Topic: Is Your Money Safer In Crypto than at the Bank? - page 81. (Read 9898 times)
You're very correct bro, it's saver in crypto currency than bank, because bank will be deducting your money every month but If you invest as the particular coin you invest in keep growing, so your money too.
This is a very bad idea, the most important rule that every person who deals with crypto-currencies should know is to invest only the money that you are ready to invest, so it's better to keep money in the bank if you live in the US or in Europe.
if you put your money on the bank you will also earn profit. but a very small profit only, and if you put you money on crypto its like you are investing with a risk. but if you had good knowledge about crypto you could earn big profit. just take extra caution for the hackers that wants to steal your holdings.
I think it's safer to keep money in the bank than in crypto. cryptocurrency is easy to break and steal. but if we keep our money in crypto then it's possible our money will double when we invest in a good coin. but there is also the possibility of loss. and if saving money in the bank our money will be safe but can not develop.
I think both of them have their specific disadvantages and advantages. For putting money into banks, banks may go bankruptcy or losing all the savings from the bank. For crypto, crypto is still very much volatile and unstable, even the exchanges and the ICOs and there are more scams in crypto. Thus, depend on your extent of risky acceptance, you can choose the best ways to invest your money.
the money will be safer in the bank than in the crypto. fluctuations of a threat most real and most serious if store owned assets on crypto. Indeed if the fortunes of the results will be great but if not also a little loss. but besides that, if money is only stored in the bank's it certainly also will not be able to multiply quickly. so the bank is indeed safe, but does not guarantee can give you a huge advantage and not even possible.
If you live in a third world country, it is always safer because of the banks to fail. In any other country, if you go somewhere else, you can take the money.
Other than that, keeping the crypto money in confidential wallets is important as well.
Other than that, keeping the crypto money in confidential wallets is important as well.
Year ago I gave advantage to crypto-currencies. I was thinking where to save money, in a bank
or in crypto-currencies. I still hold to that decision. I have more money in crypto-currencies than in
a bank, even after this market drop.
I think crypto-currencies are safer and better cause your money is working for you. In bank after
couple years even with good interest rates you will lose money cause of inflation, you money is losing
value. In crypto-currencies we our money is gaining value.
It`s easy to make a choice even after a little research!
or in crypto-currencies. I still hold to that decision. I have more money in crypto-currencies than in
a bank, even after this market drop.
I think crypto-currencies are safer and better cause your money is working for you. In bank after
couple years even with good interest rates you will lose money cause of inflation, you money is losing
value. In crypto-currencies we our money is gaining value.
It`s easy to make a choice even after a little research!
You have to choose between safety and profit, because most probably a bank will provide you with a secure storage for your savings but the crypto market gives you an amazing opportunity to multiply your savings if you have the right skills for that.
I do not think so Bank will ensure your money is always full on the crypto it requires you to transfer money and investment will get and lose will not guarantee if your transactions are wrong wrong.
There are many factors about that but the safest way to store your money is in a bank because you can ensure your money because banks have guards that protect your money unlike in crypto many hackers are in the surrounding if you just wrong click a link the money will disappear.
I think the level of bank security is still better than Crypto. When our money is lost in the bank, the bank will replace it. But if our token is lost in our wallet, then we can only let it go.
Of course not, our money in the bank is protected more than in crypto currency, but we like the crypto currency because here now you can earn more money and we agree to this risk.
You see, in the bank your money works for other people, they earn on it. And at the cryptocurrency market you can increase your deposit several times a year.
of course it will always be safe in bank than in crypto, we know that crypto uses the block chain technology and that is really mind blowing to know how they keep and store all the data and information uniformly and safely but base on the value it is not stable and it has no sign to be stable, unlike on bank it will preserve its value, i think people here are after profiting, and when they earn their money will eventually go to their bank accounts.
It will always be safe in a bank, really? I suggest to do some history check regarding bank runs, example is the Great Depression. Then you find out that the bank does not have enough money to pay everyone if indeed everyone wants their money at the same time.
Until the incessant sharp rise and fall in crypto is stabilized at list to some extent the best place for anyone to store his money remains bank to avoid a colossal loss however one can keep some cash in crypto for investment purpose and not to store all ones cash in the bank
Basically it's more safe when you store your funds on bank but your future is not safe on bank. If you store your funds on cryptocurrency definitely your future is safe because theres a big potential on cryptocurrency than storing your funds on banks.
If we are only concerned to keep our money safe, then I don’t think so that there is any such difference in between the banks and that of the crypto currencies. the only reason because of which I prefer the crypto currencies over the banking system is that investing in the crypto currencies also gives you an opportunity that you will then be able to make more earning and that you will be having some significant profit as well. 
The safer thing is our main point here. For that point to be accomplished and there's nothing extreme volatile things, i think bank is the best service for saving your money safely. But, for you to "spend" your fiat to buying some crypto, it is counted as investing or trading. Saving in cryptocurrencies like literally put away your money, and whatever comes neither its profit or loss is depend on your activity.
Crypto is not meant for saving but it can help you make profit. For savings its better to save in a bank.
Tim Draper: More Secure in Bitcoin Than the Money Sitting in Wells Fargo
Venture capitalist Tim Draper is bullish on Bitcoin and believes it will reach $250,000 in the next four years.
During a debate hosted by Intelligence Squared and the Adam Smith Society, Tim Draper was asked how Bitcoin compared with his previous tech investments in Hotmail, Skype, and Tesla. He replied bullishly, saying, “Bitcoin will be bigger than all three combined.” However, Draper didn’t leave it at that — he thinks it will be bigger than the iron age, the Renaissance, and the internet and says that the nascent technology will affect the entire world in a faster and more prevalent way than ever imagined.
The Debate: “Bitcoin is more than a bubble and here to stay.”
Backed up by Patrick Byrne (CEO of overstock), Draper took on Financial Times journalist, Gillian Tett, and Professor of Law, Eric Posner, both of whom argued that Bitcoin is indeed a bubble and strongly contested Draper’s claims. Posner and Tett called into question the “strengths” of Bitcoin, arguing that they could be regarded as weaknesses. Posner suggested that the pseudonymization of identity enabled by the technology makes Bitcoin transactions the perfect vehicle for sophisticated criminal transactions. Tett focused on the risk involved with trusting computers with finance as they can be hacked, are prone to faults, and that Bitcoin is a “terrible store of value.”
These arguments won’t be anything new to anyone who has studied the space, and the rebuttals of Draper and Byrne won’t come as a surprise either. The pair acknowledged that Bitcoin was imperfect and drew attention to the fact the technology was designed to be open source so that unforeseen problems can be managed by the community. Byrne also pointed out that although Bitcoin has been “hacked at” more than anything in history, but unlike banks, it has yet to be defeated.
Draper was more brazen in his responses and implored the crowd to use fiat if they were looking to facilitate their own criminal activity as many Bitcoin criminals get caught. The venture capitalist responded to Tett’s admission that she invests in several different fiat currencies by saying, “I’m so much more secure in my Bitcoin than I am in the money that’s sitting there in Wells Fargo.”
Who is right?
The short answer is it’s far too early to tell, but it is good to see the subject being discussed in this manner. Before the debate, Gillian Tett remarked that if both sides of an argument aren’t heard in the same room, on the same day, then the conversations can “go past one another.” It’s probably safe to say she’s right here because, although there is no shortage of media on either side of the argument, real debate on the subject can be difficult to find.
If crypto is going to head down the road Draper expects, its advocates need to be able to argue their case outside of the crypto community, and debate should be welcome as it not only gives both sides the ability to speak but also the ability to listen.
Draper’s comments are to be expected
As crypto enthusiasts, it’s easy to agree when figures like Draper sing the praises of Bitcoin, but we shouldn’t let confirmation bias get in the way of the issues. Draper is a successful investor, and he hasn’t arrived there without making mistakes. He could be wholly right, wrong, or somewhere in between — the latter is most likely. Draper allegedly owns 30,000 BTC, so he has a vested interest in Bitcoin’s success. That does not mean he is wrong, but it does mean his comments should be taken with a pinch of salt. Well-reasoned arguments are far more convincing than hype and chest beating because they allow people to make up their own minds.
The emergence of DLT might eclipse the impact of other innovations, but for now, the emphasis is not on critics to prove the crypto community wrong. It’s up to those who champion DLT to convince the world they’re right.
Originally published at cryptodisrupt.com
Of course it is safe if you will store your money on banks. The purpose of the banks is to keep and secure the money of their customers. If your purpose is only to save your money, it is better if you will keep it in banks than to cryptocurrency market. Venture capitalist Tim Draper is bullish on Bitcoin and believes it will reach $250,000 in the next four years.
During a debate hosted by Intelligence Squared and the Adam Smith Society, Tim Draper was asked how Bitcoin compared with his previous tech investments in Hotmail, Skype, and Tesla. He replied bullishly, saying, “Bitcoin will be bigger than all three combined.” However, Draper didn’t leave it at that — he thinks it will be bigger than the iron age, the Renaissance, and the internet and says that the nascent technology will affect the entire world in a faster and more prevalent way than ever imagined.
The Debate: “Bitcoin is more than a bubble and here to stay.”
Backed up by Patrick Byrne (CEO of overstock), Draper took on Financial Times journalist, Gillian Tett, and Professor of Law, Eric Posner, both of whom argued that Bitcoin is indeed a bubble and strongly contested Draper’s claims. Posner and Tett called into question the “strengths” of Bitcoin, arguing that they could be regarded as weaknesses. Posner suggested that the pseudonymization of identity enabled by the technology makes Bitcoin transactions the perfect vehicle for sophisticated criminal transactions. Tett focused on the risk involved with trusting computers with finance as they can be hacked, are prone to faults, and that Bitcoin is a “terrible store of value.”
These arguments won’t be anything new to anyone who has studied the space, and the rebuttals of Draper and Byrne won’t come as a surprise either. The pair acknowledged that Bitcoin was imperfect and drew attention to the fact the technology was designed to be open source so that unforeseen problems can be managed by the community. Byrne also pointed out that although Bitcoin has been “hacked at” more than anything in history, but unlike banks, it has yet to be defeated.
Draper was more brazen in his responses and implored the crowd to use fiat if they were looking to facilitate their own criminal activity as many Bitcoin criminals get caught. The venture capitalist responded to Tett’s admission that she invests in several different fiat currencies by saying, “I’m so much more secure in my Bitcoin than I am in the money that’s sitting there in Wells Fargo.”
Who is right?
The short answer is it’s far too early to tell, but it is good to see the subject being discussed in this manner. Before the debate, Gillian Tett remarked that if both sides of an argument aren’t heard in the same room, on the same day, then the conversations can “go past one another.” It’s probably safe to say she’s right here because, although there is no shortage of media on either side of the argument, real debate on the subject can be difficult to find.
If crypto is going to head down the road Draper expects, its advocates need to be able to argue their case outside of the crypto community, and debate should be welcome as it not only gives both sides the ability to speak but also the ability to listen.
Draper’s comments are to be expected
As crypto enthusiasts, it’s easy to agree when figures like Draper sing the praises of Bitcoin, but we shouldn’t let confirmation bias get in the way of the issues. Draper is a successful investor, and he hasn’t arrived there without making mistakes. He could be wholly right, wrong, or somewhere in between — the latter is most likely. Draper allegedly owns 30,000 BTC, so he has a vested interest in Bitcoin’s success. That does not mean he is wrong, but it does mean his comments should be taken with a pinch of salt. Well-reasoned arguments are far more convincing than hype and chest beating because they allow people to make up their own minds.
The emergence of DLT might eclipse the impact of other innovations, but for now, the emphasis is not on critics to prove the crypto community wrong. It’s up to those who champion DLT to convince the world they’re right.
Originally published at cryptodisrupt.com
Jump to: