Posted on 08/14/2023 8:58:27 AM PDT by RandFan
“Bitcoin is hard money.”
Bitcoin is investment speculation just like many other things with a supposed fixed/limited supply. What Bitcoin purists ignored was just how much other investment speculators would enter the Bitcoin market purely as hedge, and then sell their Bitcoin when they lose money on other stuff, causing Bitcoin value to jump up and down NOT based on anything about Bitcoin, but investor gains and losses elsewhere. Bitcoin theortical is not Bitcoin reality. Gold and other precious commodities (even real estate) have more value lasting power than Bitcoin because their value has someothing real underneath them while Bitcoin has nothing real underneath it.
Beautiful quote and timeless.
When I was in Ecuador, some of the better off people really liked having the US Dollar as currency. They felt that since their politicians could not print more dollars, they had to implement regulations that encouraged more export of “things” to bring in more dollars. They felt it kept the politicians from doing crazy things like just printing money as fast a possible, which would cause hyper inflation to happen. At least that was the story, I got from middle class to more better off individuals in Ecuador.
Kind of wish we, in the US could figure out a way to keep our politicians from printing too much money.
Gold and other precious commodities (even real estate) have drawbacks regarding their utility as a store of value that Bitcoin doesn't have.
Value is real, but at the same time value is a subjective, human construct. Real doesn't mean tangible. The value of a bar of gold isn't inherent to the bar itself, but to what a potential holder of the bar could do with it.
Crossing the border with $1 million in gold (or real estate!) is a much different concern than relocating with $1 million in Bitcoin.
I guess it’s a 3 way race in October?
“Gold and other precious commodities (even real estate) have drawbacks regarding their utility as a store of value that Bitcoin doesn’t have.”
Everything has drawbacks, even Bitcoin. I have a friend who has not yet recovered her big losses on Bitcoin (50% from 2 years ago).
As to stores of value - that is a matter of the intent as to use of the value. Yes, you can cash out of Bitcoin easily, and take your cash and do what you want, if that is a resson for holding it.
You can also have a master bank account that gives you easy access between your investments, checking, savings and credit accounts. You can direct purchases of new investments from checking, savings or credit and direct proceeds from investment sales to checking or savings - all electronically, from anywhere in the world. Your assets stay where they are while you go where you want, as easily as Bitcoin.
As to “crossing the Border” LOL, nearly all transactions can be conducted electronically today (including selling real estate property) and return from sales can be transferred electronically, from and to anywhere in the world. But you can’t walk into a restaurant anywhere and pay for your meal with Bitcoin, but you can with cash, a debit card or credit card.
Yes, you can “take your gold with you”, as far as retaining it and its value, by using a trusted depository account, with access to it from anywhere, as far as adding to it, or selling from it. In essence, you can go anywhere, while your gold is secure without you personally physically moving it. New purchases can be added to it and sales can be made from it. Gold (and other precious metals) as an investment has kept up with our technological age. You don’t have to move $1 million in gold across any border you choose to cross as maybe you had to one hundred years ago.
Sounds like your friend caught FOMO seeing monthly double digit gains in 2021. Piling into a visible mania isn't a good method for savings, that's pretty reckless speculation, really. Anyone dollar cost averaging into Bitcoin over the last five years is ahead in USD terms, and can point out to you that the spikes, while becoming larger nominally, are becoming smaller logarithmically.
You can also have a master bank account that gives you easy access between your investments, checking, savings and credit accounts. You can direct purchases of new investments from checking, savings or credit and direct proceeds from investment sales to checking or savings - all electronically, from anywhere in the world. Your assets stay where they are while you go where you want, as easily as Bitcoin.
The problem with this is that it requires third party trust. If the Premier decides he doesn't like the protests you donated to he can shut down your accounts.
This isn't paranoid conspiracy theory, it's recent history:
Trudeau Took a Page From Obama When He Froze Protesters' Bank Accounts
Banks are not really private businesses. "There are barriers to entry. You have to get permission to start a new bank.…The financial services industry is so intertwined with government."
That government connection means bureaucrats who regulate banks can silence government's critics by cutting off access to their money. In Canada, protesting truckers resisted pressure from police and politicians for weeks. But once Trudeau froze their money, that was the beginning of the end of their protest.
When governments can de-bank you, you are not really free.
Bitcoin's protocol doesn't require government permission for you to transfer your funds. There is no centralized point for the government to compel.
As to “crossing the Border” LOL, nearly all transactions can be conducted electronically today (including selling real estate property) and return from sales can be transferred electronically, from and to anywhere in the world.
That relies upon assumptions I think the above referenced article indicate we cannot count on. The Bitcoin protocol's decentralized ledger not only provides security against inflation, it also allows transfers without requiring any government permission. That is a property of the medium that has value. Higher in some countries than others, but still a positive property to not discount when assessing relative value for a store of value.
Yes, you can “take your gold with you”, as far as retaining it and its value, by using a trusted depository account
Could you "take your gold with you" when FDR issued Executive Order 6102?
You don’t have to move $1 million in gold across any border you choose to cross as maybe you had to one hundred years ago.
But what if you needed to? What if you were smart enough to keep your gold horde out of a third party's hands where the government could seize it. What money has better transportability than Bitcoin when walking through the airport when trying to do so with $10k in US Dollars will get it seized and the onus put on you to prove you own it?
Trying to get through Customs with a $1 million in gold? LOL Good luck!
Finito
Always happy to show someone a few things it’s obvious they hadn’t thought about yet.
Cheers!
You educated no one as far as I can tell.
Your opinions are your opinions, just that.
I’d no more buy Bitcoin than I’d buy Orange Juice, Cotton or Pork Belly futures.
Harsh assessment of yourself, but I'll consider it fair given the source.
Your opinions are your opinions, just that.
It is not merely my opinion that the authorities can cut you off from the third parties that you mistakenly thought make a normal bank account as capable as Bitcoin in performing transfers.
It is also not my opinion that permission from those authorities are required to make transfers in Bitcoin.
Those are advantages you profess a continued ignorance of, if not their existence, their value. I've tried to show you, with historical examples of account seizure and physical gold theft, where third party trust was required.
If you can't see the difference having been shown it, it is indeed an indictment of your ability to learn. But only yours. Lurkers not as slow on the uptake have the opportunity to learn about a property or aspect of Bitcoin they hadn't considered.
I’d no more buy Bitcoin than I’d buy Orange Juice, Cotton or Pork Belly futures.
That's wise when you clearly don't understand how they differ. Cheers!
“:It is not merely my opinion that the authorities can cut you off from the third parties that you mistakenly thought make a normal bank account”
how, when, where, by whom - examples with evidence.
“Those are advantages you profess a continued ignorance of, if not their existence, their value”
They are examples that are immaterial as they are of no practical significance. They are examples of Bitcoin theory meeting practical reality, making the theoretical possibility of no practicle significance. It is only your opinion that those matters are materially signifcant to 99% of folks 99% of the time, which they are not.
Commodity futures and Bitcoin are, to most knowledgeable investors, pure speculation trades, period. That is how they are similar.
Bye
That was provided in post #27.
But I can quote it again here, with the same link I provided for you to further education yourself on the news you missed:
Trudeau Took a Page From Obama When He Froze Protesters' Bank Accounts
Banks are not really private businesses. "There are barriers to entry. You have to get permission to start a new bank.…The financial services industry is so intertwined with government."
That government connection means bureaucrats who regulate banks can silence government's critics by cutting off access to their money. In Canada, protesting truckers resisted pressure from police and politicians for weeks. But once Trudeau froze their money, that was the beginning of the end of their protest.
When governments can de-bank you, you are not really free.
It is only your opinion that those matters are materially signifcant to 99% of folks 99% of the time, which they are not.
FDR's Executive Order 6102 applied to 100% of Americans for over 40 years. Does that satisfy your request for 'how, when, where, by whom - examples with evidence'?
1. Tradeu nor FDR are the U.S. President. Thus again you propose the theoretical as material when it is not.
2. Yes, I am so dumb not to own Bitcoin, with its value bdown 13% in the last 10 days. ROFWL
You seem to be confusing historical fact with theoretical proposal.
Denying FDR's gold theft happened puts you in the loony bin category of denying documented historical facts like the Holocaust.
Both Trudeau and FDR cut people off from their assets by executive whim, precisely because the legacy banking institutions are beholden to government.
Bitcoin doesn't suffer from this malady, and is thus superior to them as a medium for exchange and store of value.
It's understandable to have been ignorant of these facts, but having been exposed to them, it's downright weird to see someone deny they ever happened.
Yes, I am so dumb not to own Bitcoin, with its value up 57% YTD, up 124% over the last 3 years, and up 270% over the last 5 years. ROFWL
FTFY.
Your insights are amazing! Clearly a short term thinker who doesn't let himself get suckered into large gains.
BTW, Hope your 'friend' didn't cash out after piling in at a top. For 'her' sake. Cheers!
What happened happened but neither Tradeua or FDR are in charge of anything in the U.S. today. If you want to pretend they are, that’s your problem. And how Bicoin value have you lost today???
https://www.in2013dollars.com/bitcoin-price
Bitcoin is in the ending-last quarter - heading down - of a typical head and shoulders bubble pattern.
The same tools they used are in the hands of those currently in power today, so the ability of the government to cut you off from those third party banking institutions remains. This is a fundamental weakness that the Bitcoin protocol obviates. Obviating that risk has value. More in country like Venezuela than Canada, but clearly both enjoy a level of risk with legacy banks that Bitcoin doesn't have.
And how Bicoin value have you lost today???
None, I haven't sold any today. Why would someone lock in losses, when you know the Federal government is going to keep issuing trillion+ dollar deficits for the foreseeable future that the Federal Reserve will print money to buy?
Knee jerk response to an intra-day move sounds like something a FOMO victim would do.
I have full faith that the politicians will continue to issue debt on the credit of the United States, and thereby continue the process of debasement begun in 1913 that has seen the dollar lose over 98% of its value in that time.
Cognizant of the risks, one should protect their savings in a store of value that the politicians have no power to debase.
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.