Don't buy bitcoin because it won't be fine

[dentolas]

sorry man, but if you think it through, bitcoin is money and serves the same purpose as money.
If I have a dollar in my bank account, if is digital money that I can use to buy something. With bitcoin is the same... there are just not so many places to use it yet...
Besides, on your purposed pyramid scheme, it shouldn't be possible for someone to exchange back the "pyramid good" for real money, and even impossible to make that exchange with profit... with bitcoin is...
I think the main issue here is what we consider "money" and thinking that way, dollars are so worthless as bitcoin
There is an excellent article that might help

https://medium.com/s/the-crypto-collection/you-dont-understand-bitcoin-because-you-think-money-is-real-5aef45b8e952

cheerrs

[fxsurfer]

In a fraudulent investment scheme, like Ponzi, investors transfer their utilizable resources, be it money, goods or services, and then they end up with something which has zero utilization capacity, like promise or non-binding record of investment. After the investment, the only possible way for them to get utilizable resources back is if new investors join the scheme and in that way bring such resources with them.

The opposite is true in a legitimate investment business, where investors transfer one type of utilizable resource and in return they receive another type of such resource. An utilizable resource is anything that can be practically utilized by humans. For e.g. a car can be practically utilized for driving, a dollar for loan payments, a stock for participation in company's profitability, food for providing nutritional support, a raw material for producing finished products etc. Hence, an utilizable resource is not something that is just passed from hand-to-hand on a market for investing or speculation purposes, but something which has end consumers who will consume, utilize or otherwise put the thing to practical use. And this practical use by end consumers is why things got to the market in the first place. For e.g. dollars got to the market because they have end consumers in the form of borrowers the same as food has such consumers in hungry people. In other words, loan contracts and collaterals force people to use dollars for loan payments the same as hunger forces people to use food. Since all dollars (either paper or digital) are loan based, they are not just passed from hand to hand, but also utilized by borrowers who are forced to give goods and services to dollar investors, speculators, or regular users, when loan payment liability must be fulfilled. In the same way, hungry people are forced to give money, goods or services to food producers.

In a fraudulent investment scheme there are no end consumers, which is why a thing that lures members into the scheme is just passed from hand-to-hand, from member-to-member... until it is realized that the only profit can come from utilizable resources invested into the scheme.

And this finally brings us to bitcoin and the following question. When investors transfer their utilizable resources like money, goods or services into bitcoin do they end up with another utilizable resource, i.e. a resource which can be utilized by some end consumer? Well, the obvious answer is: no, they do not. Instead, they end up only with a record in a table (blockchain) or in other words, only with a number associated with their bitcoin address. And this number cannot be practically utilized like food is utilized by hungry people or dollar by borrowers, but it can only be passed from address-to-address, from hand-to-hand,  from member-to-member. And this is exactly how classical fraudulent schemes operate - they use something to lure people into the scheme, but the thing itself is non-utilizable, which is why it is just passed from one person to another. Once people realize that profit or utilizable resources can come from new investors only, the whole scheme collapses. And this is the ultimate fate of bitcoin. So, do not buy it.

Update 1:
I see a lot of posters are unable to differentiate between the terms "usage of bitcoin" and "transfer of bitcoin". "Using" X is not the same as "transferring X". If I say that iPhone has a use, that mens it is used as communicating device, music player, gaming console, camera, and so on. If I say that dollar has a use, that mens it is used by borrowers for fulfilling their loan obligations - which is the reason it came into existence in the first place. Passing iPhone or dollars from hand to hand is not usage - it is transfer. Nearly everything that is in existence has the capacity to be transferred from one person to another, either electronically or manually.

However, that does not mean that everything has the capacitly to be used, consumed or practically utilized for satisfying human needs. And it is the capacitly to satisfy human needs why things are produced and why they came to the market in the first place. For e.g. there are lots of people who have needs to consume goods or services they don't own. But how can they get them? Well, by borrowing them, with the implied or expressed intention of returning them back in the future. And here is where the banks kick in with their product - dollar. Dollar is produced by the banks to satisfy needs of these people. Its main feature is that it is composed of two crucial parts: contract and collateral. These components guarantee that borrowers who traded produced dollars to people for their goods and services, return goods and services back to them, which happens every time their contract obligates them to make loan payments.

Hence, dollar is product like food or clothing, with the capacity to be used, consumed or practically utilized by its end users - borrowers.

Bitcoin on the other hand has no such utilizable capacity - it cannot be used, which is why it can only be transferred - i.e. passed from address-to-address, from hand-to-hand, from member-to-member. In other words, in the bitcoin circulation chain, nobody is able use bitcoin, like in the case of dollars, goods, services and similar utilizable resources..., which is why such resources can be obtained from new investors only. And this is the definition of a classical ponzi or pyramid scheme.

Buying bitcoin is worthy in my own thought,because its a new resources or investment in new mellennial age and its like an asset that  you invest for your own future,even though we face a bearish situation of all price value,but we now for sure thats everythings will resolves soon in the certain proper amount of time,thats why we need patience to overcome this we face trials now about cryptocurrency.

Well, the problem is that Bitcoin is not a resource. A resource is something that one can actually use, such as land, car, machinery, tools, building, dollar. The latter - dollar, originated from loan contact in the form of debt, which is why it is actually used, utilized or consumed when contract's obligations are being fulfilled, i.e. when borrowers make their loan payments to settle their debt. Bitcoin on the other hand is just number associated with an address, hence a mathematical abstraction that cannot be used by humans but only transferred from address to address, which is why it is not a resource but an useless object.

[fxsurfer]

sorry man, but if you think it through, bitcoin is money and serves the same purpose as money.
If I have a dollar in my bank account, if is digital money that I can use to buy something. With bitcoin is the same... there are just not so many places to use it yet...
Besides, on your purposed pyramid scheme, it shouldn't be possible for someone to exchange back the "pyramid good" for real money, and even impossible to make that exchange with profit... with bitcoin is...
I think the main issue here is what we consider "money" and thinking that way, dollars are so worthless as bitcoin
There is an excellent article that might help

https://medium.com/s/the-crypto-collection/you-dont-understand-bitcoin-because-you-think-money-is-real-5aef45b8e952

cheerrs

Money is something that one can actually use, be it gold which is used in electronics, jewelry and dentistry or dollar which is used by borrowers for settling their loan obligations. Hence, money has to have utilization capacity. Bitcon on the other hand, has zero utilization capacity - it cannot be used by anyone, which is why it can only passed from person to person, like promises of big returns are passed in a Ponzi scheme.

[fxsurfer]

I do not understand this post in relation to bitcoin being called Ponzi or did I understand what the post is talking about. Let him come out to tell us that bitcoin is scam or Ponzi after more than a decade. Do you know that bitcoin has a fixed quantity of 21 million since inception meaning bitcoin can not increase in quantity but can only rise in market price and the developers of bitcoin never call it an investment but a P2P payment system. I will like to be part of a ponzi that will last for 10 years and continue to go strong.

None of the things you said can change the fact that no one in the Bitcoin circulation chain can utilize Bitcoin, which is why it is useless the same as membership in a Ponzi scheme.

[Mr. R2712]

Money is something that one can actually use, be it gold which is used in electronics, jewelry and dentistry or dollar which is used by borrowers for settling their loan obligations. Hence, money has to have utilization capacity. Bitcon on the other hand, has zero utilization capacity - it cannot be used by anyone, which is why it can only passed from person to person, like promises of big returns are passed in a Ponzi scheme.

Wrong. If my need is to buy a product with gold I have to exchange it first, therefore gold is useless to my needs unless I exchange it for something usable. Also, if my need is to use dollars in japan, I cannot without exchanging them first, therefore dollars are useless to my needs unless I exchange them for yuan. If for some reason I can't exchange them, they're practically worthless. I guess I could wipe my ass with some dollar bills, or a huge chunk of gold tho, so let's say that they have a use that fullfills my needs after all... The fact that gold and dollars have uses for a specific industry means absolutely nothing for me if they don't fullfill my specific usage needs. Bitcoin on the other hand is not limited by borders or conversion to other currencies, therefore I can fulfill my need of using it anywhere it's accepted, unlike traditional money that I can't use. This fact will never change regardless of your opinion, definition of what usage means or other recycled arguments. Also, even if bitcoin was 100% stable and no profit could be made, then guess what, it would still be way more useful than any traditional currency.

[fxsurfer]

Money is something that one can actually use, be it gold which is used in electronics, jewelry and dentistry or dollar which is used by borrowers for settling their loan obligations. Hence, money has to have utilization capacity. Bitcon on the other hand, has zero utilization capacity - it cannot be used by anyone, which is why it can only passed from person to person, like promises of big returns are passed in a Ponzi scheme.

Wrong. If my need is to buy a product with gold I have to exchange it first, therefore gold is useless to my needs unless I exchange it for something usable. Also, if my need is to use dollars in japan, I cannot without exchanging them first, therefore dollars are useless to my needs unless I exchange them for yuan. If for some reason I can't exchange them, they're practically worthless. I guess I could wipe my ass with some dollar bills, or a huge chunk of gold tho, so let's say that they have a use that fullfills my needs after all... The fact that gold and dollars have uses for a specific industry means absolutely nothing for me if they don't fullfill my specific usage needs. Bitcoin on the other hand is not limited by borders or conversion to other currencies, therefore I can fulfill my need of using it anywhere it's accepted, unlike traditional money that I can't use. This fact will never change regardless of your opinion, definition of what usage means or other recycled arguments. Also, even if bitcoin was 100% stable and no profit could be made, then guess what, it would still be way more useful than any traditional currency.

Neither the dollar nor the gold have something to do with your needs, but with needs of people generally. The fact is that people use gold every day all over the world to fulfill their needs. The fact is that borrowers use dollars every single day to fulfill their needs to be free of loan debt. Hence, both dollar and gold are not just passed from hand-to-hand on a market for investing or speculation purposes, but they have end consumers who use them to fulfill their needs. And this usage by end consumers is why they got to the market in the first place. Bitcoin on the other hand has no end consumers, no human on Earth can use it for needs fulfillment, which is why it can only be passed from hand-to-hand like Ponzi membership.

[QuestionAuthority]

Don’t be an idiot. Bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme. It’s a vehicle developed to support criminal activity and long cons.

Whatever the motives behind the Bitcoin's development, it still cannot be consumed by nobody in its circulation chain. Meaning, profit or benefit for investors, criminal or not, can be obtained only by using funds from new investors. Hence, Ponzi scheme.

It is definitely NOT a Ponzi scheme.  In a Ponzi scheme early investors make money off of newly injected money into the system.  With bitcoin, criminals make money by using an uncontrolled unregulated transfer of value system or con men use various schemes to convince people to send them their money using an unregulated irreversible currency.

Well, criminals are just people who have committed a crime and as such they are not immune to Ponzi schemes. A Ponzis scheme is NOT when early investors make money off of newly injected money into the system, because every investment fits that definition. For e.g.  if you had put 1000 USD into Apple stock at the beginning of the year, and sold it today, you, as an early investor, would have made money off of newly injected money into the system - which is injected by new investor, the buyer of your stocks. So, is Apple a Ponzi? No. A Ponzis scheme is when investors put in consumable resources  - resources with the capacity to be used, consumed or practically utilized by end consumers for satisfying their needs, and end up with non-consumable item which has no end consumers and as such it cannot be used by anyone. For e.g. a car is used by end consumers for driving, a dollar for settling loan obligations, food for providing nutritional support, a raw material for producing finished products etc. Hence, investing into dollar, car or food industry,  crude oil, etc., is a not a Ponzi scheme because funds are transfered into something that is used for satisfying actual human needs, and these needs are the very reason why economic activity that produces and trade consumable resources exists. But, when funds are transfered into bitcoin - a number associated with an address, this is a Ponzi scheme because this number cannot be used for satisfying actual human needs. Instead, it can only be transferred from hand-to-hand, from member-to-member, from address-to-address. If an owner of this address is criminal, nothing changed - Bitcoin is still a non-consumable item and thus, putting your funds into it is investment into a Ponzi scheme.

Wrong: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

“Ponzi scheme
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator, an individual or organization, pays returns to its investors from new capital paid to the operators by new investors, rather than from profit earned through legitimate sources.”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Ponzi%20scheme

“A Ponzi scheme is an investment scam that pays existing investors out of money invested by new investors, giving the appearance of earnings and profits where there are none. Ponzi schemes are also known as pyramid schemes.”

These definitions are correct, but imprecise since an existing investor who bought an Apple stock and sell it immediately for a small profit would not have made money from company's profit or earnings but from funds invested by a new investor - the buyer of the stock. Hence, given the definitions you provided, Apple is Ponzi. As you can see, it is not solely the source of the profit what defines a Ponzi scheme. You must also consider the type of resource in which was invested. In the above example it was invested into resources such as buildings, machinery, equipment, vehicles and tools that Apple uses to produce their products. All these resources are consumable - they can provide benefit to a human. That is why investment into Apple is not investment into Ponzi. But, by investing into Bitcoin it was invested into number associated with an address, and this number obviously cannot be consumed by humans, but only transferred from address-to-address. That's why Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme.

You can’t just change the meaning of a word. You can call bitcoin a bad thing if you like but it’s not a Ponzi.

If no human being is able to use Bitcoin for satisfying his or her needs, but only transfer it to another's address, how can someone in Bitcoin circulation chain benefit from it? Well, only by leaving it. And in order to do something like that, a new investor must join the chain by bringing usable resources like dollar, car, food, mobile phone, software, share in a company, etc. These resuorces can then be actually used. Either for fulfilling loan obligations, driving, eating, sending and receiving phone calls, text editing or producing goods and services. So Bitcoin in itself is useless the same as membership in a Ponzi scheme and one can benefit from it only by leaving it.

There are many financial scams that you can compare bitcoin to that are not “Ponzi schemes”. Stop using the word Ponzi because it makes people not listen to you.

Bitcoin is NOT the same financial scam that Bernie Madhoff used. Bitcoin is more like Enron. Enron used a variety of deceptive, bewildering, and fraudulent accounting practices and tactics to cover its fraud in reporting Enron's financial information.  
Bitcoin exchanges, which are collectively used to set bitcoins price, use a variety of deceptive, bewildering, and fraudulent accounting practices and tactics to cover its fraud in reporting the exchange rate of bitcoin.

Insiders at Enron knew about the offshore accounts that were hiding losses for the company; the investors did not.
Bitcoin insiders like Roger Ver knew Mt Gox was cooking the books to hide losses; bitcoin holders did not.

Enron was the only company that would not release a balance sheet along with its earnings statements. Bitcoin exchanges are the only “banks” in the world that do not release balance sheets or earnings statements. There isn’t a single solitary person in the world that can confirm bitcoin exchange rates reflect actual correct volume.

As Enron executives sold their shares, the price began to decrease. Enron loyalists told investors to continue buying stock or hold steady if they already owned Enron because the stock price would rebound in the near future.
As Bitcoin early adopters and major investors sell their coin the price decreases. Bitcoin loyalists tell investors to continue buying bitcoin and hold steady if they already own bitcoin because the price will rebound in the near future.

Enron’s success was measured by undocumented financial statements, actual balance sheets were inconvenient. Enron's unscrupulous actions were often gambles to keep the deception going and so increase the stock price. An advancing price meant a continued infusion of investor capital on which debt-ridden Enron in large part subsisted.
Bitcoin’s success is measured by undocumented financial statements from exchanges, actual balance sheets are inconvenient. The worldwide system of exchanges unscrupulous actions are often gambles to keep the deception going and so increase the exchange rate. An advancing price means a continued infusion of investor capital on which a failing Bitcoin in large part exists.

Enron was diversified into online marketplace services, broadband services, commodities services, capital and risk management services, project development and management services and general international investments.
Bitcoin can claim the use of all of the above systems of diversification to hide the reality of actual value. All the while, bitcoin investors are told to hodl.

Enron operated the fraud for decades so don’t assume because bitcoin has been around 10 years its any safer. Even the former lead developer Gaven Andresen warned bitcoin users to “not invest anything they couldn’t afford to lose”.

You see, bitcoin is not a Ponzi. If anything, Bitcoin is a “distributed crime system”. However, unlike Enron, there is no single entity that can be held accountable. If you close one Mt Gox, BTCe, Tradehill, or Silk Road three more pop up in their place. You can lock up the criminal but you can’t stop the crime. Bitcoin is pure criminal brilliance.

[fxsurfer]

Don’t be an idiot. Bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme. It’s a vehicle developed to support criminal activity and long cons.

Whatever the motives behind the Bitcoin's development, it still cannot be consumed by nobody in its circulation chain. Meaning, profit or benefit for investors, criminal or not, can be obtained only by using funds from new investors. Hence, Ponzi scheme.

It is definitely NOT a Ponzi scheme.  In a Ponzi scheme early investors make money off of newly injected money into the system.  With bitcoin, criminals make money by using an uncontrolled unregulated transfer of value system or con men use various schemes to convince people to send them their money using an unregulated irreversible currency.

Well, criminals are just people who have committed a crime and as such they are not immune to Ponzi schemes. A Ponzis scheme is NOT when early investors make money off of newly injected money into the system, because every investment fits that definition. For e.g.  if you had put 1000 USD into Apple stock at the beginning of the year, and sold it today, you, as an early investor, would have made money off of newly injected money into the system - which is injected by new investor, the buyer of your stocks. So, is Apple a Ponzi? No. A Ponzis scheme is when investors put in consumable resources  - resources with the capacity to be used, consumed or practically utilized by end consumers for satisfying their needs, and end up with non-consumable item which has no end consumers and as such it cannot be used by anyone. For e.g. a car is used by end consumers for driving, a dollar for settling loan obligations, food for providing nutritional support, a raw material for producing finished products etc. Hence, investing into dollar, car or food industry,  crude oil, etc., is a not a Ponzi scheme because funds are transfered into something that is used for satisfying actual human needs, and these needs are the very reason why economic activity that produces and trade consumable resources exists. But, when funds are transfered into bitcoin - a number associated with an address, this is a Ponzi scheme because this number cannot be used for satisfying actual human needs. Instead, it can only be transferred from hand-to-hand, from member-to-member, from address-to-address. If an owner of this address is criminal, nothing changed - Bitcoin is still a non-consumable item and thus, putting your funds into it is investment into a Ponzi scheme.

Wrong: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

“Ponzi scheme
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator, an individual or organization, pays returns to its investors from new capital paid to the operators by new investors, rather than from profit earned through legitimate sources.”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Ponzi%20scheme

“A Ponzi scheme is an investment scam that pays existing investors out of money invested by new investors, giving the appearance of earnings and profits where there are none. Ponzi schemes are also known as pyramid schemes.”

These definitions are correct, but imprecise since an existing investor who bought an Apple stock and sell it immediately for a small profit would not have made money from company's profit or earnings but from funds invested by a new investor - the buyer of the stock. Hence, given the definitions you provided, Apple is Ponzi. As you can see, it is not solely the source of the profit what defines a Ponzi scheme. You must also consider the type of resource in which was invested. In the above example it was invested into resources such as buildings, machinery, equipment, vehicles and tools that Apple uses to produce their products. All these resources are consumable - they can provide benefit to a human. That is why investment into Apple is not investment into Ponzi. But, by investing into Bitcoin it was invested into number associated with an address, and this number obviously cannot be consumed by humans, but only transferred from address-to-address. That's why Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme.

You can’t just change the meaning of a word. You can call bitcoin a bad thing if you like but it’s not a Ponzi.

If no human being is able to use Bitcoin for satisfying his or her needs, but only transfer it to another's address, how can someone in Bitcoin circulation chain benefit from it? Well, only by leaving it. And in order to do something like that, a new investor must join the chain by bringing usable resources like dollar, car, food, mobile phone, software, share in a company, etc. These resuorces can then be actually used. Either for fulfilling loan obligations, driving, eating, sending and receiving phone calls, text editing or producing goods and services. So Bitcoin in itself is useless the same as membership in a Ponzi scheme and one can benefit from it only by leaving it.

There are many financial scams that you can compare bitcoin to that are not “Ponzi schemes”. Stop using the word Ponzi because it makes people not listen to you.

Bitcoin is NOT the same financial scam that Bernie Madhoff used. Bitcoin is more like Enron. Enron used a variety of deceptive, bewildering, and fraudulent accounting practices and tactics to cover its fraud in reporting Enron's financial information.  
Bitcoin exchanges, which are collectively used to set bitcoins price, use a variety of deceptive, bewildering, and fraudulent accounting practices and tactics to cover its fraud in reporting the exchange rate of bitcoin.

Insiders at Enron knew about the offshore accounts that were hiding losses for the company; the investors did not.
Bitcoin insiders like Roger Ver knew Mt Gox was cooking the books to hide losses; bitcoin holders did not.

Enron was the only company that would not release a balance sheet along with its earnings statements. Bitcoin exchanges are the only “banks” in the world that do not release balance sheets or earnings statements. There isn’t a single solitary person in the world that can confirm bitcoin exchange rates reflect actual correct volume.

As Enron executives sold their shares, the price began to decrease. Enron loyalists told investors to continue buying stock or hold steady if they already owned Enron because the stock price would rebound in the near future.
As Bitcoin early adopters and major investors sell their coin the price decreases. Bitcoin loyalists tell investors to continue buying bitcoin and hold steady if they already own bitcoin because the price will rebound in the near future.

Enron’s success was measured by undocumented financial statements, actual balance sheets were inconvenient. Enron's unscrupulous actions were often gambles to keep the deception going and so increase the stock price. An advancing price meant a continued infusion of investor capital on which debt-ridden Enron in large part subsisted.
Bitcoin’s success is measured by undocumented financial statements from exchanges, actual balance sheets are inconvenient. The worldwide system of exchanges unscrupulous actions are often gambles to keep the deception going and so increase the exchange rate. An advancing price means a continued infusion of investor capital on which a failing Bitcoin in large part exists.

Enron was diversified into online marketplace services, broadband services, commodities services, capital and risk management services, project development and management services and general international investments.
Bitcoin can claim the use of all of the above systems of diversification to hide the reality of actual value. All the while, bitcoin investors are told to hodl.

Enron operated the fraud for decades so don’t assume because bitcoin has been around 10 years its any safer. Even the former lead developer Gaven Andresen warned bitcoin users to “not invest anything they couldn’t afford to lose”.

You see, bitcoin is not a Ponzi. If anything, Bitcoin is a “distributed crime system”. However, unlike Enron, there is no single entity that can be held accountable. If you close one Mt Gox, BTCe, Tradehill, or Silk Road three more pop up in their place. You can lock up the criminal but you can’t stop the crime. Bitcoin is pure criminal brilliance.

Thanks for your contribution. But, I am not talking about Bitcoin from the perspective of price manipulation, but from the perspective of ownership. Regardless of the price, Bitcoin owners have nothing they can practically utilize, and this is the same as in classical Ponzi, or similar financial schemes.

[QuestionAuthority]

Don’t be an idiot. Bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme. It’s a vehicle developed to support criminal activity and long cons.

Whatever the motives behind the Bitcoin's development, it still cannot be consumed by nobody in its circulation chain. Meaning, profit or benefit for investors, criminal or not, can be obtained only by using funds from new investors. Hence, Ponzi scheme.

It is definitely NOT a Ponzi scheme.  In a Ponzi scheme early investors make money off of newly injected money into the system.  With bitcoin, criminals make money by using an uncontrolled unregulated transfer of value system or con men use various schemes to convince people to send them their money using an unregulated irreversible currency.

Well, criminals are just people who have committed a crime and as such they are not immune to Ponzi schemes. A Ponzis scheme is NOT when early investors make money off of newly injected money into the system, because every investment fits that definition. For e.g.  if you had put 1000 USD into Apple stock at the beginning of the year, and sold it today, you, as an early investor, would have made money off of newly injected money into the system - which is injected by new investor, the buyer of your stocks. So, is Apple a Ponzi? No. A Ponzis scheme is when investors put in consumable resources  - resources with the capacity to be used, consumed or practically utilized by end consumers for satisfying their needs, and end up with non-consumable item which has no end consumers and as such it cannot be used by anyone. For e.g. a car is used by end consumers for driving, a dollar for settling loan obligations, food for providing nutritional support, a raw material for producing finished products etc. Hence, investing into dollar, car or food industry,  crude oil, etc., is a not a Ponzi scheme because funds are transfered into something that is used for satisfying actual human needs, and these needs are the very reason why economic activity that produces and trade consumable resources exists. But, when funds are transfered into bitcoin - a number associated with an address, this is a Ponzi scheme because this number cannot be used for satisfying actual human needs. Instead, it can only be transferred from hand-to-hand, from member-to-member, from address-to-address. If an owner of this address is criminal, nothing changed - Bitcoin is still a non-consumable item and thus, putting your funds into it is investment into a Ponzi scheme.

Wrong: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

“Ponzi scheme
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator, an individual or organization, pays returns to its investors from new capital paid to the operators by new investors, rather than from profit earned through legitimate sources.”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Ponzi%20scheme

“A Ponzi scheme is an investment scam that pays existing investors out of money invested by new investors, giving the appearance of earnings and profits where there are none. Ponzi schemes are also known as pyramid schemes.”

These definitions are correct, but imprecise since an existing investor who bought an Apple stock and sell it immediately for a small profit would not have made money from company's profit or earnings but from funds invested by a new investor - the buyer of the stock. Hence, given the definitions you provided, Apple is Ponzi. As you can see, it is not solely the source of the profit what defines a Ponzi scheme. You must also consider the type of resource in which was invested. In the above example it was invested into resources such as buildings, machinery, equipment, vehicles and tools that Apple uses to produce their products. All these resources are consumable - they can provide benefit to a human. That is why investment into Apple is not investment into Ponzi. But, by investing into Bitcoin it was invested into number associated with an address, and this number obviously cannot be consumed by humans, but only transferred from address-to-address. That's why Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme.

You can’t just change the meaning of a word. You can call bitcoin a bad thing if you like but it’s not a Ponzi.

If no human being is able to use Bitcoin for satisfying his or her needs, but only transfer it to another's address, how can someone in Bitcoin circulation chain benefit from it? Well, only by leaving it. And in order to do something like that, a new investor must join the chain by bringing usable resources like dollar, car, food, mobile phone, software, share in a company, etc. These resuorces can then be actually used. Either for fulfilling loan obligations, driving, eating, sending and receiving phone calls, text editing or producing goods and services. So Bitcoin in itself is useless the same as membership in a Ponzi scheme and one can benefit from it only by leaving it.

There are many financial scams that you can compare bitcoin to that are not “Ponzi schemes”. Stop using the word Ponzi because it makes people not listen to you.

Bitcoin is NOT the same financial scam that Bernie Madhoff used. Bitcoin is more like Enron. Enron used a variety of deceptive, bewildering, and fraudulent accounting practices and tactics to cover its fraud in reporting Enron's financial information.  
Bitcoin exchanges, which are collectively used to set bitcoins price, use a variety of deceptive, bewildering, and fraudulent accounting practices and tactics to cover its fraud in reporting the exchange rate of bitcoin.

Insiders at Enron knew about the offshore accounts that were hiding losses for the company; the investors did not.
Bitcoin insiders like Roger Ver knew Mt Gox was cooking the books to hide losses; bitcoin holders did not.

Enron was the only company that would not release a balance sheet along with its earnings statements. Bitcoin exchanges are the only “banks” in the world that do not release balance sheets or earnings statements. There isn’t a single solitary person in the world that can confirm bitcoin exchange rates reflect actual correct volume.

As Enron executives sold their shares, the price began to decrease. Enron loyalists told investors to continue buying stock or hold steady if they already owned Enron because the stock price would rebound in the near future.
As Bitcoin early adopters and major investors sell their coin the price decreases. Bitcoin loyalists tell investors to continue buying bitcoin and hold steady if they already own bitcoin because the price will rebound in the near future.

Enron’s success was measured by undocumented financial statements, actual balance sheets were inconvenient. Enron's unscrupulous actions were often gambles to keep the deception going and so increase the stock price. An advancing price meant a continued infusion of investor capital on which debt-ridden Enron in large part subsisted.
Bitcoin’s success is measured by undocumented financial statements from exchanges, actual balance sheets are inconvenient. The worldwide system of exchanges unscrupulous actions are often gambles to keep the deception going and so increase the exchange rate. An advancing price means a continued infusion of investor capital on which a failing Bitcoin in large part exists.

Enron was diversified into online marketplace services, broadband services, commodities services, capital and risk management services, project development and management services and general international investments.
Bitcoin can claim the use of all of the above systems of diversification to hide the reality of actual value. All the while, bitcoin investors are told to hodl.

Enron operated the fraud for decades so don’t assume because bitcoin has been around 10 years its any safer. Even the former lead developer Gaven Andresen warned bitcoin users to “not invest anything they couldn’t afford to lose”.

You see, bitcoin is not a Ponzi. If anything, Bitcoin is a “distributed crime system”. However, unlike Enron, there is no single entity that can be held accountable. If you close one Mt Gox, BTCe, Tradehill, or Silk Road three more pop up in their place. You can lock up the criminal but you can’t stop the crime. Bitcoin is pure criminal brilliance.

Thanks for your contribution. But, I am not talking about Bitcoin from the perspective of price manipulation, but from the perspective of ownership. Regardless of the price, Bitcoin owners have nothing they can practically utilize, and this is the same as in classical Ponzi, or similar financial schemes.

No worries. I’m an early adopter, miner and investor. I already made all my money. From this point on, it’s the responsibility of all of the new major corporate investors to do their due diligence or risk massive losses. Prospective buyers need to evalute bitcoin for themselves and evaluate its commercial potential. I don’t care if they fail. I already laughed my way to the bank. 

[Harrow30]

Every is entitled to his/her opinion. But I can only agree on some parts of your analysis. I do contend with your conclusion as regards people being advised against buying bitcoin; that it won't be fine. I do think otherwise that the bitcoin will definitely rise later and become absolutely relevant and worth the buy now!

[Rolley Dragon]

You can not offer a viewpoint based on your point of view, it may not be good for you, but for others it is good.

[fxsurfer]

You can not offer a viewpoint based on your point of view, it may not be good for you, but for others it is good.

Saying that no one can use Bitcoin for needs fulfillment, like car is used for driving, dollar for settling loan debt, gold for making jewelry or software for editing text, is nor my point of view, but fact. No human being on Earth can use Bitcoin in that way. No human need can be fulfilled with number associated with someone's Bitcoin address. That is why when you buy Bitcoin you can sell it to 'greater fool' only, and not to an actual user who will practically utilize it for needs fulfillment. Besides Bitcoin and crypto, the only instances where one can make profit only via 'greater fool' are fraudulent investment schemes.

[DJ_Rick]

I think that you shouldn't give such advice because it is up to everyone to make a decision whether to buy it or not. For example, my decision is to buy! I think that btc is our future and it will be stable soon

[virtfund]

For now utilization capacity of bitcoin is very limited but it does not mean it will not change. We'll see days that bitcoin is in use like U.S. dollar or some other fiat currencies. It is a matter of time. Saying it cannot be used by anyone and it can only passed from person to person, like promises, makes no sense. There is a high pressure on bitcoin for years, because bitcoin is a decentralized money but it stands for years. If it does not have a potential, we can't see this progress just in a decade.

[mekie]

Be it $, £, Yen or any other currency, the pieces of paper be it a $10 note £10 note etc is only a promissory note-it has no intrinsic value. Infact on U.K. notes it actually says "I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of ..£ signed by the chief cashier of the Bank of England. Bank notes are essentially just a tool to make bartering more effective, and bitcoin and other crypto will do the job just as well if not better in a digital age. Money be it coins-crypto or otherwise are a means of transferring value nothing more.

The gold etc reserves that central banks hold is there to back up the promise-however don't expect if you visit the bank of england etc and ask for payment of your promissory note to have much luck.   

[pocketfullofpoke]

Contrary the title of the topic, i am regularly adding a chunk of bitcoin to my holdings while the market is down. It's the best way that i can do during this time and no matter how bad the negative news about bitcoin i read almost in every corner of cryptoworld news, i never feel down with it.

[Royline]

It may not be   OK for you, but for others it may be very good, so it is up to each person to make their own decisions.

[Rana590]

A lot of speculation and a lot of expectations, I see that the situation is still difficult to predict, at any moment it is possible to rise significantly .. As we approached the end of the year

It will be the good decision because at the end of this year, price will be recovering. You are right that prediction is very difficult now. There are a lot of time for bitcoin to recover the price again. By scaring about the price, we should not sell bitcoin with cheap price. It affects on reducing the price of the bitcoin.

[Gibreil]

Even bitcoin is struggling in its current position to the market, I want it to buy. Maybe, it won't be fine when I buy bitcoin because I am just a small investor. But regarding of its price, it may go up in upcoming years since 2018 is the correction phase of the market. We just invest right now and take advantage since the price is so low. Bitcoin can raise itself because it has many supporters. Assume that resistance will break in the future,

[Bonsaiav]

Although to this day the market has not shown the presence of a positive signal and is difficult for us to predict, I believe the market conditions will recover in ways and times that we cannot predict. But clearly, I personally really hope that the recovery in prices can occur quickly.