4 ms·

All actives have relative value. It depends on lots of things. Real state in London in 100 years? Anybody's guess. And you will have big costs maintaining that

• alexasmyths 9y ago
  "Real state in London in 100 years? Anybody's guess." Ahh - but we can 'guess' - and given how we know the world works, there is a very high likelihood that London property will have value, and probably more than it does today. BTC - there's a decent chance it could be worthless. Though BTC does own the 'upper end of value spectrum' - i.e. investing in BTC could make you 1000x richer in 100 years - and London property will never do that - BTC also owns the lower end of the spectrum, i.e. with a range of probabilities at zero, or near zero. Meaning - not a very good store of value. In fact - as a 'store of value' BTC can't even be remotely considered when there are so many better options. Speculation? Sure. BTC is might be a good bet actually. Store of value? Bad bet.
  • gonvaled 9y ago
    Agreed! With one small caveat: the world is in turmoil at the moment (as usual, more than usual, not sure?), with big events hitting the economy worldwide: climate change, AI, self-driving cars, automation, ... you name it. What is the chance of any one of those events to nuke your "London Real State in 100 years" strategy? Low. The combined chance of all those forces? Not so low. What is the chance that real state in London will be wiped out (as a store of value) and bitcoin will not, in 100 years? The balance is tipped on the side of London, but not so much as you would think. Interesting times ...