Topic: Bitcoin vs. Gold Prices - page 13. (Read 2319 times)

Both of that is good on pricing but theres a big defferences of prices because bitcoin is moving a price and the price is moving theres big down of price or high of price and its nice to buy if the pricing of bitcoin will low because you will get a good profit if the bitcoin will rise again while the gold its very slowly to growth the price and its very expensive to buy but if you buy a gold we can sure the good profit.

but most of the world's population still likes to use gold as their investment because gold is seen as a safe place to save money without inflation and the like. bitcoin that comes with offering an investment with a quick profit will certainly be used as an option only because the fluctuating price makes people less interested? but for myself bitcoin is a great technology and for a long-term investment I never worry about it

Charlie Wozniak (apple co founder) said something interesting within an interview recently. This individual said humanity will create better and more effective methods to harvest yellow metal from the earth's brown crust area. Bitcoin's algorithmic approach to constraining its own production has superior chances of retaining a regular rate of source.

The actual test of platinum is actually society can realistically revert to a gold standard in instances of emergency. If a zombie apocalypse occurred down the road, would gold emerge as a preferred coin of exchange across remnants of civilization? There are videos on youtube where people walk the streets trying to sell $1, 1000 of gold or metallic for $50. No one takes them up on it. The idea of gold and its value as a currency may be too neglected within the population eye to be an emergent currency in times of distress. Not really only is support for gold exchange non-existent, their utility as a means of exchange may be a lost lore similar to the recipe for making roman concrete or damascus steel.

Golds best hope may be a form of gold renaissance, a resurgence of interest driven by fears relating to fiat hyperinflation. This kind of is occurring in certain groups. Preppers, doomsdayers and post apocalyptic planners are inventory up on important mining harvests. What gold lacks in bling power and exhilaration it could more than replace in endurance.

Via my posts on this forum, it could be evident I actually favor bitcoin over platinum. But even I no longer forget gold was here millennia before anyone realized what bitcoin was, and may be around millennia after bitcoin is lost and forgotten.

Both are having a good value in the market but they are totally different in terms of used and the way it grows. We've knew gold for so long and it's great image in the public until bitcoin's comes arrived and people Turing their heads for these.  Not exactly people forget gold but because if having a huge value of bitcoin recently they might get lost their attention into it. 

Bitcoin is the new currency it is not the old investment but if you are talking about then it is right, today everything is gradually getting digital and people are using online shopping and they are saving a lot of digital currency for their future because they knows coming age is the going to be the digital era so for me as well bitcoin is much better than gold. It is save to hold and it is easy to carry without any risk of lose you will be able to make high amount of profit every month for free and you can increase the money with eh help of bitcoin investment, GOLD is now an old fashioned investment which is not very profitable anymore.

That is not what I mean.  We want good people, but people are good only if they see most others as being similarly good, i.e. all are following a set of rules designed to benefit the community.  But what should those rules be?  That is the key question.  When you have a set of rules that allow and reward predatory behavior (especially by the top elites,) not only do you reward every-man-for-himself behavior among the elites, the corruption also goes down to average people.  The entire society is worse off.

I submit that granting the power to create money to the elites is precisely one of those perverse rules.

So your point can be summarized like to each his own, everyone for himself and devil take the hindmost. To put it differently, you can't expect anyone to behave responsible, as in money printing, when they can easily get away with being completely irresponsible as is the case with virtually any government. But then it is not an economic question anymore. In other words, it makes no sense to deal with such issues from purely economic point of view. Otherwise we will always be missing the whole picture.

In this analysis, we have to view the state and the banks as an alliance to jointly benefit by issuing financial assets and propping them up.  E.g. the asset bubble that led to the mortgage crisis was inflated not just by banks, but by bankers working hand in hand with a coalition of political entities.  It's not just the narrow interests involved (such as those wanting an increase in home ownership by minority groups,) but asset inflation benefits all politicians because the 'free' wealth lifts the entire economy, job base, investor base for public debt, and tax base.  (At least until, hopefully, one leaves office!)  This is why the 2nd most popular narrative about that crisis is that Fannie and Freddie (the de-facto public lenders) had a major hand in the bubble too.

As I implied above, top bankers and politicians are generally in alliance, not in competition, unless assets values totally collapse.  'Free market' vs 'bank regulation' is just a story for the public, in the big picture.  The only honest way to regulate banks is, as Austrian economists maintain, either 'totally free banking' or '100% reserve banking.'


This is where things get so complicated that you can pretty much argue any position and no one can say you're definitely wrong.  The problem is with the complication in the first place (created by the state intervention in financial markets.)

The argument against socialism (either the Soviet type of economic socialism or the Western financial socialism) is always that, power corrupts, and the incentives of power are always to benefit those who hold it.  Complexity and the impossibility to analyze cause and effect are part of the power wielded by the state-bank elites.

The 'otherwise there would be no growth' part is not something I can agree with.  Growth comes naturally from the market economy simply because we all want better products and services.  What we have in the modern West is unnatural (perhaps too-quick) growth, which creates all sorts of problems, including environmental disaster and personal unhappiness.

ahahah please forget tradational investment things..

yes you can lost easily but you can not earn good profit.

I don't deny that they often abuse their power of printing money but it seems to me that it is still rather a lopsided view to indiscriminately blame the government for every wrongdoing. After all, it was the financial (banking) sector that had created the subprime mortgage crisis in the first place, not the government itself. You could of course say that they should have interfered but it is free market, isn't it? Further, the fiat inflation is eventually offset by the growth in wages since otherwise there wouldn't be economic growth. I agree that inflation takes away from the purchasing power of a currency, but in the long run some balance gets established unless external factors such as wars are at play.

As you can probably guess I'm far from an admirer of Goldman Sachs, but Goldman did write a report recently comparing the relative merits of gold vs. Bitcoin, as money.  Gold wins on most measures.  The only advantage of Bitcoin is, as you point out, in storage and ease of transportation.

QE was only a small part of the systemic problem that we allow governments and central banks to create 'money' in various forms and prop it up with state power.  As I wrote, most money is created outside QE, but QE was big news because it was a sign that things were so bad that the authorities had run out of their considerable conventional power to manipulate financial markets and still pretend we have a free market economy.  QE was significant as a symbol, but it was never a major part of the problem, in itself.

That the 'systemic problem' always causes inflation is evident in the long term decline of the purchasing power of even the top currencies like the pound and dollar.  Over the last 100 years the dollar has lost its power to purchase Western labor at very roughly the same rate as its loss of value against gold.  Most, if not the vast majority of state-issued currencies on this earth have died by abuse.

Economic growth does 'bail out' the issuing of money from the problems it creates.  It's a classic scenario and happens all the time.  The problem is that the entire credit and economic cycle is dictated by central planning rather than the free market.  Central planning is designed to benefit the elites at the expense of everyone else.  Economic growth would happen anyway, due to market incentives, but centralized money creation artificially quickens it and distorts everything else.  Most of the suffering from the instability lands on the people at the bottom of the world system.

This is never specifically about the right or wrong of what the Western elites did after the 2007-8 crisis (QE, zero/negative interest, etc.)  That is a much smaller topic.

the bitcoin price is higher depends on gold but for the popularity, I think gold is more famous than bitcoin because people know gold for the first time and they still use gold as a long-term investment. but in this new era, I think bitcoin will replace gold and will be the next best of investment in the future so right now, there are many people which start to buy bitcoin although they can only buy for small part of bitcoin, they think that with this small part of bitcoin, they can make a lot of money in the future.

Bitcoin is actually for modern world while gold has been with us for hundreds of years. Bitcoin is generated through the internet while gold is tangible. When it comes to price, gold's is volatile and sometimes stabilized while bitcoin's price has never been stabilized. It keeps fluctuating.

In terms of form, bitcoin and gold are exploited and used for human needs. However, the nature of the bitcoin meets the needs of modern and high, while the gold meets the needs of daily life. Gold is accepted or actively traded, exploited and used by the government. Bitcoins may need time to be seen in the future. All said, the value of gold is safe and will not be comparable to bitcoin in the long run.

Bitcoin for investment now and save the wealth. If anyone buys gold why? Because he can just like to cancel or want to make a spaceship because gold is one of the materials that heat resistant.

People buy gold why? Because they believe that they have a good golden future. So if you talk Bitcoin, do not talk Bitcoin on a currency scale. Because if you talk Bitcoin in the context of currency, later our mindset will be limited, our mindset will be hard to think of Bitcoin as currency.

Later thoughts will arise, then who is the responsible part of the state? Then who is the central bank in charge? Then inflating how? Then the rules how? That's if we think of it as a currency. Now if you love Bitcoin as digital gold. All those questions will be gone. Bitcoin.co.id always considers Bitcoin as a commodity. Since the first interview in 2013, I always say Bitcoin is digital gold.

Early in the week of August, Bitcoin set a record: for the first time, the price of 1 Bitcoin is more expensive than 1 ounce of gold. It was the US $ 4.

When viewed more backward, folding is more bombastic. In 2012, the price of 1 BTC (unit Bitcoin) about US $ 15, now? The price is more than the US $ 15 thousand, was predicted to touch the US $ 60 thousand in 2018

But how do we know that inflation we are likely (not) to see in a hundred years is the consequence of the QE's that the Fed had run some ten years ago? I'm not questioning that we will see plenty of inflation in the future, I'm just dubious about its causes lying that far in the past. The point is that deferred inflation can be gradually eaten away by the subsequent economic growth, so it may in fact have been a good idea to pour money into the financial sector (including stock markets) to extinguish the consequences of the subprime mortgage crisis back then and deal with inflation later if required.

The difference in between the market value of bitcoin and that of gold is very much obvious and there is no way that we can deny this fact that the market value as well as the increase in the market value in case of bitcoin is far more than that of gold and bitcoin is the best way of investing money as it really helps you in making of more money in less time. Gold is only good for keeping your money safe, nothing more than this.