POLL: Bitcoin is/should be a currency, store of wealth, or both

[USB-S]

currency should be a store of wealth. The fiat system does the opposite however.

[bitbaby]

For now store of wealth is the safest option, using it as a currency is difficult currently because there aren't many places it is accepted and it is risky since its easy for swindlers to do their tricks with BTC and get away with it.

[jonald_fyookball]

bump

[manselr]

I think bitcoin was meant for everyday use, but honestly I have not read Bitcoin whitepaper. Once it reaches some stability I think it will be a suitable way to store wealth. I would feel a bit disappointed if Bitcoin was intended to make people rich (as the people waiting for its price to reach thousands want), what would be the difference with altcoins, then?

Satoshi wanted it to be used daily as a currency, but he also understood that since it would be an appreciating asset, people would tend to hoard a lot of it, as opposed to using it to buy stuff you can already buy with fiat.

[Fatman3001]

This is not a rip on people in this thread, but I am amazed that this is even discussed.

You can't have one without the other unless you peg the ledger units.

And when I see senior (full, senior, hero, legendary) members screaming that they want Bitcoin/BTC/XBT to exclusively be a store of wealth, my brain hurts.

[gentlemand]

Right now though it is a currency for some, it's primarily a payment rail that's quickly converted. I would've thought it has to prove itself as a store of wealth before it becomes widely used a currency.

[ATguy]

Both, obviously. Bitcoin as store of wealth only would be very tough to make if nobody uses Bitcoin actually as a currency. Think about it, do you store wealth in any random unused altcoin ? I dont and wouldnt.

[BillyBobZorton]

Eventually the network will be bottle necked because of the limit of block sizes. But that would only happen if Bitcoin is used more frequently and become a more recognized currency. Currently it is recognized by some governments that have banned it, but other governments are on the sidelines for now with it.

governments have not banned it for personal use. these narrow minded governments have only banned their own financial institutions from investing in it as their financial regulation criteria will not insure any bitcoin holdings..

There also is the large debate on block sizes and changing the limits, this may heat up over time as well.

yep the block limit needs to increase to cope with capacity.. especially if places like supermarkets accept bitcoin, as people will really want to spend it more often

But, based on the bitcoin wiki numbers found here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
There are a total of 86,400 seconds in a day. The Bitcoin network could handle 7 transactions per second.
So with 86,400 * 7 = 604,800 transactions can be handled.

the 7tx/s is based on 4200 tx a block.. but that equates to 238bytes a tx.. but on average most tx's are bigger and so i prefer the 4000tx/s (576k a day) which divided down to being only 6.66 tx a second.. which technically you cant have a 0.6 of a tx so its rounded up..

edit: agree with below, thats why i prefer the 4000tx a block average potential

But there can be larger and smaller inputs to the network.

A smaller transaction for example, consuming 128 bytes:
https://blockchain.info/tx/830a313d7a17b428c44461e07967bf906b585266c4892417accf718c0d9c3018


The largest block size transaction ever consuming 999,657 bytes:
https://blockchain.info/tx/bb41a757f405890fb0f5856228e23b715702d714d59bf2b1feb70d8b2b4e3e08



But in my opinion, Bitcoin is used as both. It has value as a technology and people invest into that, while also being used as a currency which people use as well.

In the long term I think block size increases do nothing. We need a second layer like the lightning network to be able to deal with the same amount of transaction you are proposing (supermarket worldwides type of use).

[eternalgloom]

As Franky has pointed out, being one does not exclude being the other.
So both is the only right answer in my opinion.

[nerFohanzo]

As Franky has pointed out, being one does not exclude being the other.
So both is the only right answer in my opinion.

Exactly, both is the right answer but I would also like to add one point and that is it is also an investment for the future, you are saving your money by buying bitcoins but at the same time it can prove to be an best future investment, and ofcourse it is a currency as it is taking care of basic stuffs like online purchases, online transfers, converting bitcoins to local currency, so for me it is three in one.