5 ms·
Massive success actually for anyone holding. Did you forget the price is $100k?
by mlcrypto 2y ago
Massive success actually for anyone holding. Did you forget the price is $100k?
- aksss 2y agoWhat does that mean? USD value decreased that much and bitcoin proved itself as an asset with tangible value (like gold?), or did value of bitcoin itself rise? I’m not a currency guy, so I don’t pretend to know crap, it’s a real question, not rhetorical.
- skulk 2y agoIt means that if you bought under $100k, you are no longer the biggest fool. Bitcoin is completely unworkable as an everyday currency and this this is due to multiple factors. Any attempt to address these shortcomings ends up slowly[0] re-inventing the modern financial system and its various systems of trust. People who try to convince you otherwise are simply in search of a bigger fool, since they bring up the USD value of bitcoin. [0]: but also too quickly, hence all the breaches and 8-figure heists
- mindcandy 2y agoCompared to the dollar over the past five years… The dollar down vs itself by 20ish percent. The median home price is up 30ish percent. Oil is up 45ish percent. Gold and the SP500 are each up 80ish percent. Bitcoin is up 1000ish percent. If you snooze through the day-by-day, season-by-season noise, the volatility of Bitcoin is a fun and relaxing rocket to ride. You just have to ignore all discussion focused on time frames of less than four years.
- tapoxi 2y agoBut you're not supposed to hold legal tender, by design you're supposed to spend it.
- redundantly 2y agogestures at all of the billionaires
- chungy 2y agoI dare you to come up with a single example of someone that has a billion dollars in liquid assets. They probably don't exist: "billionaries" are worth billions on paper, thanks to stocks, investments, real estate holdings, etc. All in all, billionaires are a bad example of holding legal tender, because that just doesn't happen.
- tonyhart7 2y ago"I dare you to come up with a single example of someone that has a billion dollars in liquid assets." royal family kingdom of saudi arabia
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> a single example of someone that has a billion dollars in liquid assets Lots of billionaires manage their portfolios conservatively. Your equating currency with liquid assets is unnecessary and tanks your argument. Almost nobody holds billions of dollars in legal tender other than those who have to, e.g. sanctioned countries and criminals.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- 2y ago
- lr4444lr 2y agoYeah, but what about when the country has to make good on bond payments to a cryptocurrency becoming stronger, entirely out of their control? It was a terribly dangerous move for a sovereign country, worse than surrender to the Euro.
- acdha 2y agoAnd it was $92k just less than 24 hours ago. That’s why it’s bad for currencies because people can’t make meaningful plans more than a few hours out, and it’s terrible for the economy if you incentivize everyone to reduce spending in the hopes that speculators will make you rich later. Real currencies circulate so the same dollar is spent by many people, benefiting each of them while you’re still holding onto your Bitcoin hoping it’ll reach $110k next. You do not want to live in a country where people are staying out of the local economy.
- the_sleaze_ 2y agoBut gold fluctuates rapidly at times at well. Not the same volatility but it does fall
- wnc3141 2y agoThats deflation, which makes for a poor tender, albeit attractive asset (less of volatility)
- armada651 2y agoI sleep better at night knowing my savings aren't part of a massive Ponzi scheme that's going to one day leave lots of working class people holding the bag as the savings they invested in bitcoin are transferred to the wealthy insiders.
- robocat 2y agoIf you own a house you are part of a Ponzi scheme in most developed nations. Japan already has houses worth $0 because Japan has run out of population growth to keep the demand for houses growing. The same issue will occur in other countries that have low population growth. In New Zealand we have been importing people so house prices have been appreciating. However my impression is that other countries are competing for immigrants (NZ seems to be slowly relaxing our filters). Also if you ever had a mortgage then you had a leveraged investment (often dangerously leveraged).
- agapon 2y ago> If you own a house you are part of a Ponzi scheme in most developed nations. Not unless you explicitly choose to. If you own a house to have a roof above you, to have a comfortable and safe place for you and your family, if you love and care about that place, then that's what you are getting out of the house. Its monetary value changes are "just" a side story. But if you buy a house purely as an investment, then yeah.
- robocat 2y agoIt's part of a Ponzi scheme either way. Even if not an investment, you have to buy it, and it will eventually be sold.
- kalnins 2y agoPeople don't own the house just to sell it for more later on. Some live in them.
- armada651 2y agoYes and that is absolutely a problem, houses should go down in value as they are used just like your car does. The fact that we've learned nothing from all the previous real estate bubbles and continue to use houses as investment opportunities is pure insanity.