Peter Schiff doesn't get Bitcoin

[niemivh]

Peter Schiff has a big mouth and an even bigger ego.

Amen.  Half of everything that Peter Schiff says is a lie, a deception or a twisting of the truth to a degree.  He is totally out for #1 and makes no bones about it if you understand what his position is.  At least that's what I get from having had listened to him for a while, I haven't read his books.

[1713531954]

1713531954

[1713531954]

1713531954

[1713531954]

1713531954

[1713531954]

1713531954

[Tukotih]

A lot of libertarian types don't like any currency not backed by something that has some utilitarian value

Well, it may not be backed by utilitarian value. But it is created from it, perhaps that could make a difference to them?

[bittersweet]

Of course Bitcoin has utilitarian value. It lets you trade online drugs, weapons and avoid taxes. It also helps you protect yourself from inflation (which is a hidden tax) and from other government scams and crimes.

[em3rgentOrdr]

Of course Bitcoin has utilitarian value. It lets you trade online drugs, weapons and avoid taxes. It also helps you protect yourself from inflation (which is a hidden tax) and from other government scams and crimes.

That's the problem with Bitcoin. Gold is SIMPLE, any idiot can understand how it works. Gold is a rare and pretty metal, people want gold - that's all.

Wrong.  You'd be suprised how stupid average joe can be.  Watch this video Mark Dice tries to sell $1100 one ounce gold coin for $50; no takers ...

[cypherdoc]

gold doesnt need to be backed by anything cause everyone has known for 6000+ years its valuable, even stupid rappers that make shit music.. it takes capitol,manpower,land and time to produce there for it could never go to zero unless 6 billion people get together and say hey, fuck gold i want bitcoins or paper dollars.   

umm... roughly 5.99 billion have said "hey, fuck gold i want... paper dollars"

i don't think they had a choice in the matter.

[cypherdoc]

when something depends on u not understanding it, u won't understand it.

[cypherdoc]

gold doesnt need to be backed by anything cause everyone has known for 6000+ years its valuable, even stupid rappers that make shit music.. it takes capitol,manpower,land and time to produce there for it could never go to zero unless 6 billion people get together and say hey, fuck gold i want bitcoins or paper dollars.   

fair point but the world has never seen the internet before either and worldwide communication has never existed btwn normal humans beings as it is today.  i could argue that the Bitcoin/gold argument is one of old world vs new world.  from what i've seen of bitcoin, i'll go with new world.

[cypherdoc]

That's the problem with Bitcoin. Gold is SIMPLE, any idiot can understand how it works. Gold is a rare and pretty metal, people want gold - that's all. The way Bitcoin works, well it's pretty advanced concept. To fully understand it you must be a sort of a hacker/geek person. Peter Schiff is not an idiot, but he ain't a hacker.

+1

[Grant]

That's not quite true. Gold has value because it's useful as money (this is why Bitcoin has value as well). Cactuses and sand are poor money, and thus not valuable for that purpose. Gold is excellent for that purpose. Society didn't arbitrarily select gold to be money, it was borne of the market's need for a useful medium of exchange. The Native American "market" seemingly hadn't come to the same conclusion, and that's fine.

Isn't that very much the "goldsmith-illusion" mankind fell for, and sold itself for many times before ? Gold was practical for some time because the goldsmiths had experience and resources to safely store other peoples deposits.  That's the only thing money needs, a secure signature...

Bitcoin is valuable because its the closest thing to wooden sticks: http://www.safehaven.com/article/2073/the-disastrous-history-of-money-english-wooden-sticks which served pretty well with its unique natural signature.

[Current-C]

Was this on the radio show or podcast?  Anyone have a link?  Youtube?  Anything?

[cdnbcguy]

Was this on the radio show or podcast?  Anyone have a link?  Youtube?  Anything?

It was on his website radio station

http://www.schiffradio.com/

but he weirdly charges money for access to the archives. You have to get the show in two days or it's behind the paywall.

[evoorhees]

Isn't that very much the "goldsmith-illusion" mankind fell for, and sold itself for many times before ? Gold was practical for some time because the goldsmiths had experience and resources to safely store other peoples deposits.  That's the only thing money needs, a secure signature...

Bitcoin is valuable because its the closest thing to wooden sticks: http://www.safehaven.com/article/2073/the-disastrous-history-of-money-english-wooden-sticks which served pretty well with its unique natural signature.

It's not the "goldsmith-illusion" and mankind didn't fall for anything. Gold is not valuable because goldsmiths first figured out people might want to keep their money safe (after all, they wouldn't haven't been using gold as money before the goldsmith offered a safe, according to your theory).

It's extremely important to understand why gold is valuable if one is to understand why Bitcoin may be even better. Gold's value comes from its physical properties - it's divisibility, durability, homogeneity, scarcity, etc.  Think of all things out there in nature... few offer all the same attributes as gold. Iron is divisible and durable, but it's not scarce enough. Wooden sticks are divisible, but not able to be recombined. Food can be used as money, but it spoils when saved and two pounds of food are not identical - not homogeneous. Cows make a poor money because dividing one in half would kill it. Gold, and other precious metals, are the only things mankind has found that work extremely well as a money. Anything CAN be used as a money, but some things are much better than others for this purpose. We use fiat paper now, of course, only because governments backed with violence and guns have forced us to do so.

Bitcoin's properties similarly make it incredibly useful as a money. Is it even better than gold, or may it exist alongside to serve different purposes? The market will have to decide.

[MarketNeutral]

Talking about money in an informed way is impossible without first distinguishing what we are talking about. Please define it first. Are we talking about debt as money, such as Federal Reserve currency that is loaned into existence? Are we talking about gold as money, which is functionally that which can extinguish debt? Or bi- and tri-metallic standards? Or more laterally, are we talking about money as a unit of account, such as the SDR, or medium of exchange, etc? A gold standard––ok, which gold standard? There have been many different kinds.

'Cent per cent' real bills of credit functioned alongside gold, as have many national currencies. (Moreover, gold standards don't prevent folly or greed.)


[Edited for clarity.]

[Derrick]

That's the problem with Bitcoin. Gold is SIMPLE, any idiot can understand how it works. Gold is a rare and pretty metal, people want gold - that's all. The way Bitcoin works, well it's pretty advanced concept. To fully understand it you must be a sort of a hacker/geek person. Peter Schiff is not an idiot, but he ain't a hacker.

While your argument is true, the same cannot be said about Bitcoin vs US dollar.  Or any government fiat currency for that matter.   The way in which the government creates money is far more mundane than how bitcoins are created.  

Peter Schiff, like most of the world, just need more education.  They need us to help them reach that "ahah" moment.  

Instead of explaining how Bitcoin works, share with people the vision.   Of a decentralized, open source currency system; one that is impossible for governments or elitists to control.

Call into his show, he takes callers every weekday.

[MarketNeutral]

That's the problem with Bitcoin. Gold is SIMPLE, any idiot can understand how it works. Gold is a rare and pretty metal, people want gold - that's all. The way Bitcoin works, well it's pretty advanced concept. To fully understand it you must be a sort of a hacker/geek person. Peter Schiff is not an idiot, but he ain't a hacker.

Peter Schiff, like most of the world, just need more education.  They need more info to reach that "ahah" moment. 

Instead of explaining how Bitcoin works, share with people the vision.   Of a decentralized, open source currency system; one that is impossible for governments or elitists to control.

+1

Good point. The technical aspects of bitcoin can be absorbed in due time. You don't get people hooked with talk of GPUs and hashes. The vision should come first, as it is what will capture people's imaginations. That early Ah ha! moment of understanding is crucial.

[evoorhees]

Talking about money in an informed way is impossible without first distinguishing what we are talking about. Please define it first. Are we talking about debt as money, such as Federal Reserve currency that is loaned into existence? Are we talking about gold as money, which is functionally that which can extinguish debt? Or bi- and tri-metallic standards? Or more laterally, are we talking about money as a unit of account, such as the SDR, or medium of exchange, etc? A gold standard––ok, which gold standard? There have been many different kinds. Cent per cent real bills of credit functioned alongside gold, as have many national currencies. I could go on. The misconceptions about money that I've read on this board are staggering.

I'm defining it as, something that is commonly accepted as a medium of exchange. With this definition, dollars are money, euros are money, precious metals are money, bitcoins are money, etc. The debate is over the issue of what ought to be used as money, and why.

[hawks5999]

Medium of exchange is really just a function of money isn't it?
Isn't store of value also a function.

It seems that historically you had mediums of exchange - generally paper notes; and you had stores of value - gold, silver, etc. And I'm not talking historically on Yap Islands but more like historically in developed economies. There are problems with having the store of value also be the medium of exchange - in that no one wants to give away the stored value. That's a bit of an issue with BTC now. Who wants to buy something with a coin that is going to be worth more tomorrow?

[jprowl]

Pursuant to the Constitution, congress later enacted the Coinage Act of April 2, 1792(1) which forever set and immutably fixed the standard dollar as a weight of silver equal to 371.25 grains (0.7734 troy ounce or 24.0565 grams) or 1.292929 dollars of silver to the ounce. The same act provided for gold coins valued but not denominated in dollars ($10 eagles, $5 half-eagles, and $2.50 quarter eagles). Once a standard has been set, it cannot be changed, any more than congress could declare that present "foot" measure should comprise ten inches rather than twelve. The only constitutional standard money of the United States is the 371.25 grain dollar of silver.

A dollar is 371.25 grains of silver, that is what the constitution states what a dollar is. A dollar is not a piece of paper backed up by nothing. Federal Reserve notes are not dollars.

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-22187/TS-368400.mp3

Have a listen to this interview with Jim Townsend. He really does into depth about the Dollar and many other things too. It it beyond interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNNv-kY2Pug

There is a youtube of him there talking about it as well.

You wouldn't take a wooden nickel, then why would you take a paper dollar.

[gswiss]

No, he gets bitcoin. Schiff is a brilliant guy. He hates our current finance situation because the dollar ISN'T backed by really anything. He wants everything to be backed by something (gold, silver, etc...). So it is not even the slightest bit surprising that he doesn't support bitcoin. It's not his type of thing.

[NO_SLAVE]

Shiff can be brought around if someone sits down and talks with him.  His and my reactions were the same when I read about BTC.  I like silver so I'm on the same page.  But Im still coming around. If he can be shown how bitcoin is similar to silver, and how BTC can be its own monetary system for a community, he'll at least not be negative on it.
Will BTC be used to fund wars, probably not. Will BTC be used to turn americans into slaves,  I doubt it.  Now lets ask those questions of the USD.