3 ms·
I'm sorry, but you can't really be saying that you consider bitcoin to be a safer place to park your money than US Treasuries? In any case, Koreans can access
by malloryerik 9y ago
I'm sorry, but you can't really be saying that you consider bitcoin to be a safer place to park your money than US Treasuries?
In any case, Koreans can access safe haven assets from around the globe; they don't need bitcoin for that.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if, after the rage of a shakeout, bitcoin were at some point banned in South Korea. Online gambling is banned (there are public service announcement ads in the subway against it, showing gamble-a-holics in handcuffs). They might just have to classify bitcoin as gambling. Once there is a large enough group of people angry at losing their money to bitcoin mania, it could happen.
- em3rgent0rdr 9y agoI never said I consider bitcoin safer than US Treasuries. I just said I wouldn't consider US securities to be a safe bet and that even US Treasuries might be considered riskier than bitcoin. Every asset has some degree of risk. And even something that might be considered somewhat risky might even reduce the risk of a portfolio through diversification if its risk doesn't correlate significatnly with the other assets.
- malloryerik 9y agoEverything has some degree of risk. Truer words can't be spoken. And sure, diversification is the only one free lunch, they say. But could US Treasuries be riskier than Bitcoin, under any scenario? Even if an EMP attack wiped out North America, or Washington DC and New York were both nuked, I'm not so sure. But those are the kinds of scenarios that might make it possible. Something where the United States ceased to exist. In those cases, would Bitcoin survive? Good sci-fi material.