Topic: Kevin O'Leary's Take On Bitcoin! - page 2. (Read 390 times)

that doesn't agree with the subjective theory of value. if nobody values above $0.00 what miners are spending electricity on, bitcoins are worth precisely nothing. the fact that miners have sunk costs doesn't create demand nor value. it doesn't create buyers.

you think investors are trying to deduce the average cost of mining and evaluating price based on that? lol.....

That's what I noticed as well. He's to narrow to think that Bitcoin only functions to pay taxes.
We couldn't recognize the success of Bitcoin is just a single thing that it couldn't do.
Accepting taxes with Btc still depends on the government.
There will always be unendless debate if one person is close minded.

Warren Buffett is also can be seen on similar shows. But it doesn't mean that he is a bad investor.

Anyway, many of those people that talk about market trends on TV don't have to be successful traders. It not always correlates with knowledge. Generally, if someone  is saying that he is making 1000% a year then it would rather be a bad trader.

USD is backed by obligation of the federal government to collect trillions of dollars in taxes from residents and companies that operate in the united states. Those money are making USD stable, not someone else's blind trust.

Do you know most of the personalities on TV? Even those who study economics usually end up on TV because they can be sensationalist but they otherwise suck at their job. It's not like being educated in something and then being on TV makes someone smarter, because there's a lot of braindead graduates from post-secondary these days that think their degree gives them the brains they so desperately lack.

The USD (along with fiat currencies in general) is literally based on the trust of the people that it will be usable and retain its value the next day. So long as that belief exists, so does the currency. If suddenly half the country didn't accept the USD anymore, the government would have to force them to accept it (which could lead to rebellion, which the gov't at large would lose) or a shaky belief in the currency is reinstated.

As for everything else, I more or less agree with you. There won't be any Bitcoin killers because their communities will never get remotely close to that which Bitcoin has. Ethereum was probably the best shot, and that petered out lol.

Why Kevin O'Leary is so obsessed with paying taxes with bitcoin.
There's nothing new to this pro-bitcoin vs. anti-bitcoin discussion.All the shit about "the regulators don't like crypto,you can't buy food with crypto,it's just a bunch of code and nothing more".
We heard that shit before and many people believe it.
Just move on and ignore this nonsense.

Sure. All those investors from TV know nothing about economics.

The problem of comparison of BTC with gold is that Bitcoin is not gold and vice versa. And this is why all those "bitcoin killer" shitcoins will never become popular. If someone made something with some shit with values that are similar to gold it doesn't mean that people have to buy it.

About statements of those guys from the quote above:
1. Saying that USD is based on belief is a pure populism and just a stupid statement.
2. This is a fair point. BTC is realy a pure speculation. Hopefully with its further growth volatility would be lower.
3. That's the problem only if you are trying to evaluate BTC the same way as people do with stocks. Maybe cryptocurrencies need some other calculation methods.

seems 3 people have no clue.
firstly we all know gold has utility value. (circuits and jewellery) and ontop of that it actually costs more than 1cent to get it out of the ground.

imagine gold, exact same utility value, but anyone and his dog could mine gold using a cutlery spoon and a coffee filter in their own back yard. i guarantee you gold would be much much cheaper to buy because it only costs pennies to acquire from other means.

same with bitcoin the mining cost is not PoS(free) its PoW(costly) so bitcoin has underlying value based on cost of creation, so saying bitcoin is backed by nothing is hilarious
saying bitcoin is valued by only 2 people agreeing on a random price is hilarious.

seems people dont understand basic economics

Kevin O’Leary gives his take on Bitcoin!

https://youtu.be/SmjUvdJdlDM


This is a clip from a recent CNBC program, where Anthony Pompliano is discussing the recent rise in BTC value. Kevin O'Leary joins Anthony at the desk, and gives his take on Bitcoin as a whole.

As you’ll notice, Kevin is quite critical of Bitcoin. Yet, Anthony Pompliano brings up some interesting points to challenge Kevin.

I found this debate extremely interesting, and while the video is only a 7 minute clip, I thought I’d include some footnotes from their discussion….


Anthony Pompliano states that as institutions as well as retail are beginning to involve themselves with bitcoin and the blockchain, we are seeing highs in the volume across all cryptocurrencies.

He also credits the trade war, as BTC might represent a safe haven of currencies for those who feel unsettled by the trade war.
-He is hopeful that prices will continue to rise with the halving under a year away.
-Explains to Kevin that it reminds people that there is a limited number of BTC
-He refers to bitcoin “disruptive technology”
- Goes on to argue that bitcoin is a belief system, just as the US Dollar is
   - for two people who exchange bitcoin, it has value to each of them

Kevin mocks the halving, saying that it is too arbitrary.
-Goes on to denounce BTC further, saying it is “nothing but raw speculation” and is too volatile
-No interest
-Cant pay taxes
-Regulators don’t like it
-No long term value

Anthony Pompliano Rebuttals

-Says BTC is best performing asset in last decade
Contradicts Kevin’s statements by saying that BTC is a better store of value, more transparent, secure. In fact. regulators prefer it because criminal activity can be tracked and is more traceable as the ledger is public.

“Why can’t I pay my taxes with it?” Kevin asks.

-Anthony proceeds to point out that you actually can use it to pay taxes in the state of Ohio

Kevin continues to bring up points…
“All boats should rise with the water, not just bitcoin.” he says.

Anthony then concludes with this final argument as to why Kevin should invest in BTC-
“Bitcoin is a non-correlated, asymmetric return asset that the value drivers of your equities are tied to earnings, GDP, interest rates, etc.”

Other reporter- “Well the problem is Bitcoin isn’t tied to anything”

Anthony- “Neither is the US Dollar”

Unfortunately… Kevin’s mind remains unchanged, as he still declares Bitcoin to be “garbage”.


I’d love to know what you guys think of this debate. What are some points that were brought up that you found interesting?
Personally, Anthony Pompliano did an awesome job providing valid arguments for the seemingly know-it-all Mr. Wonderful.