3 ms·
> What exactly is the assumption that deems BTC's intrinsic value zero and land's value more than zero? For me the easiest way to determine if something has in
by nly 5y ago
> What exactly is the assumption that deems BTC's intrinsic value zero and land's value more than zero?
For me the easiest way to determine if something has intrinsic value is ask yourself what would happen if you owned all of it (and couldn't be forced to give it up).
If you owned all the Bitcoin in the world, we wouldn't accept its use, and would just create another currency with identical properties.
If you owned all the land in the world, people would come to you to buy or rent it. You can't build a house or a factory unless someone is willing to sell or lease you the land. That's what makes it valuable.
In many ways, this is why we have the word "priceless". Things become priceless when, in certain contexts (for certain people at certain times), they will not be sold for any price. Land can be priceless because I can have a sentimental attachment to a particular place. Its value isn't derived from how many $'s people will pay for it.
- atweiden 5y ago> If you owned all the Bitcoin in the world, the world wouldn't accept its use, and would just create another currency with identical properties. Don’t all modern currencies work like this?
- nly 5y agoYes, they do. It's literally the definition of fiat money that it has no intrinsic value.
- timdaub 5y agoThat's a rather theoretical argument. If you were the sole owner of the world's land, then people would probably resort to kill or capture you to redistribute the land.
- nly 5y agoIt's a thought experiment. Imagine you're trying to prove the relationship between your personal savings rate, and the date at which you can retire. - If I save 100% of my money now, I can retire now (because clearly I don't need money to live). - If I save 0% of my money now, I will never be able to retire (because I'll have none when I forfeit my income).
- timdaub 5y agoAgain, I think this is a rather theorerical argument. Retirement is not solely coupled to the amount of money you have. I personally have aspirations and enough money to not having to work for a few years. And still I work lots of hours to achieve certain goals that have nothing to do with increasing my money.
- nly 5y agoPerhaps financial independence is a better term. Retirement depends on FI, but FI doesn't necessarily mean retirement. FI is solely determined by the amount of valuable assets you have
- Vadoff 5y agoIf one person owned all the land in the world, we also wouldn't accept it.