Ixcoin doing in the near future or is it worth buying?Thanks.

He was merely making a debate that a commodity's utility as a value proposition is what's giving it its value, therefore making it an ideal Store of Value. Bitcoin has its own value proposition too. Censorship-resistance. It's what's giving it it's utility as an ideal Store of Value for the internet. Bitcoin as a Store of Value has its pros and it's better than their Gold, their Silver, or their other valuable metals like Platinum as an unseizable form of money.

This analysis has a fundamental flaw: marginal analysis. It was proposed by Carl Menger and it explains why essential materials to life as oxygen, or water (the chemical combination of oxygen and hydrogen), has none or almost no economic value, meanwhile things that are apparently superfluous cost a lot of money.

Gold and silver are industrial materials. Gold used to be a monetary store of value, but electronic devices it’s turning it into an industrial raw material. So, as it already happened to silver, gold is losing its monetary store of value status gradually.

It has happened along history with materials that traditionally had both, an industrial and a monetary value, with time, they gave up its monetary value in favor of other things that had no real other use. It is frequently heard the argument, “why this or that should cost so much money? It has no use!” The explanation is marginal analysis.

Bitcoin has no other use but storing value or using it as medium of exchange (much more with second layer protocols). So, Bitcoin although it has been created artificially, cannot be corrupted, it is scarce, fungible, divisible, and has all the properties to become the perfect money and store of value.

Now it needs time for everyone to realize this is its intrinsic value to become generalized used as such. The same happened to many other things used as money along history. Nothing becomes money right away on a clap of the hands. It’s an evolution. BTC has barely 13 years. Nevertheless, it is quite astonishing how fast it has already been adopted by many.

Of course, if we do not have electricity, computers, or electronic devices, BTC might not lose its value: it would just disappear. But in that case, BTC will not be your concern. Do you think life as we know it is sustainable without computers, modern communications, and electronic devices? 500 million people over the crust of the Earth would be barely viable. If you’re not within the globalist elite, don’t count yourself between the survivors. As it would be the case if all of a sudden we hadn’t oxygen, which has no economic value, you wouldn’t need to worry about BTC anymore. You wouldn’t need to worry about anything at all. At some point, it will be the case of absolutely everyone, when death knocks on our door, even for those who have risen to the high ranks of the global elites.

Yeah, not all electronics are made of silver or gold because that was too expensive already but some do only need other components and they can still be able to work fine. Btc is a digital currency so it doesn't have a physical form although there are some btc fan boys who are minting a physical coin with a btc logo on it and then they engrave private keys there or maybe some kind of a qr code for it to work like a physical version of btc.

I think the op is saying that btc should give credits to gold and silver because if not because of them, there will also be no btc but I think the title of his thread is different but anyway I disagree with that.

I disagree with you. It is not all electronic equipment are made up of silver or gold. I do not think anyone has seen bitcoin physically except the digital copy. For that, bitcoin would have existed without those two liquidity. I have seen a TV that made up of wood, although the screen, the panel and cables are made of other materials, probably those parts of the equipment we're manufacturered by silver and gold but not sure. Bitcoin, silver and gold all these liquidities have their value before human so if you compare them you might waste your time. All have their own value in life. Value is added to bitcoin when the peer to peer demand is very high and at that process the price of bitcoin will be very high therefore at point of the trading the price of bitcoin will be high for the benefit of all. Though everyone thinks different way on bitcoin. As it is noe, bitcoin has more values among the three things I mentioned..

Limited if compared to empires and kingdoms, yes, but it still makes the point that collectibles, and assets as Stores of Value according to social consensus, were wanted, were desired, and were used as Mediums of Exchange because they had value. I believe Bitcoin is taking this path.


I didn't forget. Medium of Exchange that's issued, endorsed, and their value assured by a Government is also desirable, and for that it has become something valuable. A path impossible for Bitcoin. Because it's not backed by a Government, I believe Bitcoin has to have value as a Store of Value first if it's to be a Medium of Exchange.


I agree, and I merely used it as an example to make a point. It's either the common rock, or the diamond to trade for the drugs. Which one would the drug dealer accept as payment?

limited utility tribal communities of a small subset era are what you/he describe
i included kingdoms, empires and government controlled versions..

i think you forget to realise that many cultures of forms of kingdoms, empires and governments have existed for THOUSANDS of years

greeks had coins. romans, etc

oh and diamonds are not worth the PRICE you pay.
consumerism 100 years ago made useless diamonds appear as "valuable" when they done consumer advertising of suddenly suggesting that women want diamond rings as a wedding band and those rings needed to be worth over a few months salary. which then set the diamond speculation and increase of underlying value

..
its like restaurants thinking muscles escargot(snails) are a delicacy..
did you know that in the 1900's they were food for the poor.

as for the native american utility of shells(clams)
the colonists latched on to the medium of exchange.. becasue over thousands of years. native americans used it as one.. what you are forgetting is the development pre colonists that established the medium of exchange SoV

so here goes
midstate tribes were no where near oceans. where by having something rare(not found common in normal territoriality) was first seen as something worthy of showing off/displaying.. no money value at first. just something nice to have/own look at.
something unique decorative that is not common in that territory

which then grew into trading it. which then set the value based on how much effort must have gone into the previous owner obtaining it.
which when there were enough shells to make necklaces and trade of shells became common . then they set a SoV of a min value

yep even bitcoin took over 12 months (well into 2010) to start that ball rolling too

most non kingdom/empire/government money. starts off as rare items to display show off/ talk about at campfires.. that then drives demand of another person wanting it as a novelty so they can tell stories.. and then barter begins
then after barter, a set medium of exchange when one item becomes the popular one everyone prefers to use as a medium of exchange.
then to alleviate riots/squabbles fights and battles over disagreements of price. a set min value is then set by consensus or just common agreement of tradition

---

price is the random barter where some cant agree and can lead to disagreement and fight..
value is the min level all can agree, that sits at the bottom as a minimum guarantee/wall/limit..
and then speculate above that depending on demand/supply to add a premium ontop of value if its really wanted/desired.. where the premium is the price

One of the keys to determining the value of a currency is its supply and demand. If the supply of a currency is excessive, it will cause high inflation. Meanwhile, if the supply of currency tends to be low,
Bitcoin has long been considered an alternative to fiat money. Namely, a medium of exchange and a store of wealth that is able to survive in the long term and whose value is not prone to be eroded by time.

The history as described by the research of Nick Szabo tells it differently, or some of it. The "assets" that were used as Medium of Exchange were collectibles, and because they were Stores of Value, they became the preferred Medium of Exchange. Because how could there be a social consensus develop around an "asset" to be a Medium of Exchange if the asset itself is not a Store of Value? Why would I trade my drugs with you if your Medium of Exchange is a common rock? If the rock has a Store of Value component, like a diamond, we can talk.

Oh and I missed OP's arguments and talking points in the torrent of posts about the energy monster.


Governments learn only what they need to know for their job. That's why they figured out how to regulate cryptos and analyze output trails instead of the more technical details such as actually sending the coins to another address without using some stock wallet.


Did I downplay their competence in studying cryptocurrencies for national security purposes? No. Did I say that most government [heads] do not know the technicalities of crypto? Yes I did. You can't expect people who think in terms of the old system, to understand the new one.

That's why they have staff positions for cryptocurrency experts and specialists.


Look at you, just repeating exactly the same talking points of @LegendaryK. I already answered that in other places. How about zoning out to this board and look at all the threads on the 1st page about this subject?


Once again, you are completely missing the point: It is not the directors and managers to study the bitcoin system, but their analysts. Stop pretending the government is an all-seeing eye of Sauron, because if it were, they wouldn't have gotten into this economic mess in the first place.


If you look carefully, my logic is sound - I said that governments won't pay each other with Bitcoin which is why they desire hard cash for that. It has nothing to do with printing money and you're just going off a tangent here.


Past performance does not predict future results. My quote demonstrates the macroeconomic trend of Bitcoin long-term, not some price target Bitcoin will hit at some date.


On the contrary, I believe you are maliciously misinforming people about Bitcoin, to the point where you're saying that it's going to collapse just because a few governments can't afford their electric bills (LOL). You know what, go tell them to subsidize electricity costs if you are really convinced of your conclusions.

Don't you think I'm some basement guy, on the contrary. I am a FOSS software developer. And one of the consequences of being involved in FOSS is that you will guard he collective freedom of all, jealously, from those who seek to put us in darkness after we have seen the light.

If you're out here giving people "free and unfettered internet access", then why are you here trying to gaslight their free and unfettered access to the international banking system?

Let me say that again. I am dead serious about fighting misinformation and FUD, direct to a technology that has the capacity to help people like you, yet you close your eyes to it.


This is irrelevant because the Fed doesn't seize people's gold anymore. I told you they used to seize gold in the past, and that Bitcoin in the present cannot be identified to any person (by any entity) until it reaches some KYC site like an exchange.

In other words, bask in your gold if you want, but if you can't appreciate the significance that a breakthrough form of money brings it people then that's on you.


Please prove your gigantic theories by carrying any of the following attacks against the Bitcoin network:
- A 51% attack
- A large-scale Sybil attack
- A malleability attack (try to scramble unconfirmed transaction IDs en masse)
- A Craig Steven Wright attack (I.e. become a dickhead and sue all Bitcoin developers for BTC that doesn't belong to you, claim to own the whitepaper, try to block people from using Bitcoin Core or Bitcoin using an army of shills)
- Or everyone's favorite, an Electric attack - try to shut down all miners by coercing the utilities to do so.

The fact that not a single one of these attacks has caused significant damage to Bitcoin (if they were even attempted) is a testimony to the resilience of the Bitcoin network.


The good news is that Bitcoin is decentralized money and not a dating platform  


Clearly you have never lived in one of those countries, otherwise you'd see that even with intermittent power outages my friends and I are using cryptocurrencies just fine.

Of course there are no miners here. Nobody's going to mine Bitcoin in a place with unstable power supplies.


Mining is a zero-sum game and follows an economic game theory model, which means whoever censors transactions on their own blocks will lose money. Other miners will happily include them with their tx fees. You should know that Marathon attempted to do exactly what you are talking about. They had to quit, because they were losing tons of money from self-inflicted sanctions. To miners, Greed > Censorship is the relation that forms one of the pillars to the network security.


I have already explained my position in previous replies and see no benefit to repeating it herenif you're just going to distort it.



If you believe that bitcoin was used only to store information and is "worthless", why did you mine in the first place? Surely, you yourself cannot be brainwashed, manipulated as you claim I am? I sense a certain hypocrisy in your posts.


Because other forms of money did not exist back then, and in recent decades it is slowly becoming harder for the average person to buy physical gold (digital wallets with gold tokens do not count).


You know, there is a "Close" button on the right of this browser tab, and all your pains will come to an end...


That seems to describe your attitude here, wildly reflecting the debate in different angles, from declaring that governments can force all miners to shut down to your arrest to "girlfriends" to mining and then to ancient civilizations using gold and finally concluding that the person who is patiently trying to explain to you why Bitcoin is a store of value must be mentally defective.

Christ, I think I broke JayJuanGee's posting length record in the process.

Re: BITCOIN IS NOT A STORE OF VALUE

 BITCOIN IS THE ECONOMIC VALUE.

Wait and see after another decade later.
You will definitely regrets feel shame for your own foolishness.

Bitcoin is Encrypted Monetary System and Money itself.
Fiat Paper is not money but monopoly currency. 

If you can find one and plug it into the power grid, I'll admit your energy abundance future could happen,
so will you admit until you find one, that the energy poor future is arriving?

You forgot one other option: Find the Tesseract.

Now off you go.

I can say the same to you ,

You might want to look over https://zeihan.com/end-of-the-world/
So you won't be caught flat footed in the new world , which is really the old world with the end of globalization.

Their are No Dyson spheres,
Their are No Commercial Nuclear Reactors using Thorium ,
Tidal Energy is not being Utilized Commercially WorldWide by Coastal Communities.

Until one or all of the above are implemented, the future won't be energy abundant.  


FYI:
One other reason why bitcoin is not a store of value.
When the energy cost to mine gold exceeds the value of gold, the miners shut down for months to years , until gold mining is again cost effective.
When the energy cost to mine BTC exceeds the value of BTC , the miners go broke, and the entire network ceases to function. ie: Death spiral
Gold can not death spiral, as it has multiple uses .

social consensus of money is about agreeing on a medium of exchange (not store of value)
that medium can be twigs, shells, pebbles, gold, paper, or crypto


store of value then applies after agreeing on the medium..
where a set bottom limit no one can obtain for less creates a wall where no one can break this lower limit VALUE.. and that then becomes the store of value amount

this amount can be formed by law(kings orders, government min wage) or by social agreement of no one selling below X means X becomes the LOW (value)


when mediums of exchange barter at different amounts (price variations) this is the speculation above the store of value(low/set law/kings order amount)

EG
if shells are the agreed medium
and its agreed that a shell is worth a minimum of 10 minutes of labour/baking time/items
then store of value becomes that lowest amount
people then barter above this amount depending on their desire/demand to pay a premium(extra) ontop

store of value amount is not the market rate. store of value sits below market prices(separate number).

in 2011 when bitcoin had its 'drug purchase usage' pro/neg advertising/propaganda/media phase..the market rate went from $0.30 upto $32 and settled down to $2
but throughout that year, the store of value started about $0.20 and steadily rose to about $1.50 without the mega jump in the middle!(as a separate number from the market rate)

emphasis store of value is separate from market rate
emphasis store of value sits below the market rate
(emphasis store of value is not the "PRICE"

bitcoins store of value is NOT THE PRICE
bitcoins  store of value is NOT THE ATH

bitcoins tore of value sits BELOW the market rate. and is a separate statistic number
its set by the cheapest possible way to obtain bitcoin ON THE PLANET
a number no one can go below, a number that cant be broke/reached by all
a number that by being at such limitbecomes the wall/rule/protection of that amount because no one is able to buy/sell at that amount

bitcoins current SoV is about $13.5k for the year, and getting near $15k for the quarter.

to protect most of your wealth in SoV.. buy bitcoin while its cheap

the lower the price the better value your wealth is protected by

if your buying at ATH. well expect to not have much of your wealth protected
no one should be buying at ATH thinkingthey are protecting their wealth in the short term

bitcoins deflationary nature will slowly increase the SoV amount so if you have patience then slowly the SoV will protect previous high price buys. but you need patience.

EG
in 2017 SoV was only a couple $700 and went upto only a couple $k
but the PRICE went upto $20k
meaning those buying at $20k only had 10% SoV wealth protection.
however waiting 4 years their $20k buy is now SoV protected at 75%
where by each year you hold the SoV protects your wealth by more %

EG
golds SoV is currently about $900. but the market price is about $1700
gold is a SoV of 53% of wealth

Fiats SoV is far far far worse, and loses SoV by x% a year

Ser, read the Origins of Money by Nick Szabo, https://nakamotoinstitute.org/shelling-out/

I believe that proves the fact that it DOESN'T MATTER if the Store of Value asset is a metal, pieces of glass, or a SHELL if the social conensus was formed that the Store of Value asset is valuable, or not. It can be debated that Bitcoin would have been worth close to ZERO if it wasn't adopted by the drug dealers of the Dark Markets. But it was, and it has censorship-resistance components that they need which made it valuable for them, and if it was valuable for them, the value surged when many more of them adopted it, and when the value surged, it also has become valuable to US.