Posted on 07/27/2024 1:35:32 AM PDT by Oscar in Batangas
Sorry, but that's not exactly true.
All intelligent investors expect the things they invest in to have fundamental (i.e., intrinsic) value. Companies have assets that grow in value and/or a process that creates an inflow of value (i.e., revenue, income, asset growth...even tax losses that can have value to owners).
Even people who buy assets like collectibles, real estate, intellectual property expect those assets will grow (i.e., inflow) in value.
That value is "intrinsic" value.
It is still debatable if the bitcoin system has such value.
This system started in Sumeria about 3500 years ago when cuneiform writing was invented.
Yes, governments can and do make stupid decisions that erode the value of currencies, but they make stupid decisions that erode the value of all assets. To correct that problem, citizens need to change governments (as happened in Argentina with Javier Milei).
That said, if you believe bitcoin offers a perfectly unbreakable, incorruptible replacement, please explain how it is perfectly created to have NO vulnerabilities (e.g., a 51% attack).
I have never heard anyone claim that the bitcoin system is so perfect.
I feel like the information is there for all, and some people simply don’t get it, for whatever reason.
A generational issue with people who were born prior to 1975 is just my best guess.
Perhaps your securities background is part of the issue. Bitcoin is not a security in any sense, and is not recognized as such by any regulator in the world. In fact, US regulation lags far behind most of the developed world because we’ve let the SEC run roughshod over the industry, who continue to get their butts whooped in Court (with a final buttkicking from Trump not too far behind).
I guess I’m just tired of this conversation, of Freepers sounding like DUers and people stuck in a time warp when there’s so much information out there that will explain the “intrinsic value”, and more importantly, the UTILITY of bitcoin, to where there’s nothing I could possibly say that would convince you if you really have done a deep dive.
There are hoards of information that could go into detail about 51% attacks, and how they were a threat in the early days of bitcoin, which was why Satoshi and early champions like Adam Back (who I believe are the same person) were against attracting unwarranted attention e.g. facilitating Wikileaks transactions.
But all of the information will be somewhat dated.
Do you know why?
The energy and hardware requirements to even pull off a 51% attack considering the network’s current size is so monumentally and impossibly large, and the gains so weak and small, that it’s simply not a threat any longer.
Anyways, bitcoin is a peaceful and voluntary system. It’s now the 9th largest asset in the world and will probably overtake silver next year.
But if don’t get it, you don’t get it. Best of luck otherwise.
And, BTW, cryptocurrency is completely related to securities and investments because it purports to be a medium of exchange in which all investments and human financial activity may be denominated.
You seem to lack a deep understanding of how human economics works and the interconnectedness of its components (like currency and investment).
And, in case you didn't know it, your derision of those who converse with you on this subject is most certainly an ad hominem (though I can see why you wouldn't understand this). And seems to indicate an ugly immaturity.
You seem to lack a deep understanding of how human economics works and the interconnectedness of its components (like currency and investment).
When I stated that bitcoin is not a security, I meant the assertion to be literal: Bitcoin is not a security.
Certainly, there's an interconnectedness between all market forces and assets.
But this is not an immaterial point. Unfortunately, I've had to spend the past four years becoming well-versed in securities law due to the SEC's corruption and blatant targeting of the crypto space.
I've learned more about the Howey Test than I ever wanted to, but in doing so, I think we may have uncovered one of the disconnects here.
(read about the Ripple vs. SEC decision if you want more context, including Judge Torres' ruling against the SEC)
If you're analyzing bitcoin from the standpoint that it is a security, like common stock or equities, you're evaluating it incorrectly.
In the US (and essentially everywhere else in the world), bitcoin is a commodity, like gold, silver, copper, or frozen concentrated orange juice.
It's not necessarily naturally occurring, but is instead created as a result of the network confirming transactions through mining.
Bitcoin has no central issuer, no Board of Directors, no company address, no CEO, and can't be shut off, shut down, or changed by any state or governing authority.
In a better world, as Trump alluded to, digital assets would have their own regulatory schema as they do in other countries like the UK, Japan, and Singapore. Digital assets are a new and unique technology that don't easily fall under legacy asset rules, regulations, and precedent (like Howey), and we're FINALLY getting to the point where we may have such scaffolding with the FIT21 Act, which passed the House and is held up in the Senate, likely until after the election.
That will bring the US out of the dark ages and into the 21st century where crypto and blockchain projects, companies, and developers can proceed with drive and innovation rather than fall victim to captured agencies like the SEC, which is just a revolving door to Wall Street that serves the entrenched interests of banksters.
That's why Trump's condemnation of Gensler at the Bitcoin Conference on Saturday was so impactful. Gensler is the worst type of Deep State swap creature who not only shepherded con-artists like SBF away from trouble (until SBF bankrupted himself), but also signed the checks as the Clinton campaign CFO that paid Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS to draft the Steele Dossier.
I look forward to a day where Freepers will look at Trump's forward thinking on crypto and be excited about it rather than fall back on the same casual refrains you find with leftists, who hate bitcoin specifically because it is an engine of freedom and financial sovereignty.
Go watch the interview where Bill Gates, Charlie Munger, and Warren Buffet are sitting together and are asked to comment on bitcoin. That should be proof enough that bitcoin is clearly an enemy of the pedophile/pervert/robber-barron class, and that alone should make it intriguing to patriots.
Good and thoughtful comment. Thanks. I will take it to heart.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.