Bitcoin Forum

In a recent interview on the Futurati Podcast (https://youtu.be/TLHPzPbu5JU?t=848) Bitcoin heavyweight Peter McCormack claimed that Bitcoin would beat out fiat, gold, and other cryptocurrencies to become the money of the future.

Wondering what your thoughts are.

It certainly is possible, but it is not guaranteed.

Keep in mind that gold was the best before Bitcoin, and it hasn't been used as money for a long time.

Also, keep in mind that Peter McCormack is not an expert on Bitcoin, money, or economics. He is obviously an expert on podcasting and interviewing, though.

It was used as a money but later government decided that liquidating gold is not that easy so we have to print a paper which equal the amount of gold reserve we have but at some point the actual intention of fiat changed when gold is not the only source to print how much money then we have inflation, hyper inflation,etc.

To OP, Bitcoin is yet to beat the fiat in terms of medium of exchange, as of now its considered as asset so we can claim that more people see it as digital gold but the vision is still a long way to reach.

Personally I find investing in Bitcoin way more convenient than investing in gold.

I can send money from my bank account to an exchange, which auto-buys bitcoin, and after it passes a threshold, it automatically withdraws it into my own wallet. That means basically I'm almost directly sending fiat and receiving Bitcoin from it into my wallet. It's amazing.

To invest in gold I would have to buy it, wait for it to be shipped or I pick it up and transport it. Very risky and complicated. Plus I have to trust everyone involved in the transaction so that I don't end up getting a fake.

Then to store it properly. It's such a hassle, and what if I need to get fiat from gold, I would have to bring that stuff into a physical shop and sell it there. Some mints don't buy back their own gold.

It just feels so antiquated and inconvenient to invest in gold when there's bitcoin available.

I think it's a matter of time until more and more people realize this.

Bitcoin already won, it's just that a lot of people are not aware of it.

I'm bullish on Bitcoin, but it's more like "Bitcoin is winning" rather than "Bitcoin has won". I mean, we still don't see bitcoin being used as money on brick and mortar stores and everywhere online, right? We're getting there, but definitely not there yet.

Kinda too early to say? I mean sure, Bitcoin's value is BIG, but just look at the number of payment processors, companies, etc that have adopted Bitcoin as a medium for payment. They're rather low in number, and they're all mostly bigwig companies, you'd rarely see (though not impossible to find afaik) small scale businesses accept Bitcoin. We'd actually have to wait to the level where Bitcoin is pretty well known to most people, not just what it is, but also how to use it as a currency.

For gold it took years to get acceptance as an exchange asset from a valuable metal. Bitcoin needs time to attain the same. It has grown good in very short time period, but as money the network is strong for it. The regulation and policies keep it as an alternate. There will be some form of transition with time, maybe with the upcoming generation it can happen. I see the statement from Peter McCormack as the future reality of the market.

I don't think it is possible! In the world of 7 billion population, the capped supply of 21 million bitcoin is way too small regardless of the fact that bitcoin can be used fractions. Bitcoin's blockchain is not powerful enough to scale up towards the need of the world population. So I don't foresee that bitcoin will ever replace the traditional fiat currencies, unless the humankind have to face a nuke war where most institutions will be destroyed.

Bitcoin can beat some traditional investment in terms of ROI (return on investment). As the demand is skyrocketing, the prices are following the same pattern. But it wouldn't eradicate the need to a fiat currency whatsoever.

You have to understand how Peter McCormack work.. to understand why he says things like this. He likes to "trigger people" in his own words... or like he said, “just f—ing winding people up” .....so he will say something controversial to spark a debate.  ::)

The guy is a bitcoin investor and podcast host focused on Bitcoin, so he will not be biased in his opinions and statements towards Bitcoin. He even purchased professional English soccer club Bedford FC and become its chairman to use it as a marketing tool to promote Bitcoin.  ;D

In my opinion... we have won 1 small victory in El Salvador.. but Fiat money still rule the rest of the world.  ::)

Not beating fiat in use, but rather maybe able to beat gold as a form of investment that provides a large return to its owners especially to early investors. what is difficult for btc to beat fiat because of its overly fast-moving price and the media that often preaches bad things about btc.

what he said was too much. defeating gold or fiat, I don't think for this era would be possible. if the world's governments wanted to, today bitcoin could just lose its influence. remember regulation plays an important role in bitcoin existence. and this has limited the potential of bitcoin so far. so if it's called won, it's not quite right. just because some countries have accepted and allowed bitcoin, bitcoin can not be called the best. is still far away and very difficult to realize. Let's take the example of a country that has legalized bitcoin. see elsalvador whether since bitcoin is legal there, bitcoin is the main choice?. I don't think so, because the people there still prioritize fiat.

I definitely don't agree that there is a "war" between Bitcoin and fiat money(or between BTC and any other financial asset).There is no "kill or be killed" on the financial markets.The investors have choice and they could choose both BTC and traditional financial assets,in order to diversify their portfolio.
Bitcoin outperformed traditional financial assets,but I don't think that Bitcoin is ever going to completely "destroy" them and make them obsolete.
All those bullish predictions about Bitcoin becoming "the money of the future" are just what they are-opinions and wishful thinking.

I wouldn't say yet that Bitcoin has won the war, but it has won some important battles. By that I mean that Bitcoin has gradually survived over the last 13 years or so, despite huge headwinds from politics, the financial industry, and to some extent society, and has become so widespread that Bitcoin is hardly questioned from those today anymore. However, I think it is wrong to claim that Bitcoin has also triumphed over money, because in my opinion Bitcoin is currently not an alternative to money, especially for technical reasons, but rather an alternative to gold.

Is fast to say on bitcoin taking over from fiat but I do agree the level it has been accepted is increasing. There are places that lots of people are yet to understand the blockchain so how do bitcoin take over such places. Take over has to be total but for now it is yet to live into that level. Just few countries are positive with bitcoin and majority are not yet but building independent currency in digital.

No it didnt win anything.  It didnt even do anything.  What can you buy with Bitcoin?  Money buys stuff.  Assets inflate into bubbles.  Bitcoin is the later.

I don't agree. It may happen in the future I don't think it happened yet. Also most people think money and currency like they are the same thing. USD is a currency. Gold (i think) is money. Just because we don't use it as a currency, it doesn't mean it is not money.

If bitcoin is going to be money, it should be accepted by almost everybody. I don't think we are there yet.

If we take all this into account, then his opinion is completely irrelevant, as is opinion of most so-called experts who just want to profit by parasitizing on Bitcoin.

---

I can buy almost anything for Bitcoin in my country, crypto payment processors are becoming widely accepted in many online stores that sell everything possible that one could wish for. Your attitude towards Bitcoin is understandable given what you are promoting as the ultimate solution - but for those of us who understand what Bitcoin is, such statements have no effect.

Those stores are auto-settling their crypto into fiat.  It is too volatile to hold on their balance sheets.  

Out of curiosity, what is it that I am perceived to be promoting?

I am not really sure that people do understand what the war on fiat really is? It's the far on the whole economy. The economy governed by the government. I do think that we have to look at the graph and look at the value of fiat during the pandemic and that's when it mattered, people save a lot of fiat in their bank accounts to only realize that they don't own their money for real.
With Bitcoins, it's a money that's *really yours* plus it's a fine asset, even the volatility is something that helps people along the way, during the low prices people generally buy more and at the end they sell when the prices are generally normal, using them as a currency is something that people don't usually do. Therefore we cannot be certain regarding it's use as a currency right now, we still have lot of time to see if it works.

You ever ask yourself why there is not an Iranian Rial stablecoin?  How about an Iraqi Dinar stablecoin?  Weird huh?

There is a huge difference with having already won the war and the potential to do so, bitcoin without a doubt has potential to become the money with the most adoption around the world and displace gold and fiat from their respective spots, however this is still nothing more but a possibility, however it is not as if governments and banks are going to sit down and do nothing in the mean time so we need to prepare for the counterattack and see what they do to try to destroy bitcoin.

In fact, I will take it a step further and say that there were never really a "war" between fiat and crypto. It was about regulations, corruption, centralization, power grap, politicians, banks and many other stuff, the law is made by the powerful for the powerful and decisions in a country is usually based on whoever is closest to the president and the high level officials which is why it is a crooked system. So, there was nothing wrong with fiat, you can still have a very powerful and fair dollars if the people who run the country were fair, but that this doesn't change the fact that we are talking about something that is just tech related or law related.

We are talking about crypto vs fiat and there were never really anything against fiat, it was about how fiat was used and that is the biggest problem. Which is why I believe no war has been won since no war has been wagered.

IMHO,  my answer is based more on how humans react to things over the actual tech of the bitcoin.

Bans and or regulations plus taxes will be attempted on bitcoin with poor results.  But, as the price seems to be rising over time due to peoples belief of a store of value(and money printing) that seems secure(with pretty good evidence).  The fiat side of the equation will probable be forced in to a balancing act to compete against bitcoin. 

So the Point of bitcoin will be achieved even if the coin isn't as successful as everyone here seems to think.   

3 conditions

Fail = fail with possible win(with probably something arising that functions even better then bitcoin)

Tie or balanced = win (I prefer this outcome due to the idea of competition long term is good)

Win all out. = win (newer better ideas still can occur here but will have just a hard time against bitcoin as bitcoin has had)

Im am aware there are other conditions but im lumping them in to those 3 possibles.

I reserve the right to be wrong =>

If bitcoin resolves it's issues like network congestion, I would probably believe what McCormack says about it, I wouldn't believe it because bitcoin hasn't really been upscaled to a point where it's really a global market like fiat, what I mean by that is that everyone is using it and at the same time it can handle all of the incoming transactions without a hitch. On the other issue though, I don't think that bankers will sit idly while their rival financial tool is winning, pretty sure that they're going to be doing something about it.

I think so too but as long as it's going to be used by the people it already achieved its purpose even when it's still in the experiment today. Being a digital asset where the value keeps rising is what makes it attractive which is also what drives people to invest. But the fight is not over we don't know yet in the future if it's still the case because fiat is also turned into digital which is coming through CBDC. What is certain is that BTC will be used as well as digital fiat.

There is really nothing so special with this. Peter McCormack saying exaggerated things in favor of Bitcoin and against fiat, gold, and other cryptocurrencies is like the other Peter, Peter Schiff, saying exaggerated things in favor of gold and against fiat, Bitcoin, and other cryptocurrencies.

We cannot expect unbiased opinions from both men. Objectivity is not something they could stick to in terms of these topics.

I have nothing against the pro-Bitcoin Peter but since he's a Bitcoin heavyweight, things he will be saying about Bitcoin is expected to be like that.

For me, we have not yet won the war. There might be battles we've already won, though.

I do believe that Bitcoin is going to be used more than it’s being used now in the future. There is the tendency of adoption of Bitcoin increasing every time. Even if the government should ban Bitcoin, being decentralized makes it possible for people to still continue making use of this currency, whether it is being allowed in their country or not, through the help of decentralized exchanges.

But one thing, I wouldn’t really agree with is when people say that Bitcoin is going to replace Fiat by becoming the main currency of every country, I don’t really believe such. That is something that we are all sure that is never really going to happen. But in terms of adoption, it is quite possible that Bitcoin is going to gain more adoption in the future and it will be widely used, and it will even be like a regular currency and will be very popular in the future. But it wouldn’t be a replacement .

The fact is that a lot can be bought for Bitcoin, regardless of the fact that payment processors are in play - but that only proves that you are wrong when you say that nothing can be bought for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is conceived as a decentralized cryptocurrency, and the fact that it is increasingly becoming a kind of digital gold is just proof that most people do not understand its true essence.


I don't understand why you ask such a question if the answer is more than obvious? Don't just tell me that your nickname on the forum is completely coincidental and that you have nothing to do with what this service represents? It is fascinating that people who have such an opinion about Bitcoin spend their time on a forum like this - but you are neither the first nor the last to try to sell some idea better than Bitcoin.

Well, the truth is that we are already sure that Fiat is still going to remain the conventional currency. Even countries that are likely to declare Bitcoin a legal tender are still going to continue keeping their Fiat currency, It is not going to be something that they will do away with.

The Fiat currency is part of what serves as a symbol of representation for every country, so the government wouldn't really give up on it and choose Bitcoin as a replacement. Most people now see Bitcoin as an asset, and it’s definitely going to be an on top of the list asset in the future. And also the volume at which it is being used for transactions will also increase in the future. And in countries where it is legally accepted, we are going to see it being accepted in more stores around the world, both offline and online.

There will always be some "famous" people in the finance world, I still do not get how you get famous in the finance world. Like I get the Hollywood celebs and all, they are doing it because they are in front of what we watch and we watch them and they get famous for their amazing performances and we enjoy it and spend time watching them.

Finance people are just finance people, what they do is boring, and we do not even see them, only if they become like some forbes top richest list person or whatever, otherwise they are useless and boring and there is no need to give them any microphone to say something. In both sides there are many idiots and nobody should care even a little to what they are saying.

Maybe in some certain areas bitcoin win knowing how bigger the size of profit we can accumulate if bitcoin price spike up maybe that one he mentioned. But in use case I don't think it won in fiat since this is most use globally and as you mentioned bitcoin didn't reached yet in other parts of the worlds and not all people use this so maybe we cannot agree what he's saying yet.  But maybe in future this one will happen knowing that we are shifting in digital space and for sure bitcoin will excel into that.

The possibilities of btc becoming the money for the future is there but since no one can tell what will happen then it is difficult to agree or disagree, but one thing is clear, btc is gaining ground faster than many people anticipated, few years back nobody would believe this will ever be possible, but today, lots of adoption are coming up and btc gaining popularity among top institutions, so it is just a matter of time before btc fully takes over from the look of things.

Bitcoin has not yet become full-fledged money, that is, it has not become a means of payment widely used in society. Repeated surveys, including on this and other similar forums, have confirmed that bitcoin is extremely little used to buy goods and services. Under such circumstances, it is still too early to even imagine that it will be able to surpass the currency of states and gold as money. And the cryptocurrency is not able to do this. The states will never allow this.

If it has won the "war on money" (wtf?) then why is it almost invariably compared to the US dollar price when discussed in all media around the world. For people to get a gauge of comparison and value, it is still converted back to something that most people understand - a currency that has been around for many decades. If it's won this imaginary war, why is the reserve currency of the world the US dollar and why have big countries like Russia & China outlawed it entirely, making it worthless to use within their borders? People like this talk a big argument and it feels like they become disillusioned by the media bubble they must build around themselves. Bitcoin has proved a great case study, but it is far from perfect and better iterations of cryptocurrency are bound to come along. Even Satoshi would be unlikely to be so ignorant or self absorbed to claim it was perfect.

Its still very early to declare that bitcoin beats them all because the fact is, bitcoin is not yet globally accepted as a means of payment because it has its own issue that the government won't be able to adopt it. And i don't even think that bitcoin is invented in the first place to make a race with fiat and so with gold. Of  course, we all know that bitcoin has higher profits compared to gold but still, majority of the people still chose to invest in gold because its value is more stable than bitcoin and there is less risk on it.

There never was a war on money. Bitcoin has proven that, until now, the demand exceeds the offer and thus there is price increase that is likely to continue. Bitcoin is not the opposite of money, that is just a construct that some people use to convince others to buy. It is rather a tool you can use for the originally intended peer-to-peer transfer of economic units. If now has become a tool for speculation, I do not consider it a success.

Where do we get these titles for being a bitcoin investor? A heavyweight? Come on, he's no different from us that gives his insights about the market. He's obviously telling what he had also told for a long time.
There's the big chance that bitcoin could be the future money but it's more likely becoming a store of value than a currency.

For people who don't know him, he is a former football player and chairman of real Bedford he is also a cryptocurrency podcaster and he is usually positive about bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, many people believe in the bitcoin and fiat war and looking for a winner, but regarding what he said I think even if there is a war between fiat traditional money and cryptocurrencies bitcoin is the winner and known as the new generations of the currencies, but still I believe our world still needs the fiat money and these two are needed in own place depending on the usage and the situation.

Even I agree with him, I just want these words from someone who is as influential as Elon Musk or from any government which is working on adopting bitcoin as their one of legal tender. I mean people who are already into bitcoin may say anything on bitcoin to justify their decision on adopting bitcoin investments which might be having lesser impact on crypto world in terms of bringing new investors (still I agree it will get good vibes among all bitcoiners to invest more or to plan up for more longer duration).

Basically I am not having any different opinion on bitcoin from him; I am also confident about bitcoin to become as a preferred investment to gold and will become a federal reserve for governments hence it will be the money and investment of the future for sure.

It's seems a bit early to declare bitcoins as the winner in the currency wars. Crypto currencies have definitely won some battles in the past, but the war is not over yet. So far there are only a few countries which accepted bitcoins as a legal tender. For me to say that bitcoins won the war would be either after being used as the world currency, so that all international trade will be settled in bitcoins. Or that one of the leading countries will accept bitcoins as a legal tender. At the moment this still seems years away. The war will continue.

I think that bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are the start of 'internet money" taking over all other types of money.  I do think that it is going to take some time for it to take over as the worlds currency, as we are certainly not there yet.  I feel that we still have a good bit of progression to go when it comes to making cryptocurrency actually useable by all worldwide.  We are heading there certainly, but there are things to fix like speeding up speed and lowering cost ( hopefully lightning network can help with this).

Right, but I guess we have a good start, specially in the first ten years wherein we have a lot of struggles, like government anti-crypto sentiments, financial body against and tearing crypto etc.

So we survived that all this year although it's not going to be any easy road. But probably in the next 10-20 years, we might see crypto getting a better position in society.

No, paypal can be considered like that but bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are the beginning point of P2P money and decentralization. Internet money can be anything (even net-banking of traditional fiat also can be termed as internet money).

I guess no one will definitely have different opinion from you. In next decade itself we might be having bitcoin to be replacing most of the currently existing market leaders. Still, assuming right away like bitcoin has already won the war against all other money, may not be an appropriate one in my opinion as well.

While it is true that bitcoin is becoming more of a store of value than a currency this is because it does not make too much sense to use it as such at the moment, if you have fiat around and bitcoin which would you spend? The fiat that is suffering huge inflation all around the world or do you use your bitcoin that keeps growing in value? And the answer that is simple, we keep our bitcoin, but it is possible that if in the future people lose the trust in fiat currencies then bitcoin could evolve and become more of a currency than a store of value.

I support what you said because there's still a lot of things to be developed in the Bitcoin ecosystem especially the mining setting before we can declare Bitcoin as the winner of the war on money but Peter McCormack also has a point because he was referring to the momentum of Bitcoin market during the total lockdown and world economic meltdown.

None of us have any different opinions, we are here on bitcointalk because we like bitcoin. However, the "war" on money seems like a big word to use this. If he said something like "bitcoin has reached a level where we will never see it crash and be gone, it will forever be here from now out and people better get used to it and accept the fact that it is a good investment". That would be a good entry, and I would agree with him.

However, the war on money seems like too aggressive and there is no need to be that aggressive when comparing currencies. Dollar has been one of the most valuable ones for example for a while, and we do not say "war" for that.

Those are days when there is no big awareness about bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Now there is more ways through which the real taste of bitcoin and cryptocurrencies is being experienced by the people. This is the prime reason for the active involvement of common people into cryptocurrency over the last two years. The pandemic too supported the mass adoption. People found it to be an investment, and the worsening economy around the globe made them consider it a store of value against the inflated currencies.

Peter McCormack is no big expert in analysing the market, but he portrays the common man's mind from day to day life. So, it is a true fact about bitcoin.

The awareness for Bitcoin has been increasing, And the popularity of Bitcoin increased during the period of covid19, more than we even expected. Although it was no surprise to me, because right from time I have always believed that bitcoin’s popularity will continue to increase and a lot of people will get to know about it and start making use of it.

I wasn’t really expecting it to get to the level that it has currently gotten to as soon as it did, but I’m so happy that it got to this level, because now a lot of people are talking about it, it’snow bigger topic everywhere, to the extent that almost everyone you come across now knows about it. It’s unlike before when I would ask people if they know about Bitcoin, and the reply would be that they don’t. This time around it is nothing new to them at all.

How exactly? Did he go further to explain what he really means by Bitcoin beating out Fiat, gold and other currencies to become the money of the future? Of course we all love Bitcoin, and I’m also a big fan of it.

I am always in support of BTC, and always doing my part of the ‘evangelismʼ work in introducing Bitcoin to the world. But, what I always keep telling people is that Bitcoin is not a replacement for Fiat, I don’t know why it is hard for some people to accept this.

Even though I'm one of those people who support Bitcoin, that doesn't mean I agree with the opinion that Bitcoin will replace fiat. Because Bitcoin
was created from the start not to replace fiat, but as an alternative to payments that don't need to go through third parties. After all, the government
will not allow Bitcoin to replace fiat at any time, we also have to look at the reality that Bitcoin still has weaknesses and has not been able to reach
all areas. There are some areas that have not been reached by the internet network, so in those areas Bitcoin cannot be used. After all, fiat is still
very much needed, even the majority of people still use fiat to make financial transactions. So it's the best Bitcoin and fiat co-exist, so we all can
benefit from both, that's the most ideal thing to happen.

Yes, that is what bitcoin supposed to do, to co exist with fiat and not to beat it or replace it. And there's no war in the first place so we should not compare each of them as they exist not to compete but to work with each other. Although we can say that bitcoin is starting to gain massive adoption, but the truth is there are still a lot of people who have been naive to bitcoin and other cryptos. What they only know is fiat that is very useful to buy their basic needs and to receive compensation in terms of fiat.

Gold's time as money is long gone, so in that regard Bitcoin has already won. I think it's also an easy guess that, unless we count CBDCs, Bitcoin is and will continue to be used money as money than other cryptocurrencies. But as for fiat, its grip is still very firm. While inflation is slowly getting out of control, it's still stable enough and trusted enough for people to fear cryptos, including Bitcoin, which are way more volatile.
As for the podcast, I don't think the struggle is that Bitcoin is intangible; it's still that it's too volatile. Even those who are into Bitcoin are usually into it because of its potential as a form of investment, not as a form of money. Also, he says that Bitcoin's limited supply makes people think whether they need to buy this or that because Bitcoin is likely to grow in value which makes it the best form of money. But that's precisely why many argue that Bitcoin cannot properly function as money: people are not motivated to spend it, and spending is essential for money. I think that we should abandon consumerism, so I like this point about Bitcoin making us think about purchases, but I'm not sure how an economy can flourish like this.

Yes, we love Bitcoin, but I see it more as a general cryptocurrency that everyone is free to make use of, a currency that doesn’t belong to anyone at all, free from control, and not something that was created to replace Fiat. Every country will still have their Fiat, because Fiat represents each country, but there would be Bitcoin as a general currency that would also serve its own purpose for those who understands and makes use of it.

Bitcoin specifically? No. Because if something is to overtake FIAT and gold as the preferable currency, would be a slow and gradual transition, that's why saying it will be in the future is accurate because it's not something that will happen overnight, and, in the event that it happens, and by the time it does, BTC won't be a factor anymore. So I would be inclined that crypto could do that, but not Bitcoin specifically as the interest in it, by the time that happens will be significantly reduced. This does not mean I'm pissing all over BTC, not the slightest, however, I see BTC as the stepping stone towards a more positive crypto future.

The statement made by Peter McCormack may be considered speculation but if we examine the achievement of Bitcoin in the last 13years, saying Bitcoin has won the war on money is never an overstatement.

This is what some crypto enthusiasts still never understand and some government officials either that's also the reason why they see Bitcoin as a currency that will be a threat to fiat currency.

Yes, there's war but I believe he's trying to open the eyes of the people that still dont believe in the potential of Bitcoin.

Crypto vs fiat, and bitcoin vs fiat are totally different and I agree with that. I mean looking at the current situation, I could easily say that having some sort of situation where you could end up with crypto getting more popular because there is more than 2x marketcap on all of crypto versus bitcoin makes more sense. We are actually getting quite closer to gold marketcap with all of crypto combined, which is not a bad situation.

There are still some lengths to go but it is not really something impossible when you look at it right now. Don't get me wrong, I believe that bitcoin will have a greater market cap than gold marketcap one day, maybe it will take a few decades but it will happen, however it is easy to see that it will happen quicker when we are talking about all of crypto and that is something obviously a bigger advantage to all of us.

As long as people and companies do something to protect themselves from the economic crisis that we are experimenting then I am fine with that, the problem are the poor and the middle class, the poor cannot do anything to protect themselves since they do not have the capital to do so, while the middle class does not have enough money to invest in the markets and most of their money is on their homes, which they still owe to the banks, and in an economic crisis most of them will lose their homes as they will be unable to deal with the rising interest rates they will be forced to pay.