[FORBES] The Bitcoin Crash - New Article, Forbes Claim is Doom

[nighteyes]

And as always, you can always remove 'Bitcoin' and replace it with 'USD' and all statements will be true.

You're trolling, right? Because the reason the same isn't true of the USD is fairly thoroughly explained in the bit of the article BitcoinPorn quoted.

The author is comparing the US dollar(supply value=trillions of dollars in total value) to the bitcoin? Come on...we know that the bitcoin wont be the size of the US dollar anytime soon. But what happens when the dollar collapses? The author says "So, barring a major screw-up by the Federal Reserve, we can count on the value of dollars not falling very much."....what planet is this guy on? In fact, we CAN count on the dollars falling...how does this blogger think the deficit is going to be paid? One or two years of actual payments in the last 30 or so years? LOL....not to mention promises made to other people. Debt is greater than the GDP! Interest rate of debt(assuming balanced budget) is greater than GDP growth rate! Of course debt is expanding 10%+ over 1-2 years, with no one having economic growth close to that. Now if you ask me, its going to be much much worse...the US dollar is about to devalue massively, probably could be slowly held off for 5 years if they play their cards right. But once the Eurozone falls out, the spotlight will be on the USA and we go third world.

Yeah, I know our lowest rating is AA. Wouldnt you give a AA rating to an unsecured loan from a company that has $100,000 in sales, $100,000 in debt(and also $10 million in promises to others) and has made 1 or 2 payments the last 30 years? Yeah, I would too.

[1715127000]

1715127000

[Steve]

That depends. If there are 7 million of - for example - a particular brand of washing machine and 1 million of them burst into flames, that obviously makes the remaining 6 million rather less valuable. (Also, most of the bitcoins lost so far have been stolen rather than destroyed, so the number in circulation hasn't decreased that much.) On the one hand you have the decrease in supply, and on the other loss in confidence in Bitcoins as a result of the heists.

Actually, I'd say the number in circulation has likely increased rather dramatically as a result of the heists.  Consider that the thefts were from people hoarding bitcoin and the thieves are likely trying to circulate them and cash them out as soon as possible.

[error]

That depends. If there are 7 million of - for example - a particular brand of washing machine and 1 million of them burst into flames, that obviously makes the remaining 6 million rather less valuable. (Also, most of the bitcoins lost so far have been stolen rather than destroyed, so the number in circulation hasn't decreased that much.) On the one hand you have the decrease in supply, and on the other loss in confidence in Bitcoins as a result of the heists.

Actually, I'd say the number in circulation has likely increased rather dramatically as a result of the heists.  Consider that the thefts were from people hoarding bitcoin and the thieves are likely trying to circulate them and cash them out as soon as possible.

Really? Hoarding? Do you even know what that word means? This doesn't make your company look good.

[Atdhe]

The statement, that there is "nothing" behind BTC is incorrect.

There is pure energy behind BTC and around price of energy the price of BTC has to fluctuate. BTC is function of energy and development of graphic cards. Now the price is too low, so probably no miners are around, so this way automatically money supply drops.

So actually it is more behind BTC than behind fiat money.

[Steve]

That depends. If there are 7 million of - for example - a particular brand of washing machine and 1 million of them burst into flames, that obviously makes the remaining 6 million rather less valuable. (Also, most of the bitcoins lost so far have been stolen rather than destroyed, so the number in circulation hasn't decreased that much.) On the one hand you have the decrease in supply, and on the other loss in confidence in Bitcoins as a result of the heists.

Actually, I'd say the number in circulation has likely increased rather dramatically as a result of the heists.  Consider that the thefts were from people hoarding bitcoin and the thieves are likely trying to circulate them and cash them out as soon as possible.

Really? Hoarding? Do you even know what that word means? This doesn't make your company look good.

What aspect of what I said doesn't make sense to you?  The thieves stole money from people that were hoarding bitcoin and are (presumably) dumping it on the market.  The hoarders had taken money out of circulations and the thieves are taking it from the hoarders and returning it to circulation.  Seems logical, no?

[error]

That depends. If there are 7 million of - for example - a particular brand of washing machine and 1 million of them burst into flames, that obviously makes the remaining 6 million rather less valuable. (Also, most of the bitcoins lost so far have been stolen rather than destroyed, so the number in circulation hasn't decreased that much.) On the one hand you have the decrease in supply, and on the other loss in confidence in Bitcoins as a result of the heists.

Actually, I'd say the number in circulation has likely increased rather dramatically as a result of the heists.  Consider that the thefts were from people hoarding bitcoin and the thieves are likely trying to circulate them and cash them out as soon as possible.

Really? Hoarding? Do you even know what that word means? This doesn't make your company look good.

What aspect of what I said doesn't make sense to you?  The thieves stole money from people that were hoarding bitcoin and are (presumably) dumping it on the market.  The hoarders had taken money out of circulations and the thieves are taking it from the hoarders and returning it to circulation.  Seems logical, no?

Yes, except that you used the words "hoarding" and "hoarders" to describe something that isn't hoarding.

[TraderTimm]

Dow Jones Index: 10,838.08 -606.53 (-5.30%)

Yeah, sounds like someone has bigger problems right now -- right Forbes? Luckily all their dollars are backed by the Federal Reserve, who will no doubt print more money to make everything 'okay'.

As long as the internet exists on this planet, bitcoin is fine. Can't say the same for the U.S. Dollar, though.

What a wonderfully red crashilicious-day.

[hawks5999]

Bitcoin, the world’s first peer-to-peer digital currency, has lost almost half of its value against the dollar since the start of August, falling from $13.50 to around $7:

Hmm... I've seen something very similar somewhere...

Oh yeah:



Sure, it's a 10% drop vs a 50% drop but the point is this - all markets are collapsing (except Gold and Treasuries). BTC has volume measured in the thousands to 10's of thousands per day. The DJIA has a volume of 479 Million. BTC is completely unregulated, DJIA/NYSE is a regulated market.

So given that we've had a few flat out frauds recently and the market as a whole is collapsing, a 50% drop seems pretty reasonable. Somebody with better financial analysis skills might be able to show that given the macro picture a drop of 80% is more on order for a pico-cap unregulated instrument. Weak hands are getting shook out that will be buying back their coins at $10 or $15.

[RandyFolds]

The puzzling thing about Bitcoin, which I pointed out back in April, is that the currency doesn’t seem to have any fundamental value at all.

This statement is nonsense.  A bitcoin itself might not have any intrinsic value, but the bitcoin platform has plenty of fundamental value.  The author is dead wrong on this point.  The issues will get resolved in time, effective defenses against theft will be crafted, and bitcoin will survive.

Well, he obviously doesn't know that his bitcoin can get him high as shit.