Topic: Bitcoin's volatility is a non-issue - page 11. (Read 2103 times)
Bitcoin being volatile as a currency is slightly an issue in my opinion. I mean, in a business point of view, you wouldn't want to receive a $50 payment that could be $40 tomorrow(though it could also be $60). But there's almost nothing we can do about it in my opinion. Volatility will decrease as adoption comes.
- Each Bitcoin transaction is a zero-sum game -- one party benefits to the same extent that the other does not benefit. So one party is guaranteed always to be fine with the volatility. And neither party knows for sure (or at all) who that beneficiary will be.
Both parties benefit the same only in the exact moment in time that the transaction occurs. After that moment one party benefits more than the other. That's a fact, and due to that fact the timing of the transaction is very much an issue for both parties.
- The purchaser of a bitcoin has still spent the same amount of fiat no matter what the volatility after the purchase.
No, I believe you have that opposite. Volatility after the purchase doesn't keep the purchaser from worrying about the issue that is the investment's volatility.
- The premise that the aggrieved party could have done this or that instead of send someone a bitcoin that later appreciated in value has no more merit than to say that that party could have bought a stock or bond that later did well too. In each case, they simply did not have the information needed in time. Shoulda coulda woulda is not a valid argument.
Ok, ok, it's a sunk cost.
- If Bitcoin were impractical as a currency, the dark web would not use it. There would be no Bitcoin-using dark web.
Are you kidding? The dark web existed long before bitcoin. Bitcoin's practicality is strongest as an investment.
I like Uberse's style. He stealthily included Ethereum in the article in a sentence that says both BTC and ETH are good stores of value lol.
Ethereum is not a good store of value because what it promises to deliver will not be delivered. Lets watch how long they can keep the ongoing scam last.
Ethereum is not a good store of value because what it promises to deliver will not be delivered. Lets watch how long they can keep the ongoing scam last.
The arguments that the volatility of the crypto currency is not at all a problem is unconvincing. So far, due to the large volatility of the crypto currency, and primarily bitcoin, the states are very critical of it and this is one of the reasons for their rather weak and slow legalization.
It may also be that, at large price values, large volatility of bitcoin can lead to its complete or partial depreciation. If bitcoin will be very expensive, a sharp drop in it with normal volatility, if it coincides with negative information, can lead to panic that will work as a domino effect and bitcoin may depreciate in one or several days. Is this not worthy of attention and is not a problem related to volatility?
It may also be that, at large price values, large volatility of bitcoin can lead to its complete or partial depreciation. If bitcoin will be very expensive, a sharp drop in it with normal volatility, if it coincides with negative information, can lead to panic that will work as a domino effect and bitcoin may depreciate in one or several days. Is this not worthy of attention and is not a problem related to volatility?
bitcoin's volatility IS an issue but it is not that big. the media and the FUDsters love to make bigger. the fact is when bitcoin is so volatile that price can move up to 20% in one day it makes it harder to either invest or use as a currency. it doesn't mean people can't or won't use it. they are still investing in bitcoin and also using it as a currency even though it is volatile.
the difference is if it stops being that volatile, it will be used more as both a currency and an investment.
the difference is if it stops being that volatile, it will be used more as both a currency and an investment.
It is a very big issue alright. Bitcoin is meant to be a base currency where virtually all other cryptocurrencies trade against. If its volatility begins to affect the coin movement of the community of altcoins, then it should be seen as a very serious issue that will hamper the growth of other coins
Volatility isnt a issue when it comes to bitcoin/crypto investors because there are many other types of volatile investments too. People take issue with volatility because bitcoin is mean to be used as a currency and if its value keeps changing then merchants cant rely on it as an accepted payment method.
I know that this subject has been discussed many times before, but lest we forget when yet another conventional financial journalist, investor, money manager, perceived thought-leader et al pronounces on why Bitcoin will fail because it is too volatile to be used as a currency or store of value:
Underlying all of Bitcoin's volatility is an unchanging protocol that is proven to work -- and expected to grow.
- Each Bitcoin transaction is a zero-sum game -- one party benefits to the same extent that the other does not benefit. So one party is guaranteed always to be fine with the volatility. And neither party knows for sure (or at all) who that beneficiary will be.
- The purchaser of a bitcoin has still spent the same amount of fiat no matter what the volatility after the purchase.
- The premise that the aggrieved party could have done this or that instead of send someone a bitcoin that later appreciated in value has no more merit than to say that that party could have bought a stock or bond that later did well too. In each case, they simply did not have the information needed in time. Shoulda coulda woulda is not a valid argument.
- If Bitcoin were impractical as a currency, the dark web would not use it. There would be no Bitcoin-using dark web.
- Many things have been used as currency. Anything tradeable and of proven long-term value (like gold) or expected shorter-term value (like packs of Kent cigarettes in communist Romania) can be used as a practical currency, and have. Before WWI, travelers checks had the rate of conversion printed on them because it was expected that the gold-back currencies backing them would be stable. And so they were. The fact that fiat currencies require electronic conversion-rate signs today shows that their stability is entirely an illusion. They are not stable.
Underlying all of Bitcoin's volatility is an unchanging protocol that is proven to work -- and expected to grow.
Jump to: