Bitcoin vs. Gold Prices

[Hell-raiser]

I don't deny that they often abuse their power of printing money but it seems to me that it is still rather a lopsided view to indiscriminately blame the government for every wrongdoing. After all, it was the financial (banking) sector that had created the subprime mortgage crisis in the first place, not the government itself. You could of course say that they should have interfered but it is free market, isn't it?

In this analysis, we have to view the state and the banks as an alliance to jointly benefit by issuing financial assets and propping them up.  E.g. the asset bubble that led to the mortgage crisis was inflated not just by banks, but by bankers working hand in hand with a coalition of political entities.  It's not just the narrow interests involved (such as those wanting an increase in home ownership by minority groups,) but asset inflation benefits all politicians because the 'free' wealth lifts the entire economy, job base, investor base for public debt, and tax base.  At least until, hopefully, one leaves office!

So your point can be summarized like to each his own, everyone for himself and devil take the hindmost. To put it differently, you can't expect anyone to behave responsible, as in money printing, when they can easily get away with being completely irresponsible as is the case with virtually any government. But then it is not an economic question anymore. In other words, it makes no sense to deal with such issues from purely economic point of view. Otherwise we will always be missing the whole picture.

[BobK71]

So your point can be summarized like to each his own, everyone for himself and devil take the hindmost. To put it differently, you can't expect anyone to behave responsible, as in money printing, when they can easily get away with being completely irresponsible as is the case with virtually any government. But then it is not an economic question anymore. In other words, it makes no sense to deal with such issues from purely economic point of view. Otherwise we will always be missing the whole picture.

That is not what I mean.  We want good people, but people are good only if they see most others as being similarly good, i.e. all are following a set of rules designed to benefit the community.  But what should those rules be?  That is the key question.  When you have a set of rules that allow and reward predatory behavior (especially by the top elites,) not only do you reward every-man-for-himself behavior among the elites, the corruption also goes down to average people.  The entire society is worse off.

I submit that granting the power to create money to the elites is precisely one of those perverse rules.

[Activitycoin]

ahahah please forget tradational investment things..

yes you can lost easily but you can not earn good profit.

Bitcoin is the new currency it is not the old investment but if you are talking about then it is right, today everything is gradually getting digital and people are using online shopping and they are saving a lot of digital currency for their future because they knows coming age is the going to be the digital era so for me as well bitcoin is much better than gold. It is save to hold and it is easy to carry without any risk of lose you will be able to make high amount of profit every month for free and you can increase the money with eh help of bitcoin investment, GOLD is now an old fashioned investment which is not very profitable anymore.

[Altero]

Both are having a good value in the market but they are totally different in terms of used and the way it grows. We've knew gold for so long and it's great image in the public until bitcoin's comes arrived and people Turing their heads for these.  Not exactly people forget gold but because if having a huge value of bitcoin recently they might get lost their attention into it. 

[viavalenttt]

Charlie Wozniak (apple co founder) said something interesting within an interview recently. This individual said humanity will create better and more effective methods to harvest yellow metal from the earth's brown crust area. Bitcoin's algorithmic approach to constraining its own production has superior chances of retaining a regular rate of source.

The actual test of platinum is actually society can realistically revert to a gold standard in instances of emergency. If a zombie apocalypse occurred down the road, would gold emerge as a preferred coin of exchange across remnants of civilization? There are videos on youtube where people walk the streets trying to sell $1, 1000 of gold or metallic for $50. No one takes them up on it. The idea of gold and its value as a currency may be too neglected within the population eye to be an emergent currency in times of distress. Not really only is support for gold exchange non-existent, their utility as a means of exchange may be a lost lore similar to the recipe for making roman concrete or damascus steel.

Golds best hope may be a form of gold renaissance, a resurgence of interest driven by fears relating to fiat hyperinflation. This kind of is occurring in certain groups. Preppers, doomsdayers and post apocalyptic planners are inventory up on important mining harvests. What gold lacks in bling power and exhilaration it could more than replace in endurance.

Via my posts on this forum, it could be evident I actually favor bitcoin over platinum. But even I no longer forget gold was here millennia before anyone realized what bitcoin was, and may be around millennia after bitcoin is lost and forgotten.

[iMark]

Both are having a good value in the market but they are totally different in terms of used and the way it grows. We've knew gold for so long and it's great image in the public until bitcoin's comes arrived and people Turing their heads for these.  Not exactly people forget gold but because if having a huge value of bitcoin recently they might get lost their attention into it. 

but most of the world's population still likes to use gold as their investment because gold is seen as a safe place to save money without inflation and the like. bitcoin that comes with offering an investment with a quick profit will certainly be used as an option only because the fluctuating price makes people less interested? but for myself bitcoin is a great technology and for a long-term investment I never worry about it

[soenaderecho10]

Both are having a good value in the market but they are totally different in terms of used and the way it grows. We've knew gold for so long and it's great image in the public until bitcoin's comes arrived and people Turing their heads for these.  Not exactly people forget gold but because if having a huge value of bitcoin recently they might get lost their attention into it. 

but most of the world's population still likes to use gold as their investment because gold is seen as a safe place to save money without inflation and the like. bitcoin that comes with offering an investment with a quick profit will certainly be used as an option only because the fluctuating price makes people less interested? but for myself bitcoin is a great technology and for a long-term investment I never worry about it

Both of that is good on pricing but theres a big defferences of prices because bitcoin is moving a price and the price is moving theres big down of price or high of price and its nice to buy if the pricing of bitcoin will low because you will get a good profit if the bitcoin will rise again while the gold its very slowly to growth the price and its very expensive to buy but if you buy a gold we can sure the good profit.

[Pinoyfan]

The last time I did this analysis, gold was a thousand times more expensive than Bitcoin, if we compare the same proportions of total supply.  By now, Bitcoin has risen 30-fold, and so gold is only 30 times more expensive.

Of course, I was roundly dismissed for speculating Bitcoin could get anywhere near a six-figure price in dollars.  If I was criticized for being too bullish on Bitcoin, today I might be seen as too bullish on gold.

How to answer the question -- where to from here?  As I wrote recently, gold is objectively a better money for securing savers' freedom from governments and central banks.  So, if the long-term price ratio is 10 to 1 in favor of gold, Bitcoin can still go up 3 times.  It'd still be a great return by the standards of any asset, but Bitcoin is not quite as compelling as it used to be.

Especially, many early owners of Bitcoin, now flush with capital, who are also sympathetic to gold, might decide to sell some Bitcoin and buy gold at these prices.

We have to be careful here.  This entire analysis was based on the (pretty common) assumption that governments and central banks have nothing to do with gold and Bitcoin prices, and that the future of Bitcoin is to be another limited-supply monetary asset like gold, but at an appropriate relative price.  (The reality, at least with gold prices, is of course the opposite.)

So, the real question is what the Western elites want (and what China and Russia want, if they're able to counter the West in the field of monetary engineering.)  If Western debt levels and resulting economic/social/political problems are so bad that the elites have decided to use cryptocurrency to effect a reset of the entire system, to effectively wipe out their debt and start afresh, as just after World War II, then the sky is the limit for Bitcoin and cryptos.

If, on the other hand, the Western elites are only preparing for such a reset by taking advantage of cheap crypto prices so far, then we have to watch the relative price to gold.  The rise of Bitcoin, so far, is consistent with this scenario too.  From here on, our thinking might have to change.

For the answer to that question, watch the news closely for the signs!

We all know that bitcoin is the best than others so i choose bitcoin than gold because you will get more money in bitcoin than gold just invest in dip and then sell it when the value is too high because theres a chance that bitcoin will dump again bitcoin is our future money 100 percent.

[Abigail.Parsons]

I think bitcoins recent increase in price whilst the stock markets have declined will give people more confidence that it can act as a digital gold

[Sled]

These two things act different on their prices because they have a very different kind of market or environment so i think that we should not compare them two because if we will talk about profitability then it is very easy to say that bitcoin is the winner here because it is very profitable as its market's price is continue going up over the time because of its advanced technology and also very limited amount of supply.

[Dr.Osh]

These two things act different on their prices because they have a very different kind of market or environment so i think that we should not compare them two because if we will talk about profitability then it is very easy to say that bitcoin is the winner here because it is very profitable as its market's price is continue going up over the time because of its advanced technology and also very limited amount of supply.

well, both are good enough to be used as an investment tool, and both do have a very high price. but, for now, I just focus on bitcoin prices, and collect bitcoin, because I feel that the potential of bitcoin is still bigger than gold. besides, it's easier to get bitcoin than gold.

[InvestMen]

Gold has been in its niche for more than three thousand years. If bitcoin at least 100 years will grow by 1000% per year, it will be the best tool for investment. Bitcoins in the world are 23 million, capitalization is 200 billion dollars. Gold in the world for 7000 years. was extracted 161 million kilograms, and the total capitalization exceeds 9 trillion dollars. Bitkoinu need to increase in price at least 45 times to achieve gold capitalization

[Hell-raiser]

So your point can be summarized like to each his own, everyone for himself and devil take the hindmost. To put it differently, you can't expect anyone to behave responsible, as in money printing, when they can easily get away with being completely irresponsible as is the case with virtually any government. But then it is not an economic question anymore. In other words, it makes no sense to deal with such issues from purely economic point of view. Otherwise we will always be missing the whole picture.

That is not what I mean.  We want good people, but people are good only if they see most others as being similarly good, i.e. all are following a set of rules designed to benefit the community.  But what should those rules be?  That is the key question.  When you have a set of rules that allow and reward predatory behavior (especially by the top elites,) not only do you reward every-man-for-himself behavior among the elites, the corruption also goes down to average people.  The entire society is worse off.

I submit that granting the power to create money to the elites is precisely one of those perverse rules.

Okay, this is not what you meant to say but then this is what follows from your words. I don't really see why anyone would be good if they can be bad and being bad gives them a financial leverage. Am I the only one who smells utopian here? Rules are there to break, especially if breaking them doesn't entail any damages. And which rules do you talk about if we consider financial and monetary policies? Who is to set them and what metrics should be used? For example, there are competing economic theories like Keynesianism vs Monetarism vs everything else.

[BobK71]

Charlie Wozniak (apple co founder) said something interesting within an interview recently. This individual said humanity will create better and more effective methods to harvest yellow metal from the earth's brown crust area. Bitcoin's algorithmic approach to constraining its own production has superior chances of retaining a regular rate of source.

The actual test of platinum is actually society can realistically revert to a gold standard in instances of emergency. If a zombie apocalypse occurred down the road, would gold emerge as a preferred coin of exchange across remnants of civilization? There are videos on youtube where people walk the streets trying to sell $1, 1000 of gold or metallic for $50. No one takes them up on it. The idea of gold and its value as a currency may be too neglected within the population eye to be an emergent currency in times of distress. Not really only is support for gold exchange non-existent, their utility as a means of exchange may be a lost lore similar to the recipe for making roman concrete or damascus steel.

Golds best hope may be a form of gold renaissance, a resurgence of interest driven by fears relating to fiat hyperinflation. This kind of is occurring in certain groups. Preppers, doomsdayers and post apocalyptic planners are inventory up on important mining harvests. What gold lacks in bling power and exhilaration it could more than replace in endurance.

Via my posts on this forum, it could be evident I actually favor bitcoin over platinum. But even I no longer forget gold was here millennia before anyone realized what bitcoin was, and may be around millennia after bitcoin is lost and forgotten.

The fundamental case for gold and other non-state-issued monies is IMO a lot simpler and more mundane than apocalyptic visions.  It is that the incentives inherent in the modern world system will always cause the elites to destabilize their own system, over time.  They have all kinds of powers to prop up their system, yes, but eventually all that this support does is to buy them more time.

When the system is broken enough, one way or another, the elites will have to devalue their issued money against non-state money.  At that point, the pent-up appreciation of non-state money will all be released.

There's an important distinction between precious metals and cryptocurrencies.  The total supply of the latter is actually unlimited (as I pointed out in the article linked to by the OP.)  If the elites want to make cryptos a viable form of money, they will have to, somehow and eventually, put some form of limitation on the rate of the production of coins, before most people realize this fact.  (And yes, everything is controlled: the prices of gold, Bitcoin, altcoins, everything.  And yes, it's in the great interest of the Western imperial elites, at this point, to support cryptos as a viable money, in fact if not openly in name.)

[BobK71]

And which rules do you talk about if we consider financial and monetary policies? Who is to set them and what metrics should be used? For example, there are competing economic theories like Keynesianism vs Monetarism vs everything else.

The only way out is public awareness.  There are no shortcuts.  Most of the Western public are aware of the need for a free-market economy.  They're not yet aware of a similar need for a free financial market.  They're aware of the evils of a centrally planned economy (Soviet Union, socialist China, etc.)  They're not yet consciously aware of those of their own centrally planned financial system.  The two sets of problems are almost completely analogous, down to the need for propaganda.

Under the popular academic labels, I suppose you could call this Austrian economics.  (Although there are aspects of that school that sound strange to me.)  Keynesianism and monetarism were popularized in their day, because of their benefits to the establishment -- giving academic cover for a new type of state-driven financial inflation to support or renew the system that had been benefiting the elites.

I don't really see why anyone would be good if they can be bad and being bad gives them a financial leverage. Am I the only one who smells utopian here? Rules are there to break, especially if breaking them doesn't entail any damages.

This was precisely my point.  I don't see how we differ on this.

[Findingnemo]

Both are having a good value in the market but they are totally different in terms of used and the way it grows. We've knew gold for so long and it's great image in the public until bitcoin's comes arrived and people Turing their heads for these.  Not exactly people forget gold but because if having a huge value of bitcoin recently they might get lost their attention into it. 

but most of the world's population still likes to use gold as their investment because gold is seen as a safe place to save money without inflation and the like. bitcoin that comes with offering an investment with a quick profit will certainly be used as an option only because the fluctuating price makes people less interested? but for myself bitcoin is a great technology and for a long-term investment I never worry about it

Both of that is good on pricing but theres a big defferences of prices because bitcoin is moving a price and the price is moving theres big down of price or high of price and its nice to buy if the pricing of bitcoin will low because you will get a good profit if the bitcoin will rise again while the gold its very slowly to growth the price and its very expensive to buy but if you buy a gold we can sure the good profit.

Yes both having a great respect and good response by the users but my choice is bitcoin because of it’s value and extraordinary growth in a short time when comparing to gold bitcoin has a huge development in short time that’s why I’m saying bitcoin is better than gold now a days.

[Hell-raiser]

I don't really see why anyone would be good if they can be bad and being bad gives them a financial leverage. Am I the only one who smells utopian here? Rules are there to break, especially if breaking them doesn't entail any damages.

This was precisely my point.  I don't see how we differ on this.

But you just said that it wasn't what you meant. But never mind, I'm not nitpicking or whatever, I just want to say that it seems to be a dead-end from which there is no way out, no escape. The financial elites will never agree to accept crypto because they invented fiat not to go back to what can be called "digital gold" (in respect to controlled monetary supply). If this is the case, then we can't deal with these problems (e.g. inflation) and try to explain them on a purely economic basis. We will always have to consider the arbitrariness of the financial establishment actions.

[sitnikov]

Gold has been in its niche for more than three thousand years. If bitcoin at least 100 years will grow by 1000% per year, it will be the best tool for investment. Bitcoins in the world are 23 million, capitalization is 200 billion dollars. Gold in the world for 7000 years. was extracted 161 million kilograms, and the total capitalization exceeds 9 trillion dollars. Bitkoinu need to increase in price at least 45 times to achieve gold capitalization

Gold has a lo of limitations in comparison to bitcoins. Biggest problem with gold is storage. If you are having good amount of fold, you will have to spend additional money on its security like a locker. In case of bitcoins, you can store coins worth millions in your wallet and there are additional safety measures like physical wallet.

Also, in case of gold ornaments , whenever you sell them, the jeweler deducts some money in name of making charges. In case of bitcoins, you get more than the money invested if price has increased.

[BobK71]

I don't really see why anyone would be good if they can be bad and being bad gives them a financial leverage. Am I the only one who smells utopian here? Rules are there to break, especially if breaking them doesn't entail any damages.

This was precisely my point.  I don't see how we differ on this.

But you just said that it wasn't what you meant. But never mind, I'm not nitpicking or whatever,

I'm sorry if there is any confusion.  What I distanced myself from was the (possible) suggestion that I wanted anarchy, or that I see the world as amoral.

When a lot of wealth and power are at stake, then rules are tossed aside, especially if they're unwritten.  This was 'precisely my point.'  I might have replied too fast.

I just want to say that it seems to be a dead-end from which there is no way out, no escape. The financial elites will never agree to accept crypto because they invented fiat not to go back to what can be called "digital gold" (in respect to controlled monetary supply). If this is the case, then we can't deal with these problems (e.g. inflation) and try to explain them on a purely economic basis. We will always have to consider the arbitrariness of the financial establishment actions.

(1) If you mean we're powerless, that is not true.  The entire system can be changed when the public have the awareness.  This goes far beyond Bitcoin, gold, etc. and is about the freedom of financial markets in the same way as the freedom of goods and services markets.  In addition, even while we have the status quo, every bit of extra awareness by the public will create a little bit more obstacles to the elites and a little more incentive for them to do the right things (e.g. leaning more on inflation rather than financial repression after a crisis -- as I mentioned inflation is the best of the bad choices at that point.)

(2) The elites are supportive of crypto, for their own reasons.  They're just not saying so openly.  I've pointed this out many times, and you can look up my writings under my profile, e.g. the thread 'Debt Does Matter, and Why Cryptocurrencies Have to Go Up' that I started, or the one linked from the OP.

(3) I would agree 'economics,' as currently defined and classified by mainstream academics, is too narrow a sphere to have a full debate on these subjects.  Economics treats the problem from a scientific angle only and doesn't consider the human problems of greed, deception, politics etc., when reality is the exact opposite.  All of the major drivers of modern events are directly or indirectly rooted in human deception via the money system.  The only world where economic science really applied would be one where truly free markets dominate -- in such a world, the field of economics would be much, much simpler (and more of a science) than it is today.

[jeaniferomambac]

I don't really see why anyone would be good if they can be bad and being bad gives them a financial leverage. Am I the only one who smells utopian here? Rules are there to break, especially if breaking them doesn't entail any damages.

This was precisely my point.  I don't see how we differ on this.

But you just said that it wasn't what you meant. But never mind, I'm not nitpicking or whatever, I just want to say that it seems to be a dead-end from which there is no way out, no escape. The financial elites will never agree to accept crypto because they invented fiat not to go back to what can be called "digital gold" (in respect to controlled monetary supply). If this is the case, then we can't deal with these problems (e.g. inflation) and try to explain them on a purely economic basis. We will always have to consider the arbitrariness of the financial establishment actions.

When we say bitcoin it is can not be touch and we can not see on it we only see a coin that sign of bitcoin, but we can earn a lot of money from it by making an account and started working on bitcoin just like posting all your answers regarding bitcoin.we can have a big profit from bitcoin and if you like to buy or invest on bitcoin you can buy and invest anytime you like,and when we say gold we can see it and touch it and so we can directly decide if its a right time to buy it and its price is very expensive and if you dont have to much money to buy it you can not buy on it and you can not have a profit from it if you can't buy the gold.bitcoin is still great compared to gold because we can still have an extra income or we can still earn a money from bitcoin without using money and only we can do is by working on it,unlike in gold that needed a money first just to have on it.