3 ms·

Without mainstream acceptance through purchase transactions Bitcoin has no hope of going anywhere. People holding for investment, while profitable, is absurd if

Without mainstream acceptance through purchase transactions Bitcoin has no hope of going anywhere. People holding for investment, while profitable, is absurd if ultimately the final holder can not exchange it for goods. I am not an economist, but I do hold the position that money is used for the exchange of goods and its only value is in its acceptance and exchange rate.

rawtxapp 5y ago
People hold it because historically it appreciated greatly, so they expect that to continue. But it can't appreciate the average of 300% YoY forever, sooner or later, it will hit diminishing returns at which point people will be more willing to spend it. It's essentially Gresham's law in action[1]. Also for those that want to spend it, there are lots of options now for crypto backed debit/credit cards. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law
washedup 5y ago
What about gold? It's been around for thousands of years first as a medium of exchange and today as store-of-value, but is never used for transactions today. That's doesnt make it "bad money", it just makes it different than a currency.
doublejay1999 5y ago
so what bitcoin (and of course other crypto) is, is complex and ultimately subjective : it's different things to different people, just like money. It does some things money can do & does some things that money cannot. FIAT money is the same, It does some s bitcoin can't but cannot do some things bitcoin can. instead of advancing a concrete definition of crypto - which as i said is a subjective argument - i'd encourage you to look at what money, monetarism & fiat really are. It's equally subjective, and arguably a more difficult concept that crypto. At the moment, traditional cash can be spent much more freely than crypto, which is one of things limiting it's utility as a currency. But similarly, the lack of an immutable ledger, a practically infinite(or a least unknown) supply, and risk of physical counterfeits limits Cash as store of value. ....right now...crypto is something. Even if it's yet to be fully realised. It's mainstream, at least as an investible asset and It has some utility as currency, albeit limited. For people in developed countries, with established currencies backed by a military force, either directly of indirectly, it will seem quite absurd that crypto could/should replace cash. For people in unstable regimes, countries who've experienced hyperinflation, it's a massively attractive proposition.

rawtxapp 5y ago

People hold it because historically it appreciated greatly, so they expect that to continue. But it can't appreciate the average of 300% YoY forever, sooner or later, it will hit diminishing returns at which point people will be more willing to spend it. It's essentially Gresham's law in action[1]. Also for those that want to spend it, there are lots of options now for crypto backed debit/credit cards. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law

washedup 5y ago

What about gold? It's been around for thousands of years first as a medium of exchange and today as store-of-value, but is never used for transactions today. That's doesnt make it "bad money", it just makes it different than a currency.

doublejay1999 5y ago

so what bitcoin (and of course other crypto) is, is complex and ultimately subjective : it's different things to different people, just like money. It does some things money can do & does some things that money cannot. FIAT money is the same, It does some s bitcoin can't but cannot do some things bitcoin can. instead of advancing a concrete definition of crypto - which as i said is a subjective argument - i'd encourage you to look at what money, monetarism & fiat really are. It's equally subjective, and arguably a more difficult concept that crypto. At the moment, traditional cash can be spent much more freely than crypto, which is one of things limiting it's utility as a currency. But similarly, the lack of an immutable ledger, a practically infinite(or a least unknown) supply, and risk of physical counterfeits limits Cash as store of value. ....right now...crypto is something. Even if it's yet to be fully realised. It's mainstream, at least as an investible asset and It has some utility as currency, albeit limited. For people in developed countries, with established currencies backed by a military force, either directly of indirectly, it will seem quite absurd that crypto could/should replace cash. For people in unstable regimes, countries who've experienced hyperinflation, it's a massively attractive proposition.