Because one component of money is being a store of value, and for this it needs relative scarcity compared to other goods. Money that isn’t scarce just looses more and more value over time, everything around you gets more expensive and your money worth less, a bad situation to be in.

Humans are too bad at predicting the future to be able to handle this correctly. We see it right now, where inflation gets out of hand and all they can do is manipulate statistics, so it looks better than it actually is, instead of actually fighting inflation. The problem is human decision making will mess the supply up, so a fixed one is better, apart from also making it a better store of value.

This is a feature not a bug, it might sound unintuitive at first, but being backed up by an inferior form of money is a disadvantage. It doesn’t bring any benefits, and no one would need have the need to use the currency that needs backing, because they could just use the asset that it’s backed by directly. Why buy a crypto that’s backed by gold, instead of buying gold directly, it just doesn’t make sense. I say this overly simplistic to get the point across, because there’s reasons why gold fails as a medium of exchange, most people use crypto as a store of value at the moment, that’s why i won’t get in deeper now.

Bitcoin is something complete in itself, it doesn’t need other bs that’s inferior to it.

First of all, this is not a weakness, money isn’t an economic resource, it’s there to facilitate trade, it doesn’t make sense to make products out of money.

For the simple reason of fungibility, another function of money, each unit should be exactly the same as the other. This is not the case with jewellery and gold coins, they’re different so they’re desired differently, which is bad for money. No person that used gold as money, will use it to make a product out of it. Even gold coins have different desirabilities depending on when they were made and by who, this is bad for fungibility. Pure money doesn’t need another use to be desirable, just like no football club wouldnt hire messi, because he isn’t good at basketball.

I’ve seen this mixing between money and economic resource many times now, i think some people have a hard time separating this. But don’t forget the market can separate between the two pretty well and made Bitcoin the most successful asset of the last decade(outperformed gold and everything), doesn’t seem like a weakness to me, this wouldn’t be possible by being tied to gold.

Being backed by something also opens up a whole new array of attack vectors and market manipulations, as a side note.

This will be hard without having some serious expertise yourself or big amount of capital to hire competent people. Running an exchange isn’t a one time buy, it takes constant work to keep it secure and up and running all the time, this is serious software that can’t afford many mistakes, so you will need a team to handle this regardless.

Your best bet would probably be networking with people that are interested in this and competent enough to pull this off correctly(rare). Go trough this plan again and ask yourself how you will be able to compete with established exchanges in terms of security, reliability,fees, UX and volume. It’s not impossible, but it needs good planning and smart decisions to pull off.

Even if you find a one time buy, i would advise against it, because you might regret it later when something goes wrong and not being able to fix it yourself. Also you will custody other peoples money so be careful, this is a prime target for hackers or getting sued when something goes wrong and you didn’t secure it well enough.

I refuted the definition, because you weren’t articulating yourself clearly, you didn’t even mention the word intrinsic value once till now(intrinsic value ≠ value). And nah i didnt fantasise about anything, this definition is still bad af for more serious use cases, even if you wanna use it for intrinsic value, but i won’t discuss this now, because it doesn’t matter.

If you wanna talk about intrinsic value, then it’s a different discussion. But finally you’re starting to articulate yourself more clearly, we can call this progress.

The problem is you’re trying to suggest something with this. Sure there’s forms of money like gold than can be used to produce goods. But for people who used gold as money, this is not the primary function.

Also like i said above, fungibility is important for any kind of money, small differences can already affect its desirability. So maybe it’s better in the first place, to not be able to make different things out of it, because amateurs won’t understand it and then shoot themselves in the foot. This is also be a point that could be made against nfts and tokens on a main layer.

Are we starting to evaluate the capability of footballers, by evaluating how well they can play basketball now too?

K let’s remember the state of the world in the last years, now let’s check out what Bitcoin did:

• Uniting a group of anti authoritarians worldwide(which is hard, because they’re usually individualists and completely different from each other).
• Challenging people to get deeper into computer science, economics, game theory and psychology.
• No need to trust a central authority.
• Self custody over money.
• Censorship resistance.
• Transaction finality.
• Sane monetary policy that won’t change in our lifetime.
• Hardest asset to confiscate.
• Tearing down economic gatekeeping(you can transact worldwide, or borderlessly recover your money, if you can remember 12/24 words(optionally a passphrase on top) or keep them safe).
• No need for permissions.
• Best long term perfoming asset in the last decade.
• Triggering morally bankrupt and emotional people.

The list goes on.

Im sure no human can get a benefit out of this, because making jewelry out of money is more important for the world right now.

There’s an argument to be made, about how debt based money creation affects its durability. Because with each time you’re taking or giving a loan, you’re essentially making everyone else’s purchasing power go lower, on the big scale this is huge.

How durable is it to gain some additional economic capabilities individually in the short term, but then making the entire working population fall into the cantillon effect(more and more extreme concentration of wealth at the top).

So repeated use of Fiat actually affects it’s durability to be used as a store value, no matter how someone will phrase it, which makes it a weak form of money long term.
————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

And now to put it simply, stop mixing economic resources and money, because it will do you more harm than good and just create confusion to yourself. In most cases money isn’t supposed to be used as an economic resource(to produce goods or services). It should facilitate trade, but not be an productive resource itself. The purest form of money isn’t to be used for anything else, like i outlined above, using money for different things can be counterproductive.

To me there’s a reason to compare it, because in my opinion markets will take all possible options into account, to save their money. We see huge fluctuations in the short term, and in the short term the best asset varies. But for long term investors this doesn’t matter as much, there’s a reason Bitcoin is the best performing asset in the long term, it doesn’t just happen accidentally for over a decade. And we know there’s no guarantees, but doing nothing will guarantee a loss of all the time we spent working, for nothing in return. Bitcoin is risky, but fiat is more, and the market will just take the risk into account, it won’t hamper demand.

When i first got into investing i considered every possibility there is, before i even really knew about bitcoin. I compared everything from taxes and other factors(also the state of fiat) of each asset class, and my conclusion was Bitcoin is the best investment there is. No one introduced me to it. And other players in the market will act similarly. And then only after this, i learned what Bitcoin is really about.

And you’re right, you're not earning an X amount per Y days/months, but the reality is, at the banks you're actually loosing an X amount per Y days/months. There’s no reason for the majority of the market to bring their money back to the banks, first it’s a secure loss, second people know how unstable banks are at the moment (with no sign of betterment). Just because regular people are still asleep, doesn’t mean the market is.

Bad times are the best test for how strong something is, this is also a chance for Bitcoin to prove itself, for people who were unsure before.

If banks can’t even provide you 1%, what makes you think other projects can do this sustainably?

It’s not correlated, because Bitcoin still outperforms any interest rate a bank could offer.

The people that would put their money into the bank for interest(for a loss because it still won’t outperform inflation), will be the people who buy Bitcoin last anyways. So i dont think it influences the demand side that much.

The only effect it would have, is that speculators can’t easily ape into Bitcoin or any other investments with borrowed money. Which would probably favor Bitcoin, because the market would be more hesitant to get into braindead projects or empty hypes. So higher interest rates could actually favor Bitcoin, and for sure won’t hurt it.

And as we saw now, it’s better for Bitcoin if people don’t leverage too much into it. We don’t need actors like celsius bringing down the whole market, because they gamble too much.

This definition is wrong tho and wouldn’t be accepted anywhere. You can use it for yourself it’s fine, but in a debate it’s ridiculous. If you’re so sure about it, then go ahead and write an academic paper about it and see it being eaten alive by peer review.

You’ll see more people here engage in critical thinking and constructive discussion(even with idiots) than in most places. And also the whitepaper wasn’t released here, but nice try.

Again im telling you, if you work as an analyst in a company, or in academia(in places that still do science), people won’t be as nice to y’all as here, if y’all produce bs like this.

Then you’re also mixing religion with a software whitepaper, which:

1. Is ridiculous.

2. Just shows you can’t compete with actual arguments.

3. Did you ever see someone claim it is their bible? I don’t think so, you’re just letting ur personal bias influence your judgment.

You mean everyone who held for longer than 4 years is in profit?

And notice how i never mentioned profit till now, because Bitcoin isn’t about this, even tho it’s a nice side effect of sound money in an artificial fiat world.

Everything i showed there is it’s own thing and coexists with each other. I even included Greshams law which takes this into account, if you’re too lazy to study then i cant help you. Also i compared the individual properties of gold, fiat and bitcoin with each other, a table won’t change what i wrote, but if you’re too lazy to read i cant help you. I didn’t say anything without an explanation behind it.

If you think anything in the comparison is wrong then point out what and we can discuss it. Otherwise it seems like you just don’t want to accept it, because it doesn’t fit your personal bias.

I didn’t hear you say something intellectual yet and if you tried to refute something you failed hard.

I also thought about this, in this case the most unconfiscatable asset will probably win. If gold is to be made illegal, it will be even harder and more dangerous to transport it, than it already is now. Also it’s an terrible unit of account, so good luck paying smaller amounts. You would need to store and hide it, till this bs would be over.

But relax they can’t forbid everything, in case of cbdcs, Bitcoin will be godsend, where you can still transact freely. Also authoritarians forget that they can’t control everything, and that prohibitions just create thriving black markets. Just look at the prohibition in the 1920s or that even prison has its own currency in form of cigarettes and other things. The economics are on our side, because people would just move into shadow economies, and it won’t be time to make money elsewhere(it’s similar to communism). If what you’re expecting becomes true, it won’t be the time for investors anyways, and bitcoin would still be ur best bet.

Explain this cuz it doesn’t make sense. What value is transferred or stored into gold? I already explained you what properties a store of value must have. You don’t understand how the world works. Gold is not a bank account that stores usd, and neither is bitcoin. They’re things in itself with fluctuating supply and demands from the outside. Their properties influence how much value the market assigns to it.

So value is transferred and stored, your personal emotions towards something you don’t value, don’t determine free market exchange rates. Ik it’s hard to make emotional people accept this.

Nah, Bitcoin itself is the valuable thing, that people are exchanging other things for (money, services, goods etc.). Supply and demand vary for an asset with low degree of adoption, it’s something expected. The Bitcoins you hold yourself don’t fluctuate, just the price people are willing to pay, at this particular moment in time, aka exchange rate.

If there’s no demand for something(no matter if gold, fiat or bitcoin) then the exchange rate will be low in a free market. Let’s see if you’re mentally capable to understand this. Then explain why Bitcoin would reach a state of 0 demand, waiting.

Bitcoin won’t collapse if no new people come in, it can be used as a unit of account already. I could do trades without ever needing an exchange rate. If me and jay for example wanted to set up a trade, we would never need to touch a dollar, if we so choose to. We can determine the trade individually or let the market decide. It is not a ponzi that collapses without new investors. The only thing that happens without new investors is that maybe some individual expectations get crushed, because it won’t rise forever. But it still works as money, regardless of the exchange rate or new investors.

The better question you should ask yourself is, how money comes into existence organically, and once you understand this, it makes your ponzi assumptions look ridiculous.

Prime example of the Dunning–Kruger effect.

Hahahahhah thanks man, plagiarism would be boring, but what i did isn’t rocket science. It’s just taking basic economic properties of money and then evaluating them yourself. This is already an established model in economics.

You can check it out anywhere yourself, if you search for the properties of money. What’s more interesting is how money comes into existence and how different forms of money compete with each other, that’s what im currently researching, i might make a thread that goes in deep about how an individual can evaluate all this.

I get your point, but remember goldkingcoiner thought, that this guy actually did good things before, it’s an expected first reaction. I wouldn’t take it personally, lets see how he reacts after you provided him the proof he asked for.

Amen, i also dont think this fighting or betting will do anyone good. Also goldkingcoiner has no obligation to bet on anyone, he helped a guy out, who he thought did good, that’s it. He’s not dabs, so he can’t know everything another person did. Just like i have no clue everything death wish did, yet i still defended him, it’s the same situation.

Im not a friend of begging, but i also cant judge another person’s situation, even if this guy begged, it’s still anyones decision to help out or not, and when there’s serious accusations to be made, for something fishy going on, i would say tell it to the people who gave their money.

Get back on your feet death wish, fighting or betting people or taking more margin will just make ur situation worse and is a waste of time. There will be many open doors for a person with ur tech skills, so stop knocking against closed doors and get back on track.

Gold could be one way for peace of mind, to save some of your purchasing power long term, just don’t expect major gains from it.

Im not too concerned about what is happening now, because 1. the economic environment is way different than 2017/18, the biggest winners will probably be industrial commodities now. 2. the market will probably go after as many liquidations as possible, if you see how many btc ponzis like celsius are holding. 3. if we go back to a longer time horizon and evaluate Bitcoin from an economic point of view, nothing changed, if we’re looking at how money comes into existence, there’s many factors speaking for a slow long term organic adoption as hard money first.

Less volume on the weekend usually, makes it easier.

Buying dips, no hard feelings.

1. It’s funny how people who don’t even know a person are quick to judge someone as idiot who’s in a desperate situation. What about a helping hand? Instead of trying to trash someone who is already down, just wait till y’all do one mistake in your lifes. And this is not an attack guys, but let’s build someone up instead of bringing him more down, i don’t think y’all are that weak.

2. @death_wish, try preparing a plan b, escaping margin trough more margin is highly unlikely. You’re in a debt trap now, but life isn’t defined by money in the first place(just a nice to have, except for people who are lame and don’t have anything else), the best things are free, so just a reminder to not forget living, even in a bad situation. Can help to get the head free again.

The question is do you wanna buy something in the short term or not? If the answer is no, i dont see a reason to sell. Escaping into the dollar will save you from what?

This, i think the best rule is to just not put oneself into a possibly vulnerable situation ever, if not strictly necessary. Even if it means less profits in the moment, but i think in the end this approach leaves way less room for errors and will probably succeed more on average. Taking shortcuts almost always will come back to someone later on.

Exactly, thats why i dont get what difference a DiD should make. But the problem here is how data is being stored and left vulnerable to criminals, companies, governments forever. The individual has almost no measures of protecting itself against this anymore. I dont get how Jack Dorsey wants to change that.

Nah, but it becomes a problem once you get targeted specifically, and then no one can help you.

Don’t let the name confuse you, it’s just trying to mock web 3.0. Jack dorsey and his company is trying to build some kind of decentralized web, that gives you self custody over your data. How this will actually work in practice, idk yet.

Yup, can confirm seems like Bitcoiners use these situations well. Every Bitcoiner i talked to stacked more sats, the only people that lost, used margin or didn’t hold their own keys. There’s definitely indicators that confirm this trend, even tho we can’t quantify how much exactly.

Its tiring to run in circles Snowshow, so lemme explain what you didnt get yet.

1. What’s money?

- A good that enables a system of indirect trade(contrary to a barter system)
- Has 3 main properties ->
   1. Ability to hold value over time(Store of Value)
   2. Ability to be easily sent and accepted over large distances(Medium of Exchange)
   3. Ability to be easily grouped and divided(Unit of Account)

2. How are these properties achieved?

- A Store of value needs
   -> 1. Scarcity(Supply relative to other goods)
                              
Bitcoin(21 million limit), Fiat(unlimited and rising), Gold(Scarce, but not limited)

   -> 2. Durability(No loss in functionality with repeated use)

Bitcoin(digital, so durable), Fiat(mostly digital now, but less durable), Gold(was the most durable once, could still be considered the most durable depending on the pov)

- A Medium of Exchange needs
   -> 1. Acceptability(Used and accepted by others)

Bitcoin(still low), Fiat(highest), Gold(high, but not everywhere)

   -> 2. Portability(Easily moveable across distances)

Bitcoin(extremly easy and fast, can move faster than the person itself, least costly solution for high amounts today), Fiat(Bills need to be transported manually(also dangerous), banking system takes a long time over large distances, need to be converted into different currencies), Gold(terribly hard, expensive and dangerous)

- A Unit of Account needs
   -> 1. Divisibility(Easily dividable into smaller units)

Bitcoin(Easy, 8 decimal places), Fiat(also good), Gold(terrible, needs a lot of work)

   -> 2. Fungibility(1 unit is the same as the other)

Bictoin(All units are the same, altough some people argue that the history of coins can affect its desirability for others, cant be counterfeited), Fiat(Bills are the same, but higher ones arent accepted everywhere, can be counterfeited, less relevant for digital fiat), Gold(theres different coins with different desirabilities, also its not easy to verify real gold for everyone)

Now what does only Bitcoin have -> Immutability(transaction finality).

3. What speaks for Bitcoin as money?

- Its superior in all properties listed above, except acceptability. If you think a potential money with superior propierties can gain acceptance over time, then its smart to invest in it, but know the risks.
- Greshams law(check it out yourself)
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Greshams-law

Theres for sure more to say, but this is enough for now. When you can debunk these points we can go on further.

Thanks man, you dont gotta go in deeper, its always hard to recommend particular assets to a broad audience, because everyone needs/ situation is different. Growing such a large portfolio will also take time, we will have enough to do our homework till then. Was still interesting hearing your take.


I actually thought about this too that getting a small amount of gold can make a whole lot of sense. Since Bitcoin will be volatile for quite some time, there could alway be some cases where we need some kind of unexpected emergency money in the moment. And then gold is perfect, because of the stability it offers.

Just like rn if someone would need money unexpectedly it would be a terrible time to sell Bitcoin. We dont have the luxury to choose yet, when to get some money out of Bitcoin, while not making big losses. With gold this doesnt really matter, its always pretty stable compared to other assets. So we could sell it easily and buy it back later. Also Gold is terrible to store in large quantities so something like 1% could give the portfolio some nice extra capabilities.


Yup theres also another a big factor investing plays for the economy, even tho i see how the whole system has become like a casino now. But if we go back to sane economics one day -> Businesses need liquidity, consumers need money.

Doing sane investments could be a win win situation for both. If consumers invested into companies theyre customers of themselves for example. The business could scale up their operations more, and the consumer gets more money to spend. But this can also go bad, if people are bad at investing and this will likely be the case. Forcing everyone to invest is probably always a bad idea for society as a whole. A hard money like Bitcoin could in theory work as an inbuilt savings mechanism for everyone(slight deflation trough lost coins), and serve people better, because they dont need to go to third parties to see their money grow, it just happens automatically and is distributed to everyone equally. Altough this still needs to be confirmed in practice.

Right now were in a bad situation for everyone, because fiat keeps devaluing so much, that it forces everyone to either spend their money fast or invest it. Now we have an education system that refuses to teach financial literacy, and we see a growing gap between poor and rich. We have one part of the population that can play this game perfectly and the other part is forced to get into something they were never prepared for. Its obvious who will win.

And why i said bad for everyone, because this tanks the economy in the process, a healthy society needs to balance itself out. If no more care is taken of poor/ workers then the system cant work out in the long run(even tho they try to keep it alive artificially) and wealth wont matter much anymore. Loose- Loose for everyone. But at the same time a system that vilifies wealthy people, will have all their prosperity run away and end in poverty for everyone. There needs to be a healthy balance between the two, smh like someone is testing us.

The world needs sound money asap.

I get your point and it’s fair, i just want to broaden the perspective, that scaling in a decentralized is way harder than in a centralized one. The non bitcoin world often portays it as if bitcoin uses energy for no reason, but the truth is there’s no other way than this currently. If we want decentralized infrastructure we have to use energy.

I think we should also point out the differences in centralized vs decentralized architecture, so people actually understand why it does this and why some limitations are there.

Utility is more complex than transactions per day. The banking industry processes 0 decentralised, immutable, permissionless transactions a day, so in this regard they don’t provide any censorship resistance to the world, while bitcoin does. And this just one of many factors that play into utility. Bitcoin can’t do everything at the same time, without having any limitations or time to grow. These two are also complete opposites with completely different use cases. Bitcoin is way more efficient than anything else for the job it’s supposed to do.