Gold is vastly larger market capitalisation then bitcoin, sure it is. I expect btc is more liquid asset to deal though, they are just different classes really.
Thing is with gold when its bought in large amounts, they keep it and thats it, the owner will issue notes against its worth but never sell it. Bitcoin you cant do that so much, some brokers will let you buy shares based on your gold holdings as security but I not heard of btc being used that way though I guess its possible
Topic: Peter Schiff on Bitcoin (Read 38888 times)
I've never seen a real crisis where people bring out their gold. There's usually a lot of lead moving around.
Gold was used in Zimbabwe, its used in Vietnam now and I guess maybe other countries though not in the street to buy food I doubt. A loaf of bread was 1 gram which is a rip off but worthless cash causes problems and the bread was coming from south africa
Then are you telling that Gold is much more bigger in value compared to BTC?
I've never seen a real crisis where people bring out their gold. There's usually a lot of lead moving around.
Gold was used in Zimbabwe, its used in Vietnam now and I guess maybe other countries though not in the street to buy food I doubt. A loaf of bread was 1 gram which is a rip off but worthless cash causes problems and the bread was coming from south africa
Central banks will only hold tangible asset such as gold, which has proven to be "money" for 1000 years.
Central banks used paper as their method of accounting for 1000 years. They switched to computers because it is way cheaper, more efficient, and more reliable. Just because something has been proven for 1000 years doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. Central banks will hold whatever they feel they have control over. If bitcoin mining and security is decentralized and secure enough, they will hold bitcoin just as well as they have held gold.
Thats not it really. Bitcoin is not backed by anything, its the same complaint he has about dollars.
It's pretty annoying when people claim that bitcoin is not backed by anything, and then go on to defend gold, which also is not backed by anything. The brainwashing of pieces of paper backed by some bank or vault is pretty strong in our society, so when people see bitcoin, that's the first thing they assume it to be like, instead of being something that doesn't need backing. Like gold.
Gold can be a standalone product without huge dependency on technology. Should real crisis hit, electricity and computer system will not be accessible as most people would assume it would.
There is an investing newsletter called "Whiskey & gunpowder", it's a crisis investment kind of thing.
Central banks will only hold tangible asset such as gold, which has proven to be "money" for 1000 years.
Central banks used paper as their method of accounting for 1000 years. They switched to computers because it is way cheaper, more efficient, and more reliable. Just because something has been proven for 1000 years doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. Central banks will hold whatever they feel they have control over. If bitcoin mining and security is decentralized and secure enough, they will hold bitcoin just as well as they have held gold.
Thats not it really. Bitcoin is not backed by anything, its the same complaint he has about dollars.
It's pretty annoying when people claim that bitcoin is not backed by anything, and then go on to defend gold, which also is not backed by anything. The brainwashing of pieces of paper backed by some bank or vault is pretty strong in our society, so when people see bitcoin, that's the first thing they assume it to be like, instead of being something that doesn't need backing. Like gold.
Gold can be a standalone product without huge dependency on technology. Should real crisis hit, electricity and computer system will not be accessible as most people would assume it would.
Touché
Central banks will only hold tangible asset such as gold, which has proven to be "money" for 1000 years.
Central banks used paper as their method of accounting for 1000 years. They switched to computers because it is way cheaper, more efficient, and more reliable. Just because something has been proven for 1000 years doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. Central banks will hold whatever they feel they have control over. If bitcoin mining and security is decentralized and secure enough, they will hold bitcoin just as well as they have held gold.
Thats not it really. Bitcoin is not backed by anything, its the same complaint he has about dollars.
It's pretty annoying when people claim that bitcoin is not backed by anything, and then go on to defend gold, which also is not backed by anything. The brainwashing of pieces of paper backed by some bank or vault is pretty strong in our society, so when people see bitcoin, that's the first thing they assume it to be like, instead of being something that doesn't need backing. Like gold.
Gold can be a standalone product without huge dependency on technology. Should real crisis hit, electricity and computer system will not be accessible as most people would assume it would.
Central banks will only hold tangible asset such as gold, which has proven to be "money" for 1000 years.
Central banks used paper as their method of accounting for 1000 years. They switched to computers because it is way cheaper, more efficient, and more reliable. Just because something has been proven for 1000 years doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. Central banks will hold whatever they feel they have control over. If bitcoin mining and security is decentralized and secure enough, they will hold bitcoin just as well as they have held gold.
Thats not it really. Bitcoin is not backed by anything, its the same complaint he has about dollars.
It's pretty annoying when people claim that bitcoin is not backed by anything, and then go on to defend gold, which also is not backed by anything. The brainwashing of pieces of paper backed by some bank or vault is pretty strong in our society, so when people see bitcoin, that's the first thing they assume it to be like, instead of being something that doesn't need backing. Like gold.
Gold can be a standalone product without huge dependency on technology. Should real crisis hit, electricity and computer system will not be accessible as most people would assume it would.
Bitcoin's price development since 2009-1-3 (the inception) correlates 0.935 with an exponential trendline.
If I had a medium sized investment portfolio (I do), I would allocate as follows:
Bitcoin 45%
Monero 5%
Real Estate 20%
Small Business & Projects 10%
Cash, financial instruments 10%
Gold 5%
Silver 5%.
If you don't want to invest 50% in crypto, just invest 5-10% and it will become 50% spontaneously in 1 year, should the trend continue.
If I had a medium sized investment portfolio (I do), I would allocate as follows:
Bitcoin 45%
Monero 5%
Real Estate 20%
Small Business & Projects 10%
Cash, financial instruments 10%
Gold 5%
Silver 5%.
If you don't want to invest 50% in crypto, just invest 5-10% and it will become 50% spontaneously in 1 year, should the trend continue.
I think that your PM holdings are too small. With the coming unraveling of fiat and the collapse of derivatives, precious metals to the moon. And only what is in your hand do you really own!
Of course with this collapse it will trigger widespread death and destruction as war engulfs the planet.
Do you have a hardened shelter beneath your castle? How many BTC or ounces of gold will a room cost?
45% btc is way too much IMHO. No NXT? You need more financials, i.e. foreign stocks.
And did I miss something? What's Monero? I googled it, but don't feel like sorting through the BS. Can someone sum it up for me?
Lol NXT?
You mean that IPO bullshit scam coin?
Yes more people need to have that hahaha
Bitcoin is perceived as unbacked and inferior to dollars which have the full faith and support of the most powerful government on earth and the only military superpower left.
That perception is hard to overcome, whats often the case with such a formidable force is that the only people who can beat it is themselves and so far as I can tell this is what happened, Dollar is/was/continues to be undermined by the actions of its own congress through the FED
Bitcoin I think will prove superior to dollars, it does have that integrity but its a lost point on most. Gold does of course have physical backing, it is a unique element and if nothing else it is very hard to destroy or deminish. So dollars are the most fragile of the three, nothing fixes their value except politics which as we all know is an often betrayed principal. No speculation is required to see damage already done or for bitcoin a likely continued transparent path forward for reliable exchange, similarly gold is useful to many people and that simplicity is a positive. dollar value is opaque
That perception is hard to overcome, whats often the case with such a formidable force is that the only people who can beat it is themselves and so far as I can tell this is what happened, Dollar is/was/continues to be undermined by the actions of its own congress through the FED
Bitcoin I think will prove superior to dollars, it does have that integrity but its a lost point on most. Gold does of course have physical backing, it is a unique element and if nothing else it is very hard to destroy or deminish. So dollars are the most fragile of the three, nothing fixes their value except politics which as we all know is an often betrayed principal. No speculation is required to see damage already done or for bitcoin a likely continued transparent path forward for reliable exchange, similarly gold is useful to many people and that simplicity is a positive. dollar value is opaque
Central banks will only hold tangible asset such as gold, which has proven to be "money" for 1000 years.
Central banks used paper as their method of accounting for 1000 years. They switched to computers because it is way cheaper, more efficient, and more reliable. Just because something has been proven for 1000 years doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. Central banks will hold whatever they feel they have control over. If bitcoin mining and security is decentralized and secure enough, they will hold bitcoin just as well as they have held gold.
Thats not it really. Bitcoin is not backed by anything, its the same complaint he has about dollars.
It's pretty annoying when people claim that bitcoin is not backed by anything, and then go on to defend gold, which also is not backed by anything. The brainwashing of pieces of paper backed by some bank or vault is pretty strong in our society, so when people see bitcoin, that's the first thing they assume it to be like, instead of being something that doesn't need backing. Like gold.
I know yeah?
What backs gold? Right nothing but perception that it has value.
What backs Bitcoin is the protocol as well as the miners and merchants and users. Same difference lol
He's right in a way.
Bitcoin, technically speaking, IS a fiat currency. That is, there is no tangible good for which it can be exchanged at a guaranteed rate.
The real difference is that Bitcoin has value by user fiat and Dollars have value by government fiat.
Bitcoin, technically speaking, IS a fiat currency. That is, there is no tangible good for which it can be exchanged at a guaranteed rate.
The real difference is that Bitcoin has value by user fiat and Dollars have value by government fiat.
Fiat means by government decree. So technically you and him are both wrong on the actual definition.
Bitcoin's price development since 2009-1-3 (the inception) correlates 0.935 with an exponential trendline.
If I had a medium sized investment portfolio (I do), I would allocate as follows:
Bitcoin 45%
Monero 5%
Real Estate 20%
Small Business & Projects 10%
Cash, financial instruments 10%
Gold 5%
Silver 5%.
If you don't want to invest 50% in crypto, just invest 5-10% and it will become 50% spontaneously in 1 year, should the trend continue.
If I had a medium sized investment portfolio (I do), I would allocate as follows:
Bitcoin 45%
Monero 5%
Real Estate 20%
Small Business & Projects 10%
Cash, financial instruments 10%
Gold 5%
Silver 5%.
If you don't want to invest 50% in crypto, just invest 5-10% and it will become 50% spontaneously in 1 year, should the trend continue.
I think that your PM holdings are too small. With the coming unraveling of fiat and the collapse of derivatives, precious metals to the moon. And only what is in your hand do you really own!
Of course with this collapse it will trigger widespread death and destruction as war engulfs the planet.
Do you have a hardened shelter beneath your castle? How many BTC or ounces of gold will a room cost?
45% btc is way too much IMHO. No NXT? You need more financials, i.e. foreign stocks.
And did I miss something? What's Monero? I googled it, but don't feel like sorting through the BS. Can someone sum it up for me?
Lol NXT?
You mean that IPO bullshit scam coin?
Yes more people need to have that hahaha
He's right in a way.
Bitcoin, technically speaking, IS a fiat currency. That is, there is no tangible good for which it can be exchanged at a guaranteed rate.
The real difference is that Bitcoin has value by user fiat and Dollars have value by government fiat.
Bitcoin, technically speaking, IS a fiat currency. That is, there is no tangible good for which it can be exchanged at a guaranteed rate.
The real difference is that Bitcoin has value by user fiat and Dollars have value by government fiat.
Central banks will only hold tangible asset such as gold, which has proven to be "money" for 1000 years.
Central banks used paper as their method of accounting for 1000 years. They switched to computers because it is way cheaper, more efficient, and more reliable. Just because something has been proven for 1000 years doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. Central banks will hold whatever they feel they have control over. If bitcoin mining and security is decentralized and secure enough, they will hold bitcoin just as well as they have held gold.
Thats not it really. Bitcoin is not backed by anything, its the same complaint he has about dollars.
It's pretty annoying when people claim that bitcoin is not backed by anything, and then go on to defend gold, which also is not backed by anything. The brainwashing of pieces of paper backed by some bank or vault is pretty strong in our society, so when people see bitcoin, that's the first thing they assume it to be like, instead of being something that doesn't need backing. Like gold.
so he is ignorant on technology most likely
He's not ignorant. In the absence of governments that raid private gold vaults in order to shut down competing gold backed currencies, he'd be correct. None of us who knows what we are talking about disputes this. Bitcoin would be inferior to digital gold warehouse reciepts if they were allowed to compete. But, of course, they are not; and that is part of the design advantage of Bitcoin. There is no gold storage vault to raid.
Peter Schiff, Just rants about bitcoin because he sees it as a threat to gold and silver ... besides there consumptive value they do provide a decent ledger for money but bitcoin has the best ledger and therefore will devalue the worth of the store of value that gold has ...
Thats not it really. Bitcoin is not backed by anything, its the same complaint he has about dollars. His dad stood before the senate objecting to the moves by Nixon to separate dollar from gold, his family has objections on this point going back 4 decades. If there was a criticism its that Schiff is not seeing the detail to bitcoin, it is just this point that its not exchangeable at a fixed rate for anything. So people who save btc have no contract to own anything exact, its a fair point but its flexibility is also a strength.
He wants it to be like GLD which we all know would be a failure, not distributed, so he is ignorant on technology most likely
Peter Schiff, Just rants about bitcoin because he sees it as a threat to gold and silver ... besides there consumptive value they do provide a decent ledger for money but bitcoin has the best ledger and therefore will devalue the worth of the store of value that gold has ...
Central banks will only hold tangible asset such as gold, which has proven to be "money" for 1000 years.
Can't really compare bitcoin to gold at this point.
It's funny, I am interested in when Schiff is going to condone bitcoin, I know he will at some point.
Just like I know bitcoin will explode at some point.
Just like I know bitcoin will explode at some point.
Since Peter started doing his weekly podcasts he's talked about bitcoin a few times. I sometimes forget to post it. But on his YouTube video descriptions are links to when he talks about it.
Podcast #5 @ 30:49
http://youtu.be/nYiyQl7O6HI
Podcast #6 @ 45:00
http://youtu.be/Ob8stmxfbFg
Podcast #5 @ 30:49
http://youtu.be/nYiyQl7O6HI
Podcast #6 @ 45:00
http://youtu.be/Ob8stmxfbFg
Peter Schiff, Just rants about bitcoin because he sees it as a threat to gold and silver ... besides there consumptive value they do provide a decent ledger for money but bitcoin has the best ledger and therefore will devalue the worth of the store of value that gold has ...
Jump to: