in 2009. without a market price. without a economic value. people still thought bitcoin was worthy(feature and benefits).
they were willing to use their time and electric to use bitcoin.

people were developing it and transacting between each other.
the economic value increased the more people seen the features and benefits. even before there was an economic value.

by the way you are not forced to buy 1btc at $40k
you can if you wanted acquire 0.001 btc $40

no one is forcing you to hand over $40k in a lump
unlike shares where you can only buy whole shares. or stocks only in certain size allocations.

you can still use bitcoin even without paying $40k lump

with bitcoin you are not forced into a system which treats its users badly by devaluing it.
(fiat does force people to use fiat, where the value does devalue)

a ponzi scheme is just a scam where a central party takes money in, makes promises of small interest payments  and tries to avoid people escaping.
a ponzi scheme pretends to offer you interest but reality is you lose value.. fiat is a legally accepted ponzi.
bitcoin is the opposite. its not a ponzi. it hedges against the fiat game

there is no central money stash. no manager.

bitcoin does not offer interest payments. it does not force people to stay in, it does not restrict value movement out.
you are not forced to only move out of bitcoin via a central party
people use bitcoin because it has many features fiat does not offer.

---

your whole premiss is the false assumption where you think something cannot have values(utility) unless it has value(price)
where in your mind. if government did not force that $7.50 was the minimum value for 1 hours labour(min wage laws) then no one would use dollar

yet bitcoin had values(utility) before it had value(price) and also that value(price) increases with many factors that different people find as their reasons to use and value bitcoin, without force or limitation

YOU were the one that only wanted to know about just a few features that can still happen 'without the need of other people'

and i explained those few features and how they had certain level of value.. obviously if you expand out the other features you want to ignore. you might start seeing the other things that add to the combination of value

like i said there is more to it then that, there is a combination of a multitude of features and utility
because all currencies work if other people are involved. you know, you need someone to spend,swap,pay, transfer with.. ofcourse bitcoin is no different and works better the more that use it.. thats how currencies work.
and a good currency is one that not just is mass adopted. but also one that offers lots of feature that make people happy to use it.. WITHOUT FORCE

bitcoin is more then a currency.
there is bitcoin ("btc") the currency
there is bitcoin ("BITCOIN") the payment protocol
there is bitcoin ("Bitcoin") the brand of the network

but here is the thing BITCOIN does not need other people to co-sign my btc over. i can be the sole signee and only i can move btc assigned to me. so that has value to me.

the valuation of my btc within Bitcoin is also based on my acquisition cost of 2012 ($6/btc) meaning if i was wanting to sell all my btc. (i have enough) i could pull down the market price substantially and still be making a profit.
but i dont want to sell my btc below certain levels i decided by myself. and no one if forcing me into a price/value decision

other people like miners in germany or those that bought at the market ATH of $69k have higher acquisition costs so they wont want to sell at a loss. they are happy to buy at $40k because their other methods of acquiring btc are high right now

EG miners in china 2020 and in kazahkstan 2022 are mining cheaper than the market price, so their acquisition costs are less then the market price so becasue they have costs to pay like electricity, they are happy to sell at $40k.
where as it costs ~$43k+ to mine in america. so some are mining to acquire coin to hoard, hedging against inflation due to Bitcoins deflationary nature. and some are buying because its easier to buy than mine and cheaper right now.

some mine for long term hoarding, even at a premium because they want to protect the network. but the network does not rely on any single person to centrally decide on all things Bitcoin.
Bitcoin can run if there were 1 people mining 5 people mining or 1.5million people mining.
the more that mine the better and more secure the network is. and people are willing to pay for that security compared to a silly crappy altcoin you might rip off where only you are mining with your cell phone

we all have our reasons not to sell too cheap, and those reasons are independant of each other.

fiat on the other hand does force people into accepting bank notes at a value. and pretends to protect people but refuses to invoke those protections when banks fail. banks would rather make people lose value for the bank note they hold,

the market price is not some random number displayed on a market. its made up of lots of independent decisions happening.
it only looks random because randomness is the ignorance of wanting to learn, inability to know all the variables that culminate to get the value.. (your problem)

---

if you could mine gold in your back yard for nothing more then $2 of cost. you could make alot of profit and if you could hoard enough gold you could affect the gold market rate.
if everyone could mine that cheap everyone could sell for cheap and that would affect the market rate where people eventually are seeing the market with a $2-$5 value window based on the other features and benefits

gold would not remain at $900-$2k window if everyone could mine it for $2

the reason gold is at over $900, and btc is at over $35k is because a alot of independent reasons of alot of choices. based on actual decisions. of lots of factors including cost. its not randomness(well for you it is, because you refuse to understand the variables involves)

There's no point to continue this further as you lack understanding of what's consensus while you're abusing vocabulary at the same time. I quit.

Again, what's irrational and what's not is not down to you to decide.

What if I told you that it's irrational to not care about inflation? What if I told you that I do care if it's minus a “few” percent?

Because you can't. Setting up your own altcoin means you're outside Bitcoin, where everybody agrees. You still haven't acknowledged that Bitcoin is worth so much, because of consensus. You can't comprehend that this is what people evaluate and not numbers in a database.

if you created your own altcoin.

you would then need to make that altcoin work. need to mine it so that blocks are produced.
because you are just one person. with one cell phone. your altcoin wont make blocks for a long while. it would take months and years for all them missing blocks to trigger difficulty drops sufficiently enough for your cell phone to start mining a block successfully and frequently, so that you can make a payment to yourself or someone else.

by that point if you could get someone to be part of your network. they too could mine. and they would then value the altcoin based on how easy it is to acquire your altcoin by different means.

so if you were trying to offer your altcoin to them for $40k. they would decline because they are at a cellphone mining speed too, meaning 0.01c to mine fresh coin. so why would they want your $40k coin, when they can mine on your altcoin network for much less
because they may not want to go through the effort of mining they might go upto 0.02c or they may think about making their own altcoin and see the time and effort so they may go upto 0.03c, keck they might offer you 0.04c rather than 0.01c to another altcoin making person who doesnt have the same features. because the features(you copied from bitcoin) have more utility then someone elses altcoin missing the features.
but its the combination of features and costs of utility that build up a valuation..
..
now do you see why i mentioned the mining value stuff many posts ago.
now do you see why i mentioned the ease of use factor many posts ago
now do you see why i mentioned the features many posts ago
now do you see why i mentioned the benefits many posts ago
now do you see why i mentioned the utility many posts ago

its a combination of all factors

your altcoin might have the same features of protocol. but it lacks other features, like its acceptance by retailers like its mining cost, like its ease of use, even things like your altcoin is only mined by 1-2 entities meaning the centralisation risk of it is high, making it less appealing

right now there are dozens of ripped off altcoins copying bitcoins same protocol. depending on a combination of many factors that make them atleast viable to be used by some and not used by others, and the cost associated with it differ depending on different mining costs. and also the ease of use with others and retailers make some of those rip offs vary in price. some from as little as a penny. some for a few hundred dollars. but none come close to genuine bitcoins value because bitcoin can do more then what the rip offs can

EG
they/you are not buying the serial number of a bank note.

if you had a bank note and decided to copy it(counterfeit) retailers wont accept it. if then you try to convince someone to accept it, they would have to evaluate the cost of your photocopy vs their own ability to photocopy. and their own risk of retail acceptance. and in the end they might offer you a penny for your counterfeit bank note.

or they would look at a genuine medium of exchange that has actual costs involved and ease of spending. and just use that one
even if the ease of use the genuine medium of exchange comes at a higher cost. because of its utility and features that make it better than the issues, headaches and risks of your silly altcoin/counterfeit bank note

out of the many many features and utilities. you specifically asked about the features and utility without the need of other people.
so..
i can hold it much like you can hold a bank note.

but the better use of holding bitcoin is that i can back it up so that if i lose one copy of the key i can retrieve it elsewhere.
if you lose your bank note.. its gone.. and nobody accepts a copy of a bank note (counterfeit)

if i cant trust keeping a paper key safe. i can secure it in many ways.
bitcoin does not need middle men custodians to secure bitcoin..
bank notes need banks to hold it to protect it against fear of loss by giving it to them in custody

bitcoin does not need insurance against bank failure, the decentralised nature means it doesnt need banks, nor insurance
if bank notes were secure by themself there would be no need for bank custody. and no need for FDIC or bailouts.

bitcoin secures itself so no need for custodians or insurance
banks need insurance but even when banks fail the insurance is not invoked. elitists prefer other methods which cause customer value loss just to prevent other elitist loss(the FDIC didnt pay out because they couldnt. thats why the tax payers bailed out the banks instead)

i do not need someones else signature or authorisation to pay them. they do not have to be awake when i pay them.
with a bank note you have to give it to them, meet them
with a bank account the bank has to phone you to ensure you are the real person making the transfer. and are limited to how much you can transfer without question

i can move bitcoin to another wallet i own without limit or restriction or permission or question
try and move bank money from a bank account into your wallet. ATM limits are $500, bank teller limits are $1000 before being questioned, delayed, limited

i dont even need to use the blockchain to move bitcoin.
i can pass someone a private key. a passphase seed. i can make a QR code or even a cryptic artwork. heck i can put the key into a physical coin or engrave it into metal. i can pass around bitcoin in many ways.

if you wanted to send bank notes internationally, even by postal service. even they have limits and insurances because they cannot guarantee it.
bitcoin doesnt need limits or insurance. it just works

if you wanted to set up a trust requiring majority vote (eg 3 of 5) you dont NEED a lawyer/solicitor or notary or bank manager to set it up.

other features/utility
heck if i know a person well i can think up 12 words they know well too. put bitcoin onto that associated address and just say some encrypted message via a private message app like
"what type of guitar did your dad play" -acoustic
"what did your sister want to do for a job" -actress
"what did you ask me for on your birthday" -apology

heck you can even have fun with it. like offer some out as a competition/prize. testing peoples knowledge where the first person to get all answers right wins
like
"what was first bought with 10,000btc" - pizza
"whats the pseudonym of bitcoins inventor" - satoshi
"what do ignorant people like antithesis think bitcoin is" - number
and so on
you dont even need them to reply to you to win, they can take it by themselves
 

---

now here is the thing.
even though bitcoin does not NEED custodians to protect it from loss (copy keys in many ways)
even though bitcoin does not NEED co-signing authorisation

these features are available for bitcoin as a choice. so if you WANT to have a co-signer. you can. if you want to put it into custody you can. but with bitcoin you dont NEED to

the silly thing is..

now even blackhatcoiner has turned into copying antithesis flip flop of ignorance..

when asking about the value(economic) and values(features and utility) of bitcoin
        i give examples of utility and features (values)
    but then the question becomes 'but its just a number made of nothing with no cost...' (value)
        so then i explain the cost of the creation(value)
    but then question flips to but the cost is not explaining the utility.. (values)
repeat infinity loop

ill let the flip flip in and out of their loop of  asking for and ignoring value values, or values value game
they can break their own inifinity loops when they get bored of their game

---

funny part is that both antithesis and blackhatcoiner are thinking that bitcoin has no value.
both thinking its just 2 people agreeing on a medium and setting some randomly chosen number of value to assign it.

ignoring the acquisition value of the holder and his loss of utility values by giving it up as his bases of him setting up his sell price/offer.
EG if its very complicated to acquire it again in the future. im less likely to give it up in a sell or swap for goods. thus i will only sell/swap for goods if conditions are right to account for the utility value i might lose by no longer having it.
EG i wont buy a house because although a house appreciates in value every 10 years, bitcoin appreciates in value in 4 years.
EG i can sell the same house in 10 years. but trying to get the same amount of btc in 10 years would require alot more expense, effort to get back to same state as 10 years prior. so id rather keep the btc until i decide i no longer have use of it
(plus other features and benefits of use, listed in prior pages)
.
the buyer can see how easy/hard it is to acquire(mining, market, offering labour, goods) and decide how much premium value its worth to acquire if its harder to acquire by other means
EG a buyer might pay a premium on 'local bitcoins' because he can acquire it easier without kyc of markets(exchanges)
EG a buyer might pay a premium on the market because its faster and less of a headache than trying to mine it

its not 2 people dipping their hand into a hat and playing a raffle of random numbers to find an agreed price. there is more to the decision of value then just thinking up some nonsense random number

---

as for saying that banks have security to give $10 bank note for $10 bank note. its not an insurance against fire, theft, loss.
burn a bank note and see if a bank will reimburse you,, they wont. they have no insurance or liability to protect you in that way.
all you get a a crisp bank note if you hand them a crumpled but complete bank note. and they can charge you for it.
thats all you get

---

the problem with their theory that bitcoin does not have this same promise.. is that bitcoin does. thats how payment systems work.. input output contract of a transaction is the promise of the swap of one utxo for another utxo

banks and bitcoin do not promise they will exchange a bank note or btc for a fixed bread loaf value.

they just take a unit and give you a unit of the same form. thats not fixed value security with bank fiat because if you held a bank note from 2009 (5 bread loaf value) you wont get 5 bread loaves for it now. (inflation  is now 4 loaves)
banks have no security against inflation, no fixed value promise.

however bitcoin has proven that bitcoin from 2009 are worth more now(deflation)

value is more secure in bitcoin then it is with fiat
deflation is better than inflation

---

a pick pocket does not even need a wrench to steal a bank note.

imagine i had a bank note in my left back pocket. and my bitcoin app on my phone on my right back pocket.
and a pick pocket takes both.. without a wrench

i have totally lost the bank note. but i can retrieve my bitcoin.
because my phone is passcoded. and i have a backup key.

which is more secure.. bitcoin
..

then try to actually destroy all proof of the existence of my coin. you need more then a wrench to do that, yet i can just light a match to destroy all proof of your bank notes existance

which is more secure.. bitcoin

But yet, it's the only product that can be cut into millions of pieces with a click, transferred from one part of the planet to the other in seconds, be easily verified, resistant to censorship and completely durable. So, I assume that if lots of people think same like I do, that it does look like a currency, then I see no reason on not using it likewise. Call it belief.

What's so bad if we want to deal with it?

Good, that's a feature. It's a feature of free market. You still deny that you don't know your future purchasing power whether there are collaterals or not. You've only focused that, on paper, you'll own an amount.

(You used the word “voluntary” vaguely)

Simple. It's a scarce product. There are only 21 million bitcoins and if you can get a full bitcoin then you're gonna be amongst the 1% at some point in your life.

It could go to zero but it is more probable it will go to a million before that

None, unless you think what I'm doing is irrational.

I'm very sure I don't ignore your point. I've understood what you're trying to say and I'm explaining you that there's another way to see things in life.

This is just your opinion.

I'm protected by the collaterals, but who's gonna protect me from inflation?

Wrong. I don't believe people will ever give me things voluntarily. I'll have to pay them in our agreed currency.

I never said that, you made it up. All I said is that it's a hedge to inflation and I like it as a concept. It fits my character.

Exchanging stuff using Bitcoin does create new value, as it contributes to division of labour. (Which in continuance, creates value)

But, Bitcoin is not such scheme, because:

---

But, cost has nothing to do with the utility. Just because there's a cost in the procedure of extracting something from the ground doesn't make it useful.

Banks supposedly consider both the same, whether it's a bank note or a promise of a bank note. When you own a $100 bill, you can redeem it for a $100 worth liability. So, I'd say that you can actually “buy” other people's debt with cash, again if we consider that banks consider both the same. Therefore, you're indirectly owed if you hold their money.

No need to comment the example you've given... No one's gonna redo the work for the last 510,000 blocks. Ever heard of the $5 wrench attack?

YOU are ignoring that bitcoin has a cost in its creation and acquisition

and there is a HUGE cost in trying to destroy if from existence.

need a match to figure out which one has no security?

PoS coins have no creation cost. so those would actually follow your idea that its just a number(like fiat) where it has no cration cost, but gains value by people finding labour/goods to make swaps with it

but PoW coins actually have a cost that comes with its creation. and due to other features and benefits, they have utility too

fiat does not have the 'borrowers liability/security' you think it does. you are owed nothing when you hold a bank note

bank notes value does not come from its creation. but from someone else working to then give it value after creation in exchange for goods/services.
thus a simple medium of exchange with no underlying backing(Pos coins and fiat)

bitcoin has underlying backing right from its creation, which is then strengthened by the work to add more confirmations. and also new confirms when its being spent.

then.. it becomes used as a medium of exchange ontop of that where people swap labour, goods for it(like fiat)
so bitcoin has more to it than fiat does


i have bitcoin from 2012, and to undo the proof of its creation. it requires ~510,000 blocks to be undone to remove trace of my coin. and then another >510,000blocks to be rebuilt ontop to legalise that change into existence by overtaking the network
it costs over $240k to make a block right now
meaning it costs $5,691,784,177,413.87 redo all that work

i can destroy proof of your bank notes existence with a match, and your bank wont just give you another. you have no security

now if you want to think they are just number.. try it
take a bank note out of your pocket. and put it beside your screen
then find a random bitcoin on the network...

try and destroy the bitcoin, then light your bank note on fire... see which one survives and which one can be destroyed

Since you are trolling, you'll ignore all the evidences in the world, no matter how good it is, aren't you? 

I feel somewhat sorry for all these people who ignored the "don't feed the troll" rule and tried to answer you nicely.
However, if you go with this... tone, you may end up with no people to answer this... little game.

Even if that's the case, the grain of sand gains market value if hundreds of millions of people find it utilizable. You can't deny that a group of people actually use Bitcoin, whether they're irrational or not.

So, it just became meaningful, you're wrong and case's closed.

That's a lie. Emphasis mine;


And yet, you keep making the same kind of witless questions.

First, this is solely your opinion, diamonds are scarce, but we don't need them to live, and second, I can live with Bitcoin.

But, it ain't just a number. I can't create bitcoins by drawing numbers in a paper. You're becoming a laughing stock.

---

You can't comprehend that money is beyond debt. You only want to prove us all wrong, because a “number in a database” sounds too moron to be traded with fiat currency. Well, guess what: It's not. People like you, who are conservative and not creative enough, can't see what's Bitcoin. Please allow the others to think otherwise, thanks.

As for irrationality, you're the most irrational and obtuse person in this room, as far as I can tell.

Like I said, you simply cannot criticize adequately something you fail to grasp due to your lack of knowledge, even if that "something" is someone's behavior that you for whatever reason consider irrational. If you don't understand the difference between the numbers inside the system and outside the system, and if you don't understand how the design of the system works and how it makes numbers scarce, then go and find out. If you think bitcoin is abundant like sand, then go and dump the market with unlimited bitcoins printed out of thin air. The problem is you can't get these special numbers that are inside the system for free, you must pay for them. Unlike sand that exists in abundance outside the box, bitcoin doesn't and can only be obtained through hard work.

Of course, you can create your own cryptocurrency and give it whatever name, but it won't in any way affect bitcoin or make it less scarce or significant. Yes, bitcoin, like any other software, is merely a set of zeroes and ones that behave in a certain way and perform certain functions, but these numbers differ from any other numbers because they stay inside the bitcoin system which has value only because people consider it valuable. If people stop considering bitcoin a valuable thing, they won't be investing their time, money, and effort to interact with it. It will become worthless, like any other thing should people stop deeming it valuable. What you need to do before trying to convince people that bitcoin is not valuable is you need to learn more about bitcoin, understand how and why it works, how so-called scarcity is achieved, how it is even possible, why people may want to put their money in it, why miners spend a valuable thing that everyone can live off of to obtain numbers that don't make sense and then you should convince yourself that everything you have learned about bitcoin can't work in the real world and is against all economic laws. Only when you have spent thousands of hours learning about every aspect of bitcoin, can you start to criticize it adequately without employing questionable analogies. There is no other way, no one can convince you to buy bitcoin until you convince yourself. This is an absolutely voluntary system.

lets word things in your language. maybe you will see the point then

people (so called employees) spend a ton of muscle energy only to get a serial number. energy is a valuable resource people can live off
people (so called goldsmiths) spend a ton of fuel only to get a bunch of atoms. energy is a valuable resource people can live off
now lets repeat your example
people (the so called miners) spend a ton of electricity only to get a number. Electricity is a valuable resource people can live off of

regarding bitcoin
you are ignoring the fact that bitcoin is just evidence of complex mining where acquirers use valuable things(electricity). in fiat, bank notes are not created at a cost, they are evidence of 0cost creation..
in fiat these things are not mined, but given for free. after people get that, they have to give it back at extra cost to themselves(muscle energy) so banks can profit. banks work on faith that people will pay back more for something that cost nothing

It is a bad comparison on the grounds that in the example of a grain of sand you are exchanging something that is abundant and widely available for a precious good, whereas, in the case of bitcoin, you are exchanging something scarce and hard to obtain for the same precious house. It is true that only irrational people would exchange a valuable thing for something they could get for free. Apparently, you can't believe and understand that something like bitcoin, "a number," can be scarce and valuable, and you are calling other people greedy, stupid or irrational because you can't understand why they keep exchanging valuable things for something you consider worthless. Either you are defending your ego because you can't admit that other people are smarter than you or you are smarter than millions of people who mistakenly believe that digital scarce decentralized money is not nonsense and that the only justification for the existence of traditional money is that governments have managed to coerce people to use costlessly-printed money in their transactions. In either case, you have no choice but to accept the fact that bitcoin is used and seen as money by other people. No matter how smart or stupid those people that have chosen bitcoin, bitcoin will stay and will function as intended because it doesn't even care what people think about it. You either buy it or ignore and resist it while you can.

The grain of sand example again. This discussion has got to the point where it restarts. It's a loop. You call irrational people who evaluate differently than you do, because they may have a different treatment.

Welcome to my troll list.

As I said before, you are right, and you shouldn't. And no one should try to convince you otherwise. But your problem is that you keep asking the same questions over and over again. What do you hope to accomplish with this topic?


It's just your opinion. What you find irrelevant may not be irrelevant to others. Try to be a little more open-minded.

bitcoin is created out of a complex program function that costs alot of electricity to compute, people want to get paid for that complex and expensive work

regards to fiat. you keep talking about irrelevant and non existent securities and liabilities, where you think you are owed or guaranteed something. i showed you that you are not owed anything bar a service of swapping a crumbled note on deposit for a crisp note on withdrawal, where the banks can charge you for this service.
borrowers do not owe you anything, your value is not given to borrowers

no one got a FDIC cheque in the post when the banks failed in 2008
what they got was their value was devalued and now paying extra tax or getting less public services due to banks failing in 2008.

---

.. getting back to bitcoin because you pretend to want to know how the value is established

its not actually just 2 people wanting it and they both pick a random number and find a middle ground

its actually where those that have coin know the cost of their acquisition. and they will refuse to sell at a loss, obviously

if they fresh mined the coin in 2010. the difficulty of the math was cheap. meaning it had a $0.01 to $0.10 cost depending on electric costs around the world

ok ill make some things simple
in say 2010. imagine there were 120 people mining bitcoin at the same time.
lets say in fairness to randomness. each person had equal strength computers so all had the same equal chance
30 machines in china,
30 machines in america,
30 machines in the UK,
30 machines in germany,

because there are only ~6 blocks an hour. it takes a 20 hour period to cover each person getting their chance hit.

meaning they are using 20 hours of electric to get 50coins in 2010
in china at 4cent electric/khw using a desktop pc of 500w thats 2cent an hour and $0.40 for that 20 hour period for 50coin=0.8c/coin
in america at 12cent electric/khw using a desktop pc of 500w thats 6cent an hour and $1.20 for that 20 hour period for 50coin=2.4c/coin
in the UK at 18cent electric/khw using a desktop pc of 500w thats 9cent an hour and $1.80 for that 20 hour period for 50coin=3.6c/coin
in germany at 38cent electric/khw using a desktop pc of 500w thats 19cent an hour and $3.80 for that 20 hour period for 50coin=7.6c/coin

so around the world people could mine for between the value window of 0.8c-7.6c per coin

now lets imagine no one wants to sell their coin at a loss
germany wont make an offer for less than 8cent
the UK wont make an offer for less than 4cent
america  wont make an offer for less than 3cent
china wont make an offer for less than 1cent

lets say america tried to sell it for 10cents. .. no one is buying because everyone on the planet can mine for under 8cent. so no deal
then say america tried to sell it for 9cents. .. no one is buying because everyone on the planet can mine for under 8cent. so no deal
then say america tried to sell it for 8cents. .. someone in germany cant be bothered mining so takes the slight premium. so 8cent. deal

now what happens is people start to see it has a price.
and people in china can see they can 8x their cost. so they start using 4x machines
and people in america can see they can 3.3x their cost. so they start using 2x machines
and people in america can see they can 2.2x their cost. so they start using 1.5x machines
people in germany are breaking even so they dont bother adding more machines


now the landscape of machines is
120 machines in china,
60 machines in america,
45 machines in the UK,
30 machines in germany,
totalling 255 machines, meaning 42hours 30minutes for fairness chance for all

so costs are now
in china 1.7c/coin
in america 5.1c/coin
in the UK 7.6c/coin
in germany 16.2c/coin

china, america, the UK can still sell at 8cent and make a profit.
but now germany stop mining because the market is cheaper to buy than it is to mine.
so germany just buy coin. buying up all the coin at 8c available
because germany are willing to buy for anything below their mining cost of 16c. and germany are high demand. america pushes up its price to 9c, 10cent to see where the demand dips

lets say it plateaus at 14cent
now because the market has a value window of 1.7cent-17 cent. but the ATH is 14cent
because china can make 8x again they again 4x their machines, america 2.5x its machines and UK dont expand its machines
germany doesnt mine this week, they just buy coin, as its easier and cheaper
machines in china, become 480
machines in america, become 150
machines in the UK, stay at 45
totalling 675 machines meaning 112.5 hours mining for each to have a chance

so costs are now
in china 2.25c/coin
in america 6.75c/coin
in the UK 10.125c/coin

in germany if they were to mine it would cost them 21cent
so the value window is now 2.25c-21.37c

imagine all american coins got sold at 14cent. and demand is depleting because germans had enough
UK and china try selling coins at 14cent.and as they run out of the coins they hoarded all week. the price also depletes due to filling depleting demand, so say the price settles down to 11cent
its still between the 2-21c value window. but the price inside that window is not as much as the 14cent ATH

because china can still 3x and make a profit at 11cen. china 2x their machines. but the UK dont bother mining this week, america doesnt add more
machines in china, become 960
machines in america, stays at 150
taking 185 hours for each machine to have a chance hit

china 3.7c/coin (its not 4.5c thanks to UK dropping out and US not multiplying  )
america 11.1c/coin (thanks to UK dropping but no thanks to china for doubling up )
because the price is 11cent and america cost is 11.6cent. they buy instead of expand machines.
the price rises to 12cent

if uk mined 16.6c
if germany mined 35c

now the market has any left over german buyers still wanting more coin
UK still wants coin
so UK and germany buy coin.

if the price rises to new ATH UK starts mining again.
news hits the media about bitcoin and now new speculators that dont know the complexities of mining just want to buy coin. so the price moves up to above 20cent. UK starts mining again. and the price moves forward. as does the mining cost.  which then brings up the value window

---

pre-empting your repeated questions:
why are they buying it?... because it has a cost. which some regions find it cheaper to buy it rather then mine it
why are they buying it? because bitcoin does something banks dont do the same way.
why are they buying it? it offers lots of features and benefits banks cant offer.

The following remain purposely unanswered.

bitcoin comes with a base value window due to its mining cost(variable due to regional cost differences). where no one wants to mine at a loss and so no one tries selling at a loss
the acquirer than has his acquisition costs and he too does not want to make a loss

the market price sits somewhere between the cheap/premium value window

bank loans have NO upfront cost. banks literally print the money out of no where.
banks then ask for it back plus X% extra, where the literally destroy the capital returned(to re allot themselves with loan capacity for future loans) and keep just the x% they use the x% to cover the banks costs from other services they offer

a loan being made has no contract with anyone else but the borrower and the bank
a borrower does not owe anything to the general population. all he owes is the bank

when you set up a savings deposit account.. there is no mention, no term or condition that mentions your funds being contracted out to a loan.

the funds of the loan are not general population funds redistributed

you as a dollar holder are not obligated to give him your dollar for him to pay it back to the bank
you as a dollar holder are not contracted with him to request dollar from him to settle the banks debt
you as a dollar holder are not secured to receive a dollar from him when he pays the bank
if he fails to pay and the bank gets in trouble. your not guaranteed a $10 cheque from the government insurance

the bank does not use your dollar to pay him in a loan. thus he does not owe you.
banks CREATE new money for loans, not swap old money around

he can pay the bank via many means. but that contract is between him and the bank. not you
he can go abroad. and work on an african gold mine. and get paid euros. and a euro bank can convert that to dollars to pay his loan..
meaning never interacting with you, meaning he does not need to touch a dollar to repay

he can become a bitcoin miner, mine some rewards and go to an exchange and then pay off the bank loan.. again nothing do to with you
he can get a job or manufacture something, charge payment in many forms or such. again nothing to do with you.

---

maybe big numbers are too big to imagine.. lets simplify it

if you have $10 bank note. there is no insurance. if you lose it or have it stolen banks wont reimburse you. its your loss

if you deposit it. the bank keeps $1 bank note in a vault. puts $10 into a digital balance,.
and separately due to a contract THE BANK has with government and other private banks. the bank can also create another balance account for someone else for another $9 (meaning upto $30 in circulation in different forms)
.. this loan creation charter is not a contract between you and the bank. nor you and the government nor you and the borrower

your bank note has no contract where by you are part of the $10 deposit balance + $1 bank note vault part
your bank note has no contract where by you are part of the $10 deposit balance + $1 bank note + $9 loan account part

your bank agreement is that you put in 10, you can get out 10
crumpled note 10:10 crisp note.. that is all (and in many cases they can charge you for that service)
...
lets say from this separate $9 allotment 2 people (a, b) takes a loan for $5 and $4 respectively.
a. interest is 5% meaning after a year he pays THE BANK  $5.25
b. interest is 5% meaning after a year he pays THE BANK  $4.20

the bank cancels out the $5 and $4(that was in circulation) so that it can reuse it as $9 for new loans
and the bank keeps the $0.45
with this though.
the bank owes another private bank insurer an insurance premium on the $9 allotment(separate from deposits) its allowed to play with
the bank has also obligations with the FDIC to pay an insurance premium on deposits
the bank also wants to pay you something for not withdrawing your deposit.
but these 3 things are not contracts with you.

these three things do not bind you to the loan account via the 3 contract path.
they are separate contracts for separate services the bank has with separate entities
banks are not obligated to pay you interest. they can change the terms of accounts conditions as they please
its why banks used to be generous with a 5% incentive a couple decades ago but now only pay silly 0.05%
you have no security/guarantee of getting interest. because the agreement allows them to change the terms
..
to incentivise you to not withdraw your 10 the bank will put limits on daily spending. charge you if you spend too much, too often,  and also offer a bit of a bonus if you keep it in for a year(if they chose to)

this is not security to you. this is just a way that if they can keep your money. it allows them to profit with the new balance in the other account they created(out of nothing)

if the bank was to fail. the government wont send you a cheque instantly for $10 or send 4 loaves of bread(value rate at deposit)
what they do instead is shift the failed banks accounts to other banks. so you simple get Bank A 10:10 bank B

whereby the cost of the swap ends up that your buying power diminishes from 4 loaves of bread to less loaves of bread.

the 2008 banking crises shown millions of people lost out directly and all americans value diminished due to the inflation caused by the bailout

if $10 could buy you 5 loaves of bread in 2008.. i can guarantee you now. withdrawing $10 now wont get you 5 loaves now. and i guarantee you you wont get 4 loaves in the near future. and also.. if your bank fails. the chances of you filing a claim to get a FDIC cheque is super small. they would prefer to get the country to pay more tax and just shift balance sheets around to other banks. than pay out the insurance

so dont think that you will get a guaranteed cheque from the FDIC if your bank fails.
and dont think you can still buy 4 loaves(todays value) with your future $10 in a different bank account that took over yours

no no and no
thats not the banks charter, thats not the banks contract. thats not the banks job

if you go to a bank they dont give you bread. they just ask for your crumpled bank notes. and give you back crisp bank notes for the same number(if you meet their conditions).

'savings accounts' is where you give them crumpled bank notes. and they store the number in another form(electronic). they dont need to keep X% of paper bank notes on hand at any time, but some do.
meaning to stop bank runs of everyone asking for a withdrawal at once. they limit, question or delay requests.
its why ATM's have limits of $500. its why if you do more then 6 bank note withdrawals a month from a savings account the banks charge you for it.
they question the reasons if the amount is above a certain level. they say you have to make a pre-arranged request taking days to finalise if its above a certain level. to pressure and give you headaches to not withdraw it all in one go.

banks in america are not obligated to instantly pay you on your demand. the charter actually does the opposite. it allows the banks to delay, limit or deny instant demands

savings account is NOT where they "USE" your deposit amount as a loan to someone else. instead they have a separate charter where a charter allows a bank to 'create new money' for the person getting a loan as a separate charter (nothing to do with your savings account terms and conditions.) based on how much volume a bank holds.

EG say a bank has $100billion savings account deposit balance on its books.
a bank has to hold $10bill as bank notes.
but can create upto $90bill of new money
this mean while all savings account balance still appears as $100bill digitally.  loan accounts of other customers can go upto $90b digitally. and the bank has $10b in bank notes physically ($200b savings'balance'+loan 'balance'+paper bank notes)

they are not actually giving away your savings balance to a loan recipient. a loan recipient is not liable to you.
your deposit balance still appears as $100b even when 90bill loans are created
if a loan defaults. it does not affect the savings account holder. it just means the bank loses out on its potential future profit from the terms of the $90m loan allotment

anyway
the bank can do many things with the $90m separate loan allotment amount
1. split up and offer parts of this $90b loan allotment to other customers in the forms of bank branded overdraft, bank branded credit, or bank branded mortgages

2. sell part of the allotment to other companies. for a small percentage so that (non savings deposit) credit companies can offer credit/mortgages to their customers

..
there are a few other charter details. like its not exactly $90bill a year they can offer out in one go. its more complex. EG like if they want to allocate $90bill over a 30 year mortgage period. they can only offer out $3billion per year. so that it all sums up that if all mortgages are paid in full  over time it equates back to the $90b allotment
..
anyway. this $90b is not the savings account security/property/liability.... its the banks liability/property

a savings account owner cannot walk upto a person that got a loan and say "give me my money back, its mine"
its not theirs.. the loanee has a contract with the bank. not the savings account customer.

its not a Loanee   <->  savings account depositor contract

its not a Loanee   <->bank<->  savings account depositor contract

the closest visualisation is
                                                   ┌>treasury                
loanee <->credit bank subsidiary<->private insurance
                                                  └>bank
the loanee has a contract with the credit bank subsidiary
separately. different contract
the credit bank subsidiary has a contract to pay insurance on the loan allotment.(private company)
the credit bank subsidiary has a contract to pay tax on the loan allotment.(treasury)
the bank gets to keep the rest
..    
separately.                    ┌<bank        
saver <->deposit bank<->FDIC
separately. different contract
the BANK has to pay insurance on the deposit allotment.(FDIC)

a saver has a contract with deposit bank
a loanee has a contract with credit bank subsidiary
but a saver does not have a contract with a credit bank subsidiary

---

because a bank is offering its product to subsidiary which offer to loanee's... the loanee needs to pay THE BANK(indirectly) in the future.
so imagine all collected up(paid in full) $100bill loans returned in a year
the bank subsidiary gets $5b
out of that the bank subsidiary has to pay
800m-1.2b to the treasury
2b to the private company
the bank keeps 2.8b-3.2b (its less because the subsidiary also keeps profit)

then separately to entice/ incentivise savings depositors to not "bank run"/withdraw.. the bank may offer its $100b depositors
60m-810m (0.06%-0.81%)
then separately to entice/ incentivise savings depositors to not "bank run"/withdraw.. the bank insures depositors by paying the FDIC
830m(0.83%) (for a $250k cap per customer)

where by the bank keeps 1.16b-2.13b out of the 5bill loan interest returned via the subsiduary

..
your savings account is not secured against a loan. it has nothing to do with a loan.
your savings account is insured for 'upto' $250k
meaning if you have $1m
a. spread over 4 accounts($250k each)
the $1m will be insured
b. in one account($1m in 1 account)
the FDIC will only honour $250k.. and the rest of your $750k is lost if bank failed

it has nothing to do with any contract with loans
a savings account is not contracted to a loanee, not secured by a loanee. not liable to a loanee

obviously the bank only makes profits from loans. and thus can only afford to pay depositor insurance by doing loans.
but that does not mean a deposit/bank note is securitised/contracted/linked to a loan. there is no contracted obligation between a bank note/deposit account balance to a loanee

a loanee does not owe the depositor anything. because the savings account balance does not disappear when loans are made.
the loanee does not 'get' funds of a savings account. they are separate balances

where by as said at the start. a bank with 100b in deposits .. will have a combined loan, deposit balance and bank note of $200bill

---

---

with all that said..
BANK BALANCE in a deposit account is insured by upto $250k per account
but guess what.
in the 2008 financial crisis. the FDIC did not want to let banks fail to then have to pay out the insurance.
no one was able to file claims to activate the insurance clause.
even if it was activated. the funds go to the bank. not the citizen
(thus the insurance is meaningless as its never used)

what actually happened in 2008 was the treasury 'printed' its own money and gave it to the banks.
so now the banks have the value.
the treasury is now in debt by trillions. and its now the people that owe the treasury, in tax, to attempt to draw down the national debt.
yep the bank is getting tax from people. (meaning their $100b deposits are now worth $80b(20% tax)) the treasury then pays banks that bought the bonds a small % of the $1trill 'quantitative easing'/bail out. so again the banks are making profit while peoples money is becoming worth-less and worth .. less

your bank note is not insured.
your bank deposit balance probably will never activate its insurance clause
instead, government will just create debt which its citizens have to pay back, even if they personally didnt ask for a loan.

if you want an explanation of this process i can give it. but i think i have wrote enough for now.