Bitcoin Forum

With the increasing influence of Bitcoin in the world, more and more people are supporting and approving Bitcoin. Few mainstream media can directly say that Bitcoin is a scam. However, there are still many opinions saying that Bitcoin is a bubble, and this bubble will eventually burst. Many mainstream economists hold this view. They always oppose Bitcoin for different reasons. Economists are scholars who study economics. They have knowledge and social status far beyond ordinary people. Logically speaking, they should be more able to see the value contained in Bitcoin. Why are some economists always opposed to Bitcoin?

In my opinion, this is determined by the interests they represent. Many economists currently do not live independently. They need to depend on the government to survive. They need to help the government formulate various economic policies, financial policies, and monetary policies, so their starting point and interests must represent the government's will and interests. Therefore, in their world, the status of legal tender must be the most important and correct. On the contrary, they have forgotten the demands of the people and the interests of the people. Bitcoin stands on the side of the people, allowing the people to obtain their own asset freedom, and naturally stands on the opposite side of some economists.

This is my point of view, what do you think of this?

Because the development of things does not happen overnight, just like turning a book,
Although the content of this page is different from the previous page, it still maintains continuity.
No matter how small it is and how weak its current impact is, bitcoin digital currency has become a fait accompli. The reason many economists reject it is simply that the existence of bitcoin has affected the existing economic order. For the country , The macro economy receives a shock, or the hegemony of a currency, or the current SWIFT settlement system may go bankrupt. Bitcoin affects national interests.
A very simple example, if you smoke a cigarette,Would you light the cigarette in reverse？ When the inherent economic model and habits are broken, there will always be different voices and rejections. This is normal, and it also shows that the development trend of Bitcoin is irreversible.

The mainstream media has repeatedly been wrong about Bitcoin among other things. They will publish stories that generate clicks based on ignorance and hysterics.

More recently however, there has been positive stories about Crypto especially with NFTs.

Not many, only some.
And the media is only reporting what gets them the more attention. At times like this when price has not made any major moves for more than 2 months the negative articles will get the most amount of attention so obviously they keep quoting those who have said something negative about bitcoin. In a couple of months ago when price was rising consistently every week the exact opposite was true as they published anything that was positive.

Why are these people positive or negative about bitcoin? In my experience it is almost always out of self interest.

I think the moment that the most influential and controversial investigative journalists died, media was never the same, it became a way to make money by manipulating the thoughts of many people. So I am not surprised that they are attacking bitcoin through mainstream media. This is just my theory but the growth of Axie Infinity might be the reason why there is a positive stories regarding NFTs.

Yes, yes, although I am not an economist, I do not allow other people to come up in my bed, and the title of economist is also given by the government, which is more like the government’s mouth talking, telling everyone, This is not allowed, this is a Ponzi scheme and so on.

I do not think this is really true though. I am sure a lot of mainstream economists if you put them in a room will have 10 different point of views and argue about everything a lot. And maybe Bitcoin could be one of 10 opposing views,,, this is not for BTC or against BTC, BTC is just one of many alternatives.

Even Nobel Prize winners in Economy never got their recognition right away, some waited decades before people saw their truths:)

For some mainstream economist, they see bitcoin as something that can disrupt the norm. And we all know that people resists changes. But there are some who are very positive on what bitcoin can bring specially to the majority. They saw it as something that can tip the balance of power, sort of. And it can give financial freedom specially for those who are unbanked. Giving them a lot of opportunity to manage and earn.

economists only understand the old economic theory they get from their lectures...

while Bitcoin is a new thing that they can't understand with their theory that's why they always associate Bitcoin with tulipmania. if they care about people then they will definitely say Bitcoin is the right choice for investing and also transacting large amounts.

Economy is a Social Sciences.

"Economics is a social science because it examines the social behavior of human beings with regards to allocation of scarce resources in order to meet the needs of each individual in the society. Economics does not only involve production and distribution of goods and services, but also the human factor."

--Web Bot Crawlers

For one is that even if they agree to adopt Bitcoin, they seem too late to buy at $30,000 each. The price is just not going to make them think their holding will be profitable for them to stack. And second, they are very much rooted in the fiat system which they know the government still will bail them out.

They are still in the delima whether they really could adopt Bitcoin while the rest had thousands of BTC in their wallet because they are early investors.

Remember. Every discipline has its disciples and every school of thought can be found. Economists aren't a bunch of people just siding with one ideal or other.

And the media probably isn't going to sit around and wait for pro Bitcoiners to reach out for an interview.

Most of what you read is directed media. Media got to eat too so they find opposing thoughts. Makes for better readership.

Think you'll find more plurality in universities teaching economics. Maybe not even more Bitcoin enthusiasts but even crazier guys!

I would say the OP is right and the majority of economists calls Bitcoin out as being a big fat bubble but nothing else. Maybe they lack understanding, maybe they are even right. First and foremost I think that a lack of knowledge in technology combined with monetary theory may lead them to their negative conclusions about Bitcoin. Most of them often argue that it is inconvenient and expensive to use, but that is only the first half of the sentence because Bitcoin can improve. If you just look at that statement, they are correct. For now Bitcoin isn't what it probably is supposed to be, but that doesn't mean it is the end of the story as those economists often put it.

In many cases, Bitcoin is inherently opposed to governments. What the government pursues is centralized power and centralized management. What Bitcoin pursues is decentralized governance. These are two completely different concepts. At the same time, it is more important that Bitcoin is a collection of multidisciplinary knowledge. Economists mainly focus on thinking in the field of economics. They do not understand knowledge other than Bitcoin economics, so they cannot make an objective assessment of the value of Bitcoin.

Economists are traditional ones and they mostly can not accept what Bitcoin brought to the world, change the world, and made the financial party becomes more decentralized.

Most of them are old enough to reject new terminologies and weird technology. In fact blockchain technology has no longer been weird after more than 10 years of growth.

Some of them oppose Bitcoin and crypto because they want to protect what they love and what they are familiar with, under central bank control.

We have to understand that these economists have not actually studied and observe Bitcoin for a considerable period of time and so they have no clear basis for the warnings that they are spewing except the fact that they are fearing that what happened with the Tulip mania before can also happen with Bitcoin. And for the past more than 10 years, Bitcoin has had proved these economists wrong plain and simple. In the past, many experts pronounced Bitcoin to be dead...unfortunately for them Bitcoin keep on resurrecting  itself. There must be something with Bitcoin that these so-called experts don't and maybe could not comprehend.

something that can't be controlled is a scary thing. maybe this is what they think, and also seems to interfere with the existing system. that's why economists don't like crypto. they fear that crypto is undermining the current financial system, which gives them an advantage. they resist change. do not want to develop for the better and are comfortable with existing technology. this kind of thinking is already primitive, and if they don't change they will be left behind by the times.

it's all personal interest, now it's time for settings, other mouths are different in the heart, there are some people who always post negative things about bitcoin, even though he always collects bitcoins, for the benefit of his assets, because nowadays it's hard to distinguish which is sincere and No, sometimes the mouth is sweet but the heart is rotten, and vice versa, what is certain is that whatever they post is definitely for their personal interests, to seek sensation, to seek sympathy, some are looking for profit..

There are many economists who oppose bitcoin it usually depends on their personal interests in some countries there is no law on bitcoin, while in many countries bitcoin transactions are legal however regulators economists and other stakeholders around the world have warned that investing in cryptocurrencies is risky as their prices rise and fall sharply. I think investing in bitcoin without opposition will help improve their country's economy.

Very well said, Bitcoin is indeed a lot of things. It combines literally any science out there in one or or another way or at least touches upon them or has an impact on them. Only because Bitcoin is about decentralized governance, mainstream economists should still be able to objectively get their head around Bitcoin and whether it could play an important role in global monetary order and systems.

what these.economists do, of course, has.an instant. basis, for example, a change that occurs.in an.instant that makes.everyone astonished.but they only see the results and do not see when we experience a loss and then they make a statement that is.hateful.towards the crypto currency

not only that. they also think bitcoin is too risky an investment, because it looks like a big bubble. nor can we assume that their choice is wrong. because in fact it is. but what I regret is that they only see that extent. economists don't see the full potential of blockchain. they just see bitcoin as a threat. but turn a blind eye to the underlying technology.

They cant see the bitcoin's worth yet. All they believe is that, bitcoin is a threat towards government and can not be a help in economy. On the other side, bitcoin can still see as a good reason to contribute to the economic rise. As some point, it can also be a help to boost those contries that are at developing stage.

It is simply because of the danger it imposes to a certain economy considering how much financial freedom it gives to people. They tend to choose to go against bitcoin because they are too afraid to accept the fact that at some point, it can save a country's economy and make it improve after just a short period of time. Nevertheless, it doesn't remove the fact that bitcoin is a risk that a country should never take right away, it needs to be thought through before committing completely. Soon they will see how useful bitcoin can be and start agreeing with it regulation in improving the economy.

Because they think that their knowledge is absolute and that they don't consider new technology in finances such as bitcoin as a thing. Plus they really have this subconscious feeling that they are saving people from potential scam just because they don't exactly understand how bitcoin works. Ignorance isn't a bliss sometimes because you have to be open to new knowledge and information, it's how learning should be, continuous.

Economics has always been a game of trial and error. Many brilliant economists have walked on this earth for the past centuries. They debate, discuss, disagree with each other. Some theories prevail over others. New theories replace another. An emerging one debunks an old standard. And so on. But look where we are now.

The point is that some economists are not supporting Bitcoin not because they are somehow committed to the government but because they simply have different views. And considering that Bitcoin is generally alien and is also more than just economics, many economists must have been confused with it, the technology behind it, how it works, and so on.

It is simply coming from a strange paradigm which mustn't have been thoroughly explored by majority of the economists. Who would've theorized on a monetary system which is beyond the power of the state and its sanctioned entities? No mainstream economist would have imagined of a certain country's economy to be built on a currency which is beyond the control of those who are tasked to create the nation's economic blueprint for the next years or decades.

               Whichever the case, the main point about this is that all of the people in this world do almost everything they do every day because they can expect to gain something out of those things they do. Now some may be different and do something that would benefit others more than it would benefit themselves but there is a huge chance that these things they do are just for show to boost their image. But regardless, we cannot judge anyone just because of a few things that we see them do. People have reasons for their actions that are influenced by their needs, culture, environment and so on. So unless we know everything, we should just keep our opinions about other people to ourselves. The same goes in this industry. We buy then sell, some shill, while others talk trash about other coins. That's just how things are. And thus, no matter how bad some of these may taste on our throats, it is undeniable that all these are vital ingredients that make this industry whole, continue to strive and give benefits to anyone who knows how to take advantage of most situations.

Very few oppose this. I personally have a thought, these people are already in the elite category. They doesn't want the middle class and the lower class people to improve their lifestyle and turn themselves rich. The middle class people are the one who work hard and make use of the opportunity than the rich. This way they'll give the best to learn and earn through cryptocurrency. There is risk, but realising the same when people are ready to invest these economists make some panicking statement.

your review is very reasonable and very solid, most of those who hate bitcoin are average rich people, government and millionaires, their reasons to scare weak hands, don't know bitcoin, and say bitcoin is a scam, and not clear, mostly the nature of the rich, do not want others to equal his wealth.

You have mentioned the real reason that they oppose bitcoin and that is because they feel it is not felt physically, seen to interact with economic indicators etc but I think the solution to this illusion is to involve Blockchain and cryptocurrency in the academic curriculum for students to start formal study in schools. This will help to diffuse the notion of bubble . The bubble story has been on since the beginning which is a huge critism from the economist.

actually not all economists think the same and only a few are old-fashioned like this,
this is very reasonable because there are several reasons that I can conclude here
the first is how does one get an economist degree? none other than the answer is from the government itself so that indirectly the economists say like directives from the government and directly aware of it or not this refers to a mindset which if bitcoin continues to soar it will become a chaos in the economy.
the second is that these economists only know about theory and rarely practice directly so that they think the theory they learn is generally correct even with the old theory so they don't want to take risks by making new steps and changing from their comfort zone. they can now.
this is just a mindset that is applied how we accept it or not
apart from that I prefer to be here now whether it can be destructive or not according to them because as far as I walk in crypto I don't know about what they are talking about whether it's a scam or a bubble that is like a bomb just waiting for time to end

Not being able to physically feel Bitcoin's existence is a good point if you look from a different perspective. It able to make other didn't know what is your possession in term of money. I rather think it is wholly based on the personal interest about why they look at Bitcoin that way. But I didn't believe they reach that level of ignorance if they based their decision because of it, people just stay behind their own motive, rather embracing the adoption of Bitcoin.

Probably they have little knowledge about btc or not yet sure what to make of the space yet,  from the look of things those who oppose are dropping in number compare to before, this days there are more economist not against crypto than before,  just as we have many institutions now supporting btc more than what it use to be, now the narratives has changed quite a lot,  btc is no longer seen as bad rather on the contrary.

maybe they feel very surprised by the very rapid development of bitcoin which is so much in demand by its players as is happening at this time, so they build a very negative opinion on the crypto world. satisfied with the current drop in the price of bitcoin, so many people will leave the crypto world to return to the business they control

yes , it is exaggerate to say that "MANY" when there are no actual proof of this claims , there might be some who oppose but majority of them are just riding the situation meaning they have no actual stand but what they do is putting their side on what is popular and what can make them profiting,
by all means this are just a Stupidity idea of other streamers and economists .

Bitcoin is trying to break the system, the system they utilized to increase the size of their empire. It matters to them cause it might cause a drastic effect, and the outcome doesn't reflect on their view. Blockchain technology has more to prove; if it reached the status of being a household name, we could get more acceptance.

In my opinion, economists are good at summarizing past events, not the future. Bitcoin is an important economic phenomenon in the future. They don't want to think about the future. When Bitcoin has been widely recognized, economists will say yes. :-X

Economists are old people who never actually knows what is bitcoin so they assume that bitcoin can be created by anyone for that they are mentioning about mining but mining is different and no one is earning bitcoin for free. Other set of people know the decentralization will make the fiat money useless so they are strongly opposing that it is a private currency meanwhile they spent their whole life to earn paper which we are using as money.

The reason is simply in the ending statement of yours. Humanity is after power, everyone wants to control one another most especial the government and elite among us. Now if you're to take away that opportunity to control, don't you think those previously benefiting will give it a fight and not just let go willing, that's exactly what the government through the economist are doing.

Mainstream economist just don't want to let go of all they were taught and learnt in college/university about the financial system. They were made to believe money is what the Fiat system is operating without realizing their a better alternative in decentralized finance.

While some economist do this on purpose so as to decieve the general public while loading up their bags, others are ignorant of this information but with time, they'll all come to realize the true potential of the industry but hope by then, it won't be late.

No one can stop the trend of historical development and civilization evolution. At the moment Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin, there was no artificial force to stop the development of Bitcoin. The history of the past 12 years presents this perfectly. Many economists are now defending the old economic and financial system and are launching a war against Bitcoin. However, when some people find that no one can stop Bitcoin in the end, they will also turn around and start supporting Bitcoin. This is the inevitability of historical development.

It is not surprising to see some of these old school economists badmouthing Bitcoin. Their entire career has been built on mainstream economy, which frowns upon new innovations such as Bitcoin which deviates from the fiat-based core. Also, for someone who is so attached to the fiat-based economy for many decades, it is never easy to think about some other sector, which is drastically opposite. And this is exactly the reason why those in 20s and 30s find Bitcoin more attractive, when compared to those in their middle ages.

In my opinion the real reason behind some of the statments that a bunch of these econimmest that give about bitcoin and crypto, is generaly because they wanna protect their investments, because if you think about it who is going to get hurt from crypto rising up and becoming more mainstream, the awnser is the banks it eliminates the need for them, and if crypto rises above all the other investments these poeple will lose money, so its in thier best intrest to talk shit about it.

The ideology of promoting and refusing to accept blockchain technology is an obvious "contradiction".  They stand with what they feel they deserve from the government, face the selfishness and that is the nature of being anti-bitcoin.  Check out Visa's latest moves for Australia.  It is a worthy thing about change. https://cointelegraph.com/news/visa-to-approve-bitcoin-spending-card-for-australian-startup-cryptospend (https://cointelegraph.com/news/visa-to-approve-bitcoin-spending-card-for-australian-startup-cryptospend)

I think not all economists.do that, there.are still many economists.who also want change, but for.economists who reject it they are afraid.of what they think will be rivaled.by the presence.of the bitcoin world which provides.many changes.to boost the economy.of a country they want. think that the crypto world will rule the world which can make them.slowly disappear

Not all economists are investors but they know the importance of investment and if someone being an economist then they are not going to invest on any assets which will depreciate with the fall of fiat purchasing power so if fiat losses they are going to make more money actually but the real reason is they don't understand the technology behind it even though they understand the decentralization, most of them believes that bitcoin can be made with a single click on a computer but it will never be like that.

Here is the list of reasons that I think cause mainstream economists oppose bitcoin:

1. Economists are sponsored by the government to study economics and they are obliged to follow some sort of instruction that could gain and win the citizens' heart, in favor of course, to the state.
Maybe the economists that we keep on seeing opposing and invalidating the victories of bitcoin are allied of the state that is against cryptocurrency community. With this, they just have to follow their higher ups command that is to negate the positive claims in using bitcoin, so that they would look superior and people will not be enticed to enter crypto world.

2.These kind of economists follow the old teachings, hence, aren't open-minded about what bitcoin has to offer.

Like what they often say, you can't teach an old dog new tricks. Maybe this applies to them. Some people have the tendency to be stubborn because they are confident enough that they know it all. They don't want to view things from a different angle. They don't want to discover and try new things. What they have learned and knew before, they will apply it up until the present, disregarding the updated facts and additional information.

3. Economists don't really care about the needs and disposition of the people.
Economists are not financial advisors and they do not aim to help us achieve our aspirations such as climbing the top. They are in it for money, to serve the well-being of the state and not the citizens. Maybe they are opposing bitcoin for a reason of not wanting the majority achieve financial freedom and financial independence. Because if that thing happens, the people will be completely free of what they will say. People will not mind their prediction because they have proven that bitcoin has indeed a lot of benefits and can really save them to a lot of troubles.

Only a few of them just know and give the real thought about Bitcoin, but many were assuming that they are right and predicting Bitcoin is only a scam thing. Paid economists, paid reports, all of these things happen because of our differences and personal interest. It is simply why they don't accept the truth about Bitcoin it is because they are losing their business.

The opposition.made by economists.of course, there are several factors.including dropping.bitcoin so that there will be less interest.in investing.their shares.in bitcoin, of course they are also very surprised.by the real development of bitcoin because it will also involve.the future of their business which will reduce the interest.in them.to their business

The old school FIAT system has to protect their economic hold over people, so they keep with the old school education. Sheep will go where the "sheep dogs" will guide them..... Why? ....because they fear the dogs. These old school economist fear their peers and also the government and Banks that tells them what to do.  ::)

Also, the old Fiat Stock markets and trading platforms are the playground of the rich and the educated.... they have to protect that advantage and the "fees" that they charge for financial advice. (Brokers)

Now suddenly uneducated people are trading Crypto currencies without intermediaries and broker fees and "special" knowledge and those people hate that.  ;)

I couldn't agree more, because when my lecturer taught me how the stock investment flow, that looks like only for they are clever who can invest in stock market meanwhile I was a poor student without much pocket money but really want to come out from the poverty then I found BTC. Although for the first time, I dont believe with BTC but for next my friend encourage me to start investing in BTC and I feel better than before, in crypto market the flow is easy to understand and without broker fee or anything else. Just use ur own brain and that really helps me.

This is something that I would definitely agree with. These people, who can be considered as of the old era, refuse to change their ways and thus influence others. Whereas, with this crypto breakthrough, many realized that there are far more ways to trade and invest aside from those being taught and believed by such people. With crypto, many were uncovered and no biases linger since everyone are welcome.

why most mainstream economists always oppose bitcoin, in my opinion the reason is simple, they are afraid of being rivaled, since the presence of bitcoin many people have moved to bitcoin, you can say they are very afraid, because people who invest with them move to bitcoin, so they always slander bitcoin , let people feel afraid to play in bitcoin...

I think it's just a trick so economists can buy bitcoin at a cheaper price. In recent years we can see that bitcoin has experienced a very high price increase compared to gold. From the fact that we have seen that bitcoin is very promising for its holders if they are willing to be patient to hold bitcoin until the price rises very high. Even though the price of bitcoin has decreased very far but at some point the price of bitcoin will definitely rise higher and it will definitely happen, so don't be disappointed if the price of bitcoin has decreased.

They don't categorically oppose bitcoin. The news cycle however tends to magnify those economists who are not fans of bitcoin more so than those whose opinions are supportive.

I think you just nailed it. We see the so called specialists because they appear on the media (our main source of information), so it's natural the media only invites specialists who corroborate with their point of view, that is the same point of view of governments, since there is a lot of public sponsorship at mainstream media channels or sponsorship from businessmen who have deals and are benefited by the governments.
All these people are linked in a chain that will defend the interests of each other, while the individuals stay outside this chain, only being abused by these entities who rule the world as we know. But I believe there are many economists who also think the opposite of what we see on the main channels, however they are never going to be highlighted anywhere.

They are actually opposing bitcoin and the majority of them are waiting for bitcoin to fall. Even if it's just a bear market, they'll say such negative thoughts that it's bound to go zero and its death. That has been heard so many times that it made bitcoin died 400+ times in the record. They are more with the traditional assets and these economists in the mainstream are not yet willing to adopt the newest trend in investing and that's all about the digital assets and economy.

These three summaries of yours are very good and very systematic. I believe many friends have similar views. Nowadays, many economists are more defenders of the old economic and financial system. They are employed by the government and naturally stand in opposition to ordinary working people.

Either they didn't understand about the bitcoin or the acknowledged the consequences of decentralized finance sectors are the most common reasons meanwhile their experience is a real barriers to explore something new no matter it is good or bad, they just want to stick with their old school and end their life they don't want to take any risk at their very later age period.

True. Not all but mostly oppose because crypto  technology will replace the current banking system which they never want. The lesson of the history is people always oppose change and want to maintain status quo but change is the only constant. Crypto is a reality , better technology and it is unstoppable, we like it or not one day it will rule the world.

It is very easy to know why this is the case, after all if you are being paid to not understand something then it does not matter how many times a concept is explained to you it will be impossible for you to get it.

Basically economists are invested in the current model and since they get their living out of it they cannot understand bitcoin at all, also this is a matter of pride, they believe they are the masters of the universe and for an unknown person to create the best currency the world has ever seen is something they cannot tolerate and as such some criticize bitcoin out of envy.

Exactly, They are the beneficiary of current financial Model and make their living out of it which makes rich richer and poor poorer. The vested interests will always oppose any new Technology that can potentially challenge  their interest but Bitcoin is here to stay and will replace the current financial system which is very un-democratic and serves the interest of elites but commons suffer.

Now that bitcoin has become a reality Where are these people when the bitcoin goes up? Sometimes the bitcoin starts to come down, these people are visible That is their job bitcoin is Bad this is a bubble we are listening to years ago but bitcoin is a new digital asset this is a reality and no buddy can stop bitcoin we are lucky to collect some bitcoins hope we see good futures.

It is time to accustom yourself to the fact that there may be different views and different opinions on the ongoing processes and it is not at all necessary to see only selfish interest and malicious intent in the opposite point of view. Moreover, economics has never been and is not an exact science like mathematics, physics or chemistry, so the conclusions of some economists are not the ultimate truth and can be interpreted both in this and in another direction. If bitcoin as an asset shows signs of overheating or a bubble, then there is no need to immediately deny it and assert the opposite only because of sympathy for bitcoin, cryptocurrencies and everything that is behind it. You just need to be objective and not be afraid to call white white and black black.

Yes, economics is fundamentally different from physics and mathematics. One belongs to the social sciences, and there is no standard answer. The other is natural science and must be rigorous and careful. I believe that as Bitcoin's global consensus becomes stronger and stronger, more and more economists will re-examine the historical role of Bitcoin. They no longer proceed from their own interests, but from the entire human currency system. How to build a more healthy, fair, efficient, and low-cost global currency network. In any case, I firmly believe that Bitcoin is the future of mankind.

Economist are only thinking traditional currencies where they don't want to be get involved in what we are calling cryptocurrencies.

As it is only accessible through the use of internet and digital technologies, they don't want to engage on it.

But some so called lowkey economist who are not popular are absolutely investing on cryptocurrency as they know that cryptos really proved many things.

maybe now everyone knows.that bitcoin is.growing so fast and growing in.the economy.and does not.involve anyone, maybe this can.also trigger economists.to oppose the mainstream of bitcoin at this time, because they will hate it.very much with the development of the crypto world, this is.it which is.the main trigger that is so significant.to the opposition.made by some.economists to the crypto world

Ever heard of the phrase "bitcoin is against the central bank"....economists and banks learn the same thing about money, when Bitcoin appeared it was like destroying or changing what they had learned for decades. 

Bitcoin will always go against the conservative economists mainstream.

In my opinion, not all economists are against the movement of Bitcoin flows, because those who oppose it are people who do not know how Crypto works. Meanwhile, the economy is now more digital, where transactions are easy and there are no delays. But on the other hand, some economists predict the risk of digital asset owners, especially in investments that can harm the country. But this is not a serious problem because as much as people hate the development of Bitcoin, slowly the economy is changing in the digital age which allows everyone to own digital assets.

I have heard a lot about fake news about BTC, they say BTC is just a scam or defame BTC, but personally I think they are just blind technology people who do not know how to follow the current new development, uninformed and uninformed about the potential future of BTC.

Economists probably prefer to keep the old orthodox views and systems when their years of research into economics is based on these theories, there aren't too many cases that can make them misanalyze but since facing bitcoin they become more and more wrong, from times and then several times, a system that is anti-normative and can be called unorthodox, allowing the creation of the most absurd things. Embarrassed and angry at the points that go against their theory, they may need to absorb this new culture

the government is against for bitcoin, how will the mainstream media make positive news about bitcoin?

the media never dares to work against the government. in a word the media of my country is a servant of the government.
media promote bitcoin very negatively like it's scam because it's not controlled by no one country.

Unfortunately, most mainstream economists are so used with the traditional types of investment instruments in the market. Anything that is relatively new (especially if media has stigmatized BTCs), they would oppose it.

The problem with most mainstream economists stems from being too close-minded to change. They oppose the idea that a revolutionary payment scheme that eliminates third-party consensus cannot be sustainable in the long-term. But in fact, this would be the main consideration in the near future where the world shifts to digital currency- and the blockchain technology will play a huge part on that.

These economists who oppose Bitcoin behave very differently so they are not able to accept this technology.  Maybe because they are more aware of the cons of being volatile and unpredictable, they simply don’t fully understand the importance and the benefits it brings to the continued development of the financial aspect and the benefits it brings to having freedom in the digital assets and in conducting online transactions.

because they are also very surprised by the rapid development of bitcoin in such a short time, and its impact is also very changing for investors, so this is what makes so many economists against the crypto world so that they make opinions that can bring bitcoin down , and also added by many countries that prohibit the circulation of bitcoin in various countries in the world

Quite honestly I do not even put too much blame on them as this is just human nature, those that are at the top will want to remain there so they are naturally against any technology that may take them off that position.

For example this happened with electricity, back then most people used kerosene and candles to light their homes and the streets so when electricity appeared the ones that controlled those businesses did everything to avoid the adoption of this new technology, but they failed, and they failed because electricity was the best out of the two technologies, and I expect something similar to happen to bitcoin.

Basically there's no point for them to say good things about bitcoin, because these people has been paid a huge amount of dollars just to say bad image about cryptocurrency. They opposed all over again even though the price went so high, and with their frustrations they're creating different rumors and black propagandas against bitcoin. How much worst when there's a news which relates to bitcoin, they'll make it more exaggerating.

actually I don't really think about this, after all, everyone has the right to support crypto or not according to their own understanding. we know that systems involving cryptocurrencies are in stark contrast to the centralized economic systems currently implemented around the world. maybe, this system disturbs the existing order and can be a big threat to them. I dunno, I don't really know technically about that. what is clear I can take advantage of here then it is more than enough. while the issues of both pros and cons from world economists, consider it to create waves in the crypto ecosystem so that it is not boring.

You could be talking about the so-called "seasoned" economists who have been honing their craft for a lengthy amount of time yet have not been accustomed to the current face of world economy, because I have seen a couple of mew-age economists who are quite happy that a thing such as bitcoin existed. Then again these aforementioned economists will base their statements and stands about a certain issue in accordance to whatever happened in the past and the current trends leading up to it, for these old-timers they may have not seen something like bitcoin before and the fact that it is revolutionizing the system is quite scary for them, hence the opposition. This is also a possibility. Huge corporations paying world-renowned economists to throw shade at cryptocurrency and bitcoin to influence the people to not invest on it is a common smear campaign that is also quite effective, as it is done by major brands against their competitors in the past.

Its a free market then its really free for everyone to dive in and make out their own sentiments or opiniongs.It is just that the community is really just  too reactive or mindful on whats those words is all  about.

Always opposing bitcoin? For sure they will but not all would be diving on the same bandwagon and would definitely realize if they do prove out for theirselves about its usefulness or relevance.

Also,we dont even know if those  no-coiners or trying out to say negative things on bitcoin but secretly accumulating it and wouldnt be known on the public.

Yes, it still doesn't satisfy them, and I think they also have their own positions and arguments. The right or wrong of the matter depends on the perception of the viewer, but I don't see many people who are against it. Perhaps it is more true that there are only a few who still do not want to accept them into this world.

It doesn't rule out the possibility, however the response of economists to bitcoin, what is clear is that I believe that people will continue to maintain their activities in bitcoin, this will not be abandoned, those who have long been tied to bitcoin will be increasingly attached and I think the power of bitcoin will increase over time from time to time even though it is not yet fully legal and is still considered by most governments. This is still like a great hope for the people to improve their lives in terms of finances.

Mainstream economists are usually more on the side of the government, so it's no wonder they are against Bitcoin. As you said there are still
many countries whose governments have not legalized Bitcoin, This means that the government is not comfortable with Bitcoin that cannot be
controlled. But I agree as time goes Bitcoin is growing and getting stronger, because it has been proven that Bitcoin can improve the finances of
many people. Even I also feel it, I have been investing in Bitcoin for five years and there are many things that I can buy from the profits I get
from Bitcoin. So in the future mainstream economists will slowly move in favor of Bitcoin I believe in that.

I think economists look bitcoin in a wide view. So they not only see bitcoin itself but combine it with the whole economic factors. I learn economic but just learn economic is not enough. I learn business management which there I learn how entrepreneur changes the world to be better. Entrepreneurs create innovation then companies copies the technology and spread it. I prefer like to hear what CEO said rather than economists, because CEO see the future. I usually hear what leader or CEO of ETH said, people behind ETH understands more than economists. Bitcoin ease people to do transactions, people is the main factors in economy so if people can do more in economy then economy growth will be better. That's my opinion.

it's like a double-edged knife, it could be good for bitcoin or it's rivaled, so they can ruin the development of bitcoin. Since bitcoin is almost taking over the entire industry, some industries that don't accept bitcoin are definitely looking to break it.

Yes, this is also my main point. Bitcoin is a product of multidisciplinary knowledge. We must look at the changes that Bitcoin has made to human society from different disciplines. We cannot use a single knowledge to explain Bitcoin, we must understand it from different fields. Therefore, many times CEOs understand the logic behind Bitcoin better than economists. Because CEOs pay more attention to the layout of the future world, economists pay more attention to maintaining the existing order.

Good explanation @shasha80. The economists' opposition to bitcoin usage are a little high as per the current picture because they aren’t that much comfortable with it. This can change in the future as the upcoming economist generation is under the modern era.

it's true as you said, they did everything possible to bring down bitcoin, and make people no longer believe in bitcoin, actually they hate bitcoin because they have lost, in the competition, because bitcoin has reached a high level,, but whatever their way to dropped bitcoin and scared the public, but in the end their efforts failed miserably, and yielded no results..

Yes, the prosperity and development of Bitcoin has become the trend of the times, and no force can stop it. No matter what economists say that Bitcoin is not good, Bitcoin is proving its unique advantages to the people. Bitcoin has truly liberated the minds of ordinary people. It has not only allowed us to gain freedom of wealth, but also freedom of thought, allowing us to gain true freedom and equality.

Investors, orthodox economists always believe that an asset must be legalized and secured. Meanwhile, bitcoin has not yet reached, the risk of bitcoin investment is still high because of the volatility, they fear past bubble bursts. That scenario has changed, bitcoin is the only craze right now. While the delicacies of mainstream economists are real estate, securities, ... are standing on the edge of the abyss. I'm not sure if they've changed this mindset?
While institutional investors have been more progressive and confident when choosing to invest in bitcoin and crypto, they are the opposite. I very much hope that the conservatism of these mainstream economists will end soon.

Many economists were probably educated to believe that the government/central banks control money and only government money is legal and viable. The economics they know has entirely to do with the machinations of governments and central banks, so talking about money outside of these institutions doesn't even make sense to them. Bitcoin is an entirely new sort of monetary asset that doesn't fit into this structure so they simply dismiss it. Perhaps if Bitcoin came out when they were first learning economics they would have been thrilled by it, but they were educated in the pre-decentralized era and simply don't see it fitting into the world they were taught about.

Most people are most creative and most able to understand new things when they are younger, and as they get older and their era of learning a field becomes distant past for them, they are unable to accept new breakthroughs or ideas even in their own field. This is why it is people in their 20s and 30s that usually do the most important groundbreaking work for humanity and build upon the most important new ideas, because people get "set in their ways" the older you get. That's why every generation the old look down at the young like they are crazy and the young look down at the old like they are out of touch.

For example, even take an absolute absurd god-level creative genius like Einstein, he blew the world away in his 20s and 30s with Special Relativity and General Relativity as well as a few other things. In his 40s Quantum Mechanics grew into a full fledged field, and while he continued to accomplish some things in physics, he spent most of his last 3 decades fighting against quantum mechanics because he was already past his most creative years and so his mind couldn't accept this radically different reality. If instead of focusing on coming up with a Field Theory to replace quantum mechanics, if he could have continued using his immense creative powers to work on quantum mechanics maybe he would have discovered breakthroughs in that years before those discoveries happened.

People become more rigid in their thought patterns as they age, and often can't recognize the power of new ideas even when they are considered experts in the field and should be able to pick up these new ideas the easiest. Thus is the case with many economists and Bitcoin. This also shows why Bitcoin became popular with people in their 20s and 30s first, people who were still just learning about finance and investing and had grown up with technology so a purely technological solution to money wasn't so alien to them.

Your answer is great. Many times, older people have solidified their thinking, and they don't want to make too many changes to the world. On the contrary, young people can more easily accept new knowledge. At the same time, they hope to use new knowledge to change their own destiny and achieve stratification. Today Bitcoin brings hope to the straddle of young people. Therefore, more young people love Bitcoin.

I think I am alright with asset being legalized, what I don't like is the orthodox, that means that we can't evolve because we can't or the fundamentals don't let us think outside the box. I think the reason that some of this people hate on bitcoin is probably they think that they are preventing people from losing their money because they thought that anything that you can't hold physically is a type of scam, although not all of them are looking out for people, some just don't believe in it or actively antagonizes it.

 

 Becuz they are funded by current system, wallstreet and bankers hold the strings, control the media and even politicians.

 if they dont defend currennt system, they wont be paid and seen at tv or centre of other big media.

Today's recognized economists, whose opinions we can hear today, were educated in the old days, which even theoretically did not allow the possibility of such digital money, especially decentralized and not issued by governments. Therefore, of course, they cannot give an objective assessment of the events taking place in the global financial market. It is necessary to change the current generation of economists, only then will we be able to hear completely different reasoning. Everything has its time.

sometimes I think, people who vilify bitcoin also invest covertly, it's just their trick to get a low price, when the public starts to get excited and influenced, it slowly brings up good news so the price pumps again, and profit for them... well this is just my imagination ;D
whatever it is actually I don't really care, as long as this can give me the opportunity to earn money then I will use it well. Everything has a risk, if you don't want to take it, it will be difficult for us to grow. experience is the best teacher, if we lose then consider it a cost for learning, and after that we have to evaluate it so we don't get caught up in the same mistakes.

many people also see bitcoin as a threat, and not suitable for use by governments on a large scale. until a lot of negative news about bitcoin was created, we can see that after 2017, where bitcoin was in an extreme crash, many people thought bitcoin without a clear mission, and was just a money game, so many people left it

Yes, everything is possible. Many people use the media to manipulate the market. They slander Bitcoin and cause panic in the market. In the process, people who are not determined will choose to sell Bitcoin. And these people will take the opportunity to buy Bitcoin at a low price.

Or maybe they are truly investing in crypto that is why they are opposing to make the market continue falling so they can buy the cheapest they can get?
imagine that these economist are always seeking for money and crypto currency is the best source of money specially in our time now that electronic money is making the best option , most importantly now that pandemic is around so cashless is what will make people safer.

I once saw the point of view of an economist who said that blockchain technology is good, but people who use blockchain to conduct illegal activities are not.Until now, there are still some economists who cannot agree with Bitcoin. They believe that virtual currency has no intrinsic value. They believe that Bitcoin cannot deduce its intrinsic value based on market value, but Bitcoin economics is fundamentally different from traditional economics. It does not need other conditions to support it. People need Bitcoin, rely on Bitcoin, and believe in Bitcoin. This is the source of its value.
Perhaps few people who oppose Bitcoin really understand Bitcoin and do not feel its beauty.

Yes, in many cases, the position of economists is consistent with the government's interests. Bitcoin is essentially a kind of weakening of government power. Naturally, many economists stand on the opposite side of Bitcoin. However, I believe that as the global consensus of Bitcoin becomes stronger and stronger, a group of new economists based on human digital civilization will gradually emerge, and they will support Bitcoin. It will help Bitcoin to enter the main stage of human civilization.

Economists oppose Bitcoin for a very important reason. Economists understand the concepts of blockchain and cryptocurrency, but they just have a different world view. Many economists are participants in the monetary policy of sovereign countries and are employed by the government. This is what you say for profit. But the economic policies of mainstream economics have seemed feasible in recent decades, but they are still doomed to fail in the long run. The increasing debt fueled by loose monetary policy is simply unsustainable, because either the debt will not be paid off or the purchasing power of fiat currency will disappear.

There are also some economists who look at this issue objectively

Many doesn't want to take new risk and always go to what they know that's why we see them oppose because they don't know on what's really happening also on what it can possibly offer to its user. But if they study how good bitcoin is for sure they will tell that bitcoin is good option in profitability also with as currency to use. For now since this is new to them maybe we should let them discover how big the potential of bitcoin is since for sure they will adopt it if the bitcoin demand will soar high more.

to change the economic order, especially with the opposite characteristics, is not easy, especially in the blink of an eye. therefore we should also understand from the government's point of view, because they think about the country as a whole, not just a group of people although there are also officials who abuse it for bad activities

why are so many mainstream economists always against bitcoin?? I don't think there are many mainstream economists who are anti-bitcoin, I think only a handful of people hate bitcoin, it's just that the media is exaggerating too much, because we know the media wants to seek popularity, and want to increase their income.

Yes, you are right, economists are against BTC as they are an element of another financial system, namely the dollar one. And in more detail, economists are part of the banking system, and BTC is part of the digital one, and at the moment there is a struggle for power between them, at least in the United States. This is why we can observe such a behavior of economists and others towards BTC and the entire crypto industry.

many mainstream economists are always against bitcoin, in my estimation, not many are against bitcoin, I think only the media exaggerates such negative news, only people like warren buffett say Bitcoin has no unique value at all,
Warren Buffett dislikes Bitcoin because he considers it an unproductive asset.

Because that’s not what they were thought. Economists see things differently, and the reason why some of them oppose Bitcoin is because they can’t see where the value is coming. They believe that since whatever value we are seeing there is there because someone says so, then it’s not real. They want it to have somewhere that the value is attached to, and not just a value that is there because people says so.

It makes them to feel that Bitcoin is scam. If you look at Bitcoin the value that we have now is there because of trust; the more we invest in it the more the value grows. So, most of them can’t come to agree with this. That’s what I feel is making a lot of them to believe in Bitcoin being legit. But, that shouldn’t be a problem for us since it is not meant for everyone.

Yes, you sum it up very well. Many economists can't see the value of Bitcoin. Let's not talk about the position they represent. The most basic thing is because they don't understand the source of Bitcoin's value. The source of Bitcoin's value is based on trust, based on the trust of more and more people in Bitcoin. They are willing to store their wealth in the form of Bitcoin.

Because they didn't buy bitcoins until 2017

One of the biggest employer of mainstream economists are central banks. Their potential employer is the one that will be out of a job if crypto takes off -- of course economists will be against Bitcoin.

The economy that many economists understand is the economy they derived from theory, but digital cryptocurrency is a new type of theory. These economists may not have time to fully understand what this digital cryptocurrency is, but some Economists simply and crudely define it as a scam, which I think is inappropriate.
There are also many who even understand Bitcoin, they represent the government. They cannot express their love for Bitcoin, but can only look for the shortcomings of Bitcoin.

The main job of mainstream economists is to study how to manage and protect existing systems. Even if they are optimistic about Bitcoin, they will not praise Bitcoin.
There are not a few well-known scholars who are optimistic about Bitcoin, but most of them belong to the Austrian school and believe in the free market and free economy.
The main difference between the two factions is their view of the country. Liberal supporters who believe in Bitcoin believe that the government is an oppressive force and hope that its power will be constrained.
Andreas Antonopoulos once said that comparing Bitcoin to traditional currencies is like comparing meteors to dinosaurs. There is no competition between the two-everything is just a matter of time.

Surprisingly the so called professional economist have been calling bitcoin a bubble and bitcoin it still proofing them wrong for over ten years now. They should review their professionalism, maybe bitcoin analysis is out of their scope. Bitcoin existence will never be affected by mainstream economist perception about bitcoin and their news.

Yes, there are currently two financial systems. One is the existing US dollar-centric world monetary system, and it is also a group of vested interests. Most economists belong to this system. Another system is the booming Bitcoin currency system, which is a brand new currency system based on mathematical algorithms. It is a decentralized currency system. The new system is now revolutionizing the old system. In the process, it will definitely be suppressed by the old system.

well because bitcoin is a very unorthodox type of investment, and for the past few years the price of bitcoin has been slowly getting bigger and bigger, this alarms the economists because bitcoin does not depend on the stock market and it is intangible thus making it hard to believe that bitcoin will be a safe investment for the people.

besides, another reason is because the development of bitcoin is feared to make the economy unstable. Many people think that bitcoin will replace fiat someday. while bitcoin is not centralized. so, it will be challenged by the economy in general. in fact, some countries have made regulations banning bitcoin as a currency because it makes fiat endangered, tax problems, and creates some resistance in other economic systems, especially for large countries and corporations.

They do not yet understand the Bitcoin proposition. They think that its "just a currency based on belief of value". They do not see the bigger picture. Simply put, they are talking out of their asses. Mansplaining.

Economists view bitcoin still negatively because they have not fully delved into the development of bitcoin which until now is very high in value, and economists still see the legal status of bitcoin so they still consider bitcoin a bubble that will eventually disappear, and I am sure later economists will believe bitcoin is a digital currency that is worthy of full support from the government for the benefit of the country in increasing its income. Because of this, in the future the development of bitcoin will continue and they will certainly consider.

Its been 10 years and Economist cant even explain how a non tangible asset kept on growing. The hate comes with their prediction and their study but they are proved to be wrong. I think they need to study about crypto in order to give a definite answer and the hate will be replace with knowledge about crypto/btc

The economist has an agenda. And they have a strict line. So you can't blame them for taking the side of the people who are financing the magazine and publication.

Just like you cannot expect Bitcoin.com or any other Bitcoin-related crypto media to suddenly start talking nicely about centralized finance and banking.

Bitcoin people are also predicting fiat and bank collapse since years and it doesn't look like happening anytime soon.

Everyone has their own opinion and they are all entitled to it. Some of them that are talking about Bitcoin do not understand what Bitcoin is all about, if you ask them to explain it to you they won’t be able to explain it at all, so they are saying it based on what they have heard others say they just think that it is scam while it is not.

So, due to their lack of understanding and what they are being told, they’re just going to assume that bitcoin is a scam and they will say things that are bad about it. And then As for others they just feel it is bad because of how Bitcoin is, because they don’t see any company that is behind it as the owner or controls it; a company or someone who can be held responsibility in case of any problem that happens, so that’s why they don’t like it, simply because there is no central control unit.

It speaks volumes about how leaders view their people. They clearly think so little of us that they assume that if people have the ability to do illegal or unethical things that we definitely will. The rich and powerful view the masses with suspicion, and their disdain is palpable.

They don’t like change, they don’t like innovation & people upsetting their apple cart. It’s all a moot point any because they won’t have a choice other than to shut up & accept they were wrong soon any way.

Many of them are obsessed with bitcoin & tweet negatively about it regularly. Peter Schiff is one of the worst.