Topic: Is Bitcoin for “Fake Rich”? - page 3. (Read 929 times)

But it will exist? As long as there are bitcoin nodes running and preserving the ledger, your assets will completely safe.

And do you think that it is plausible that the internet will just disappear for an extended period of time while billions of people have already come to rely on it, and hundreds of millions make a living off of it? Please.


I'm still confused as what exactly you mean by the "fake rich". Are the Winklevoss twins a part of the "fake rich" because they weren't as elite before BTC rallied? No, they are still two very high net worth individuals.

And even old wealth is flocking towards BTC right now, just look at the amount of institutional demand.

I will even say more that all these super-rich people from the top ten richest people on the planet do not keep all their funds in the form of Fiat cash or in Bank deposits, but keep the bulk of their capital in the form of shares or shares in their business. Recently, the mass media slipped information about Elon Musk who does not have his own money and he constantly borrows it from others for living and food, so all this talk about fake wealth is both true and false.

"How's quantum computer can actually destroy Bitcoin or blockchain lmao?" - Seriously?.. I assume you having a Full Member rank here do understand how DLT works, and what are the potential effects of new type of computing, such as quantum can have on it. As for the decades in order for such technology to come into effect, please do check the latest news from IBM, Google, and the Chinese firms' developments in this area. It's gonna be within our lifetime when we will see actual quantum computers in work (maybe not in your pocket like a phone yet), and then you could tell me what is the effect But don't forget, people in 40s-50s also were saying that thousands of years will pass before everyone in the world could have a personal portable computer at home... Less than 100 years passed and you have it in your pocket to check IG, TW, etc.


I am not sure how you see the connection between the destruction of tech, and land at the same time. But I guess we just have different understand of the potential situation which was described.




Nope, I wasn't sarcastic at all. Because as you probably know - there are already futures on water https://www.cmegroup.com/trading/equity-index/us-index/nasdaq-veles-california-water-futures.html And yes, with such development: "securitized energy" -> "securitized line of code" -> "securitized water" -> "securitized air" could well be the next step (btw we securitize value - entirely new concept (not self-promotion)). Actually, we, internally had a concept long-time ago about new financial products that could emerge in the future also, and actually as you mentioned - scarcity and global demand & essential need for this "asset" can be good characteristics for the potential securitization. So if you want to predict what might come next, you could take a look at Maslow's Pyramid and try to imagine what constitutes different levels of the pyramid (water, air, food, are parts Psychological Needs for example, and almost all have been securitized by now) you could potentially predict what might be securitized next. But as for BTC you are absolutely right. Most of the people won't hold it for that long, no matter how loud they scream that they will HODL it forever. Being a human creates, even if they buy BTC today @ around $23,000, they will be happily screaming and selling if/when BTC reaches $100k or $1m. So yes, for sure there's no harm in speculating such things, same as with Tulips in 1637 

You actually are absolutely right. I don't know if that was sarcasm or what but I feel air and water might also get listed soon on Commodities exchanges if the scarcity of both so remains and increases. I Mean if you see the commodities exchange something very basic which started like a utility like power too is being traded on exchanges so what's the problem with air and water? Once we reach a time where you have to pay for it you might see Air and water derivatives getting listed on exchanges for sure. But yes talking about Bitcoin obviously you are right that we might see quantum computers which could end bitcoin but are you going to hold your cryptos for so long? I mean let's be pretty honest. No one plans to hold it for the next 30-40 years what I am trying to say is that if something has value and demand which is likely to sustain until next 5-7 years there is no harm in speculating on such a thing for time less than that.

How's quantum computer can actually destroy Bitcoin or blockchain lmao? They are vastly two different products. One is a public ledger, and other is technology. Even though, what you are saying makes little sense, but you are referring to a future which is many many decades after of. So, it doesn't matter at all with respect to today. If needed, Bitcoin will also get replaced by something better in future.

Also, aren't you being contradictory when you say that there will be a calamity when all internet and phones and everything will be destroyed, but at the same time land, fiat will remain still? Lmao. When internet, phones and everything gets destroyed, so gets destroyed land, money and even human species.

I think great point! In such manner, we might come to a point when air would be also sold and traded, just like the "line of code" (Bitcoin) is traded now. World changes, and assets might also change. Yet, some of them survived wars, revolutions, government falldowns, epidemics, etc. for thousands of years, while some just emerged in the past 10 years, and we already all know will not exist after the next 10-50 years once quantum computers become a daily reality of every common person.




Do you really believe ipone and tesla offer the best quality Think again ...





You purposely right in a way to make me agree with all your points? Because I agree with this as well. And yes, early BTC holders also have a chance to become the next elites deeply rooted in the global economy, but... that depends on 1) whether they are capable enough to rally make that transmission - from "tech freaks trading hype-priced lines of codes" to "financial elites affecting global politics and economy", and 2) whether the old elites permit them to do so... recently SEC and other institutionalised watchdogs had shown an increasing efficiency in taking down those "ex-crypto - to-be elites millionaire". And the case with Ant Group in China showed that the financial elites won't give up their spots so easily even to "traditional / non-crypto" tech oligarchs.




Could you please point out specifically who would sponsor such post, and we would get in touch with them directly? And I believe you either didn't read the post and all comments well, or you "see the words, but don't get the meaning" thats why you are making such accusations.




Yes, your last sentence is exactly to the point! However, don't forget the tech side of BTC and the fact that once quantum computers become a part of regular daily life - yours, mine and anyone's BTC will be useless peace of code, as it was in the first few days when it was created. But fiat, will remain... gold will remain... factories will remain... land will remain.




Loved your comment! Very great point which wasn't mentioned by anyone before. For anything - fiat, gold, iPhone, Tesla, watches, Bitcoin - whatever, - appropriate conditions must exist in order to function as they should and in order to be of any value. But over time, the environments have changed many times, and conditions too - some assets, or "things" remained unchanged for thousands of years. Others came, became popular, attracted attention and just to make some people earn a lot of money on the expense of late-comers. Of course, I am not claiming BTC is one of them for sure, but yet it could be... only time will show and we can get back to this post after 50-100 years to see what happened and how changed




Aren't you? You should try telling your old friends whom you didn't see for a long time, or who are super far from BTC/crypto/tech/finance that you are BTC-holder since 20XX and you will see the difference. BTC might have not been created for that purpose (or it was - idk; just don't tend to easily believe to what is written or spoken by some people), but as you can see in 2018 and now in the end of 2020, it is happening.




Great point! But Apple's shareholders they don't own a share of iPhone and don't call themselves "iPhone evangelists" (imagine if they would ). They own a company with real production facilities, with real brand (yes Bitcoin is establishing its brand now with the help of community), if something goes wrong - they can get all Apple's assets and infrastructure and liquidate it via bankruptcy procedures and get cash, but when you will be able to hold a quantum-powered phone in your pocket, like any other person having iPhone now, whom we all can go to sue and ask for asset liquidation and repayments?.. Furthermore, as a regular BTC-holder you barely know how you can individually affect the network or make any change, but if you are a minority shareholder of Apple - you can do quite a lot of things actually. But yes, depending on personal beliefs, philosophy, pre-set of norms we follow, and willingness to expand or direct own thinking towards specific ideas, such question as the one posted here is a very slippery question.

But still - you can not call BTC "fake wealth". It's like calling an Apple stockholder a beggar just because he's holding Apple stock instead of dollars.
The state in which the cryptocurrency now is the same shares of Apple or IBM just in a different form.
But at the same time, when switching to the" natural "value of the cryptocurrency, it will also not be called" fake wealth " because it will already be a full - fledged means of payment. Quite a subtle and slippery question, in general.

Indeed, sometimes people having an Iphone or things with signature brands like Gucci etc. etc. is just a product of social media pressure. Some people tend to push themselves going on what's hot despite of inability to sustain such things — being social climber at its finest.

But in the case of bitcoin, you are not considered social climber when you have one simply because you are investing. Imagine, you can be a trader even having a small capital only. Nice, isn't it? Thus, Financial Literate is a much better term for you .
That's right lol. Mankind is not that dumb anymore. We can fix it. The only problem with us is that we are doing damage on this planet even though we are aware of it so I hope we will realize in the future what we done wrong before its too late.

I disagree with you completely.

iPhones, Tesla might be overpriced "products" which the middle class might buy just to feel that he will be "rich" but bitcoin isn't a product, it's a currency itself.

There might come a time when something unnatural might happen causing no phone, internet and electricity but I don't see that coming for the next couple of centuries!

When that time comes, all bitcoin will have been mined long before that. And probably, human species will also go extinct. So who cares when that happens, everything will be destroyed let alone fiat or Bitcoin!

This post is sponsored by an anti-Bitcoin evangelist who thinks bringing in pseudoscience crap would bite off a true Bitcoiner... there are instances given in too many journals by different scholars around the world about the possibility of the internet being shut down which is close not happening.. The Europeans are investing heavily in the stability of cellular network globally, if there are some imaginary apocalyptic humans to dominate the universe by shutting the technological advancement  consider it void already.. 

Imagine how you could use bitcoin easily by just accessing an internet available device, no third party approval unlike the centralised banking system which is even more targeted by such destroyers... 

Yes, everything I've written is a simplified version of what's really going on. 

For example, most modern landowners in Great Britain are families with lineages dating back to the time of William the Conqueror.  This is a testament to how slowly the change of elites in the world is. 

Landowners, financiers and industrialists rule the world at the same time.  They interact very closely with each other. 

Nevertheless, each stage of technological development gives new people a chance to become members of the global elite. 

Early Bitcoin holders also have this chance.

What a load of BS from the OP? Iphone and Tesla cost more, because they offer the best quality. Instead of an iPhone, you can always go for a phone with similar specs from Xiaomi, which will cost around 80% less than the Apple product. But it won't give you the same quality as that of iPhone. Also, you can go for Nissan Leaf instead of Tesla Model 3. But again, it won't give you the same range or battery life. So these products are not overpriced. Rather, they are fairly priced and people are ready to buy them at these prices. Same is the case with BTC as well.

Actually if you see all the assets that you have mentioned were tangibles. Even a stock is tangible as indirectly there are the net assets that you get of the company working to appreciate it's price. Derivatives derive their price from these stocks and bonds only. But Bitcoin has no physical asset below it. The antminers or hardwares mining Bitcoin cannot be said to be bitcoin's infrastructure. Therefore to be honest it is merely a line of code. But yes coming to fiat too it's also a sentence promised by the government. So yes it's difficult to draw a direct comparison between both the things. But this does not makes you fake rich. As long as the line of code can be sold in the market at price this high you have no problems at all and same is the case with the fiat money. And if you are so naive to say that governments can fall easily and make your fiat useless there are equal chances of bitcoin pricing falling down to $1000 again.

You made great points! I tend to agree to the most part, however, I believe with the emergence of financial elite, the history might not have been exactly as you described. Even the largest industrialists were financed by banks and investors (i.e. financial elite). Even during the WWII war, Hitler was financed by elites. With tech millionaires, same - they obtain capital from VCs who in turn have LPs in the form of banks, insurance companies, large funds, etc. - thus also, either directly or indirectly financed by elites. You cut their cheap capital flow and they all will die together with their "unicorns". And that's just the surface fin elites, and we didn't even discuss the Fed, BIS, IMF, WB, SWIFT, and those supranational ones who exist above and beyond the state's reach.

With the current tech development, its fairly easy to identify and track everyone who is dealing with BTC (good example is Alipay in China blocking accounts of OTC BTC traders; and same for banks). So when/if needed SWIFT could easily stop processing all BTC-related USD payments, thus stopping FX currency dealing in BTC as well, and we could be just exchanging BTC for cash or for pizzas on the offline p2p basis.

I guess there are not only the "Bitcoin-crazy rich Indians", but other nationals as well. But irrespective of that, their wealth is not stable - today it's $50m, tomorrow only half of that, and they are not that rich as they thought. With the real rich, that's not the case to such a great extend.

What is wealth?  

The landowners were rich.  The land was real wealth.  Also, wealth is slaves.  Slaves cultivate the land, and landowners get rich.  

Then loan capital appeared.  Gold has become valuable.  Derivatives for gold, such as promissory notes, emerged.  The bill is very handy if you are traveling.  

The financial elite gradually began to dominate the landlords.  Then industrial capital arose.  The capitalists began to compete with the financiers.  There were stocks, bonds ... Slavery was abolished.  The landlords finally lost power.  

In the XXI century, IT technologies have developed.  The problem arose of the redistribution of wealth from capitalists and financiers to IT specialists.  One of the instruments for this redistribution of wealth is Bitcoin.  

Many IT pros in the 21st century have become millionaires thanks to bitcoin.

what about Bitcoin-crazy rich Indians, having btc  which is real money does make you upper class

Yes, "nuoveau riche" is a great concept, but I didn’t refer to those ones. Those are typically already rich somehow, and are from lower social classes. Whom I referred to by “fake rich” are the ones who want to be "nuoveau riche", but are actually not, thus copy their attributes, without possessing the same wealth.

As for the Tesla - First Tesla Roadster was nearly same with Lotus Elise in design, but 2 times more expensive, was ½ seconds faster from 0 to 100 Km/h than Lotus. At the same time people could purchase Ferrari F430 Scuderia @ $187k, with 3.6s from 0 to 100 and way better design; could purchase Aston Martin DB9 @ $155k with 3.5s from 0 to 100, had great design, and had all the tech features for showing off; there were also same priced Porshe 911 Turbo, Audi R8 Quattro FSI, and in 2010 there appeared Chevrolet Camaro Callaway, Chevrolet Camaro SLP ZL575, Chevrolet Camaro Hennessey HPE700, Ford Mustang Shelby GT GeigerCars, and some others – all priced cheaper than Tesla Roadster, with way better design, mostly better interior, nearly all faster, and some of them with all the fancy tech.

Thus from the actual end-user perspective (average Joe who doesn’t care about the “green trend”) Tesla was significantly inferior car from unknown manufacturer. But it’s not the car-discussion topic, thus let’s not take community’s attention toward cards, but happy to discuss in DM if you wish, or on dedicated thread if there’s any.

And you are absolutely correct about Bitcoin – for the ones who truly understand what it is what it is, it’s really revolutionary. However, I think there are very few of those. Majority in it are for gains only, as you could see even from the comments above. Therefore, I think you are actually correct, but for very small group of people, while the majority, unfortunately are not like that.





I don't think gold would be useful in big city only, but yes, overall I do agree with all your points. And even with the virtualization of life I do tend to agree with all the digital things, VR/AR, etc. But dinosaurs also didn't expect an apocalypse. Yet, I do know such scenario is absurd and doesn't require consideration But as you saw from above "fake rich" concept is proven here not only in the apocalyptic scenario.




So you are distinguishing 2 types of "fake rich" - smart ones who exploit human psychological inefficiencies, and the stupid ones who just want to show off Great point - I also think so!

Everything or work always has different risks, so only a fool wants to look rich even though he is only pretending to be rich, and for an opportunity it is clear that it must always be used in order to make a good profit, and that is only used by them the smart ones, not the ones pretending to be rich.

for fake risky rich when you are ready to risk some money you should have opportunity to earn