> Really? Doesn't seem like getting off the gold standard was so miraculous in preventing recessions. I'd look back at the graphs. The wild inflationary and de

> Really? Doesn't seem like getting off the gold standard was so miraculous in preventing recessions. I'd look back at the graphs. The wild inflationary and deflationary swings were dramatically worse on the gold standard. Because inflation doesn't depend on supply of currency but instead it is calculated from the price of goods. > Inflation doesn't encourage spending, it kills saving and makes storing wealth something only the sophisticated and wealthy can achieve. Same thing bud. And no, thanks for roboadvisors, anyone can save any spare capital via investments. Or series I bonds. > Pathetic cherry picking. How about I do the same thing and I start in 2013 and end anytime in the past 8 years? Pathetic cherry picking. How about you do it based on the percentage of people underwater. 40% of all bitcoin investors are now underwater. Unless you have a time machine, my number is far more relevant than yours. The entire country of El Salvador is down 40% from their investments. How many people are underwater on the Series I bonds - an actual hedge against inflation? Nobody. > Lightning isn't the only layer-2, and it isn't killed by routing complexity, it simply requires more centralized routing hubs, users don't just connect to all their friends directly. This is fine for payments small enough to justify it. So you solve scaling with centralization, fundamentally invalidating the core value proposition of Bitcoin as per the whitepaper. I can do that too, with my dollars. > Fundamentally sound means what it says. It means the most basic function is the best in its class, and that once the market realizes it the world will build around it. Cool, but their assertion was garbage, and Bitcoin is fundamentally worse than pretty much everything it competes against, in every measurable way.