Debate: Bitcoin vs Gold with Anthony Scaramucci and Peter Schiff

[Lucius]

Listening to Schiff on anything bitcoin related is stupid, but sending him or his son free bitcoin "to teach him a lesson" or "to spite him" or something is just downright moronic. As I said above, he is just the same as an altcoin shiller, manipulating his followers for his own benefit.

Similar to when Mr. Sun pays a fortune for dinner with Oracle of Omaha, and then gives him an expensive smartphone with a BTC wallet on it, and he has no idea how to use that smartphone. That was good PR for Mr. Sun despite failing to convince Omaha that it was the right time for D-Day.

Some people just think they can pay someone to change their mind, and some obviously make very good use of situations like this and pretend to be stupid and confused, and actually play one cunning game.

[1715367039]

1715367039

[1715367039]

1715367039

[1715367039]

1715367039

[1715367039]

1715367039

[1715367039]

1715367039

[fiulpro]

Gold and bitcoins are very different as compared to each other and at the end of the day, it's not ideal to compare them both with each other. I do think that people are right now just too desperate to try and compare things to bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies since this would not only attract more attention but at the same time this would get them in the news 📰.
Both are important and at the same time both of them are used all around the world, it's more like comparing black and white. Why do we even give thought to people like that? For some people it's better to be involved with cryptocurrencies like bitcoins and for some people things like gold works out, that does not necessarily exclude the possibility of the other being an absolute failure.

[Sterbens]

so their discussions on Twitter are already known as conflicts between father and son, although I doubted that they just want to attract even more attention to themselves.

They are just manipulating their followers. Schiff comes out and says "I'm holding 0.001 BTC as an experiment, here's my address, I sure hope no one sends me any more!" and gets a bunch of free bitcoin. Then he says "Now my son has just bought some bitcoin, look at his account here!" and then he gets a bunch more sent to him for free. Listening to Schiff on anything bitcoin related is stupid, but sending him or his son free bitcoin "to teach him a lesson" or "to spite him" or something is just downright moronic. As I said above, he is just the same as an altcoin shiller, manipulating his followers for his own benefit.

Even so far I have never had gold in any form. For me Bitcoin has made us fall in love. With all the risks and things that Peter Schiff often provokes, it never really makes sense. In fact he could only babble to shake us, even though uiu was just as useless. Gold and Bitcoin really don't need to be clashed, only a few people like Peter Schif make this something that is considered the opposite.

[o_e_l_e_o]

In the case of Schiff, it's that the dollar is eventually going to fail and so even if you're wrong on the timing, it's just the timing that's wrong, not the premise.

If you truly believe the dollar is going to fail, then your options to hedge your money are pretty much anything that isn't based on the dollar. Gold, sure. But also any other precious metal, oil or pretty much any other commodity, real estate, bitcoin, any stock or share from a company which would either be unaffected by the dollar collapsing or would make money from the dollar collapsing. Hell, even a "stable" fiat like Swiss francs. Even better, spread your wealth among multiple assets. Going all in on gold is just as stupid as going all in on bitcoin.

That was good PR for Mr. Sun despite failing to convince Omaha that it was the right time for D-Day.

Sure, but there is a difference between Justin Sun doing it as a PR stunt which directly benefits himself and his trash altcoins, and a random person on Twitter sending bitcoin to Schiff's son and gaining nothing for themselves.

[oHnK]

Going all in on gold is just as stupid as going all in on bitcoin.

The finance minister of my country once said that in the US and Europe the level of education and type of work is not much different from my country which is clearly still in the developing category.  But what She highlights about the highest difference is that people in the US and Europe work just as normal but their assets work hard for their income.   

Investment literacy should be much better here.  How can someone only depend on 1 asset because that is the same as piling all the risk on one asset.  As you explained, there are so many assets that can be used in our asset portfolio according to the level of risk.  Because automatically, the higher the risk, the higher the profit.  

Gold and Bitcoin in terms of risk are much different.  Although some people think Bitcoin is digital gold, it is much different, especially from the level of risk.  Arguing 2 different things will lead to high bias.  So that their debate is actually not fair.  How can you compare 2 assets with very different levels of risk.

[jaysabi]

In the case of Schiff, it's that the dollar is eventually going to fail and so even if you're wrong on the timing, it's just the timing that's wrong, not the premise.

If you truly believe the dollar is going to fail, then your options to hedge your money are pretty much anything that isn't based on the dollar. Gold, sure. But also any other precious metal, oil or pretty much any other commodity, real estate, bitcoin, any stock or share from a company which would either be unaffected by the dollar collapsing or would make money from the dollar collapsing. Hell, even a "stable" fiat like Swiss francs. Even better, spread your wealth among multiple assets. Going all in on gold is just as stupid as going all in on bitcoin.

A lot of the things you mention are not safe havens if the dollar collapses.  Stocks in this country are good vehicles for investment exactly because the USD (which they are denominated in) is stable.  Things with functional utility like real estate is pretty good, but there's probably a practical limit because real estate is notoriously illiquid, which is not what you want in a scenario where the dollar has collapsed, you'll need a lot more flexibility than tying up your wealth in real estate.  And if the dollar collapses, the demand that would create for other national currencies would sky rocket, making those highly volatile and much riskier to continue trying to buy.  As you said, diversification is key.  But obviously the best solution is the dollar never failing, because there is no way to effectively plan for what the world would look like after that.  You won't recognize the economy or the standard of living, and all the assumptions you've made in trying to plan for it will turn out to be wrong.  Rooting for the death of the dollar, either for gold's or bitcoin's sake, is what idiots do because they don't understand the world.

[Ozero]

Gold and bitcoins are very different as compared to each other and at the end of the day, it's not ideal to compare them both with each other. I do think that people are right now just too desperate to try and compare things to bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies since this would not only attract more attention but at the same time this would get them in the news 📰.
Both are important and at the same time both of them are used all around the world, it's more like comparing black and white. Why do we even give thought to people like that? For some people it's better to be involved with cryptocurrencies like bitcoins and for some people things like gold works out, that does not necessarily exclude the possibility of the other being an absolute failure.

Indeed, the discussion of this eternal problem still can lead nowhere. Gold and bitcoin are completely different financial assets that have almost nothing in common except for the high price. Gold has always existed next to man, while bitcoin has been known for only a little more than ten years and can only exist alongside high technologies. Cryptocurrency still needs to be convinced that it can compete with such an eternal value as gold. Under any circumstances, gold will have value in the future. What will happen to the cryptocurrency, no one can know yet. We hope that a person will be able to preserve the Internet, and with it its offspring - cryptocurrency.

[Rufsilf]

Gold and bitcoins are very different as compared to each other and at the end of the day, it's not ideal to compare them both with each other. I do think that people are right now just too desperate to try and compare things to bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies since this would not only attract more attention but at the same time this would get them in the news 📰.
Both are important and at the same time both of them are used all around the world, it's more like comparing black and white. Why do we even give thought to people like that? For some people it's better to be involved with cryptocurrencies like bitcoins and for some people things like gold works out, that does not necessarily exclude the possibility of the other being an absolute failure.

Exactly, here in crypto space we both know already that gold and bitcoin is different and it's not comparable either one way or another because bitcoin is bitcoin while gold is always gold. That's why people really need to be literate enough to know which is which and to be knowledgeable enough to know about it.
Identically, people tend to compare it because of it's similarities, someone says that bitcoin is the new or modern gold or it's the digital gold. Others are also using gold as an example to teach them about cryptocurrency because they find it much easier to explain. But at the end of the day, bitcoin and gold is not correlated.

[Charles-Tim]

But at the end of the day, bitcoin and gold is not correlated.

Bitcoin and gold are not the same thing but they have similarities, the reason why people are comparing them both. The similarity is the demand, as people are buying more of gold, the price is increasing, so is bitcoin too. People are comparing it because they are assets that are appreciating as more people are buying it. So they can be different, but being appreciative assets led to the comparison and it is worth it as people think the world is going more digital.

[LUCKMCFLY]

Gold and bitcoins are very different as compared to each other and at the end of the day, it's not ideal to compare them both with each other. I do think that people are right now just too desperate to try and compare things to bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies since this would not only attract more attention but at the same time this would get them in the news 📰.
Both are important and at the same time both of them are used all around the world, it's more like comparing black and white. Why do we even give thought to people like that? For some people it's better to be involved with cryptocurrencies like bitcoins and for some people things like gold works out, that does not necessarily exclude the possibility of the other being an absolute failure.

Indeed, the discussion of this eternal problem still can lead nowhere. Gold and bitcoin are completely different financial assets that have almost nothing in common except for the high price. Gold has always existed next to man, while bitcoin has been known for only a little more than ten years and can only exist alongside high technologies. Cryptocurrency still needs to be convinced that it can compete with such an eternal value as gold. Under any circumstances, gold will have value in the future. What will happen to the cryptocurrency, no one can know yet. We hope that a person will be able to preserve the Internet, and with it its offspring - cryptocurrency.

Well I think there are many opinions, and none should be dismissed, but I think that both gold and bitcoin represent money, and each one has its differences, gold is by nature the safe haven and the only one that has the ability to draw of any crisis to a country or nation, besides that it is accepted worldwide and is usually used as the best backup option before banks and money that will not suffer inflation, while Bitcoin has the ability to represent money under the tonic that it obeys only to supply and demand, whose purpose has the non-participation of third parties such as banks and governments, being a deflationary economy.

[dzonikg28]

Gold and bitcoins are very different as compared to each other and at the end of the day, it's not ideal to compare them both with each other. I do think that people are right now just too desperate to try and compare things to bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies since this would not only attract more attention but at the same time this would get them in the news 📰.
Both are important and at the same time both of them are used all around the world, it's more like comparing black and white. Why do we even give thought to people like that? For some people it's better to be involved with cryptocurrencies like bitcoins and for some people things like gold works out, that does not necessarily exclude the possibility of the other being an absolute failure.

Indeed, the discussion of this eternal problem still can lead nowhere. Gold and bitcoin are completely different financial assets that have almost nothing in common except for the high price. Gold has always existed next to man, while bitcoin has been known for only a little more than ten years and can only exist alongside high technologies. Cryptocurrency still needs to be convinced that it can compete with such an eternal value as gold. Under any circumstances, gold will have value in the future. What will happen to the cryptocurrency, no one can know yet. We hope that a person will be able to preserve the Internet, and with it its offspring - cryptocurrency.

Well I think there are many opinions, and none should be dismissed, but I think that both gold and bitcoin represent money, and each one has its differences, gold is by nature the safe haven and the only one that has the ability to draw of any crisis to a country or nation, besides that it is accepted worldwide and is usually used as the best backup option before banks and money that will not suffer inflation, while Bitcoin has the ability to represent money under the tonic that it obeys only to supply and demand, whose purpose has the non-participation of third parties such as banks and governments, being a deflationary economy.

That is true but during the last couple of crashes gold didn't seem to perform that well either, which makes sense as in the end gold is a luxury good/asset and what do people do during a financial crisis? They sell their assets as they have to when people get laid off.

I believe it is also a question of age and preference. Those who are in their 50s today and hold gold would probably holding instead if they were younger and grew up with the digital space. Holding Bitcoin was just no option 13 years ago as much as other digital assets haven't been available back at the time. This will now become ever more important when we enter an age where the metaverse becomes reality.

[paxmao]

Kind of the arguments that are used to diminish bitcoin are actually counter arguments. Example: bitcoin is just a string of numbers. Sure, and gold is just a metal with not that many applications other than looking good and making great electrical contacts. The problem is that we are so used to certain things such as the money and gold that people even believe that these actually have any intrinsic value on themselves other than the one that comes from adoption, supply and demand. It takes a mental leap to break from that and not everyone is able to take it.

[Hydrogen]

The moderator said the world economy was plunged into crisis as a result of covid-19, many economists predicted a great time of instability in normal times investors we seek to hedge against volatility by buying gold, but this time some are putting their money in large quantity into bitcoin and other digital assets. This raise a pretty fundamental question that will bitcoin or gold be a trusted store of value and the assets of the future

Economists rely on banks and financial institutions for employment, research and contractual work. This creates a conflict of interest where many economists must vocally support certain narratives if they want to continue having a job in the industry.

The nobel prize in economics is funded by banks. To succeed as an economist to win a nobel prize means having a very good relationship with the banking industry and saying all of the right things. Research and scientific acumen lags far behind having the correct talking points.

Many have a strange worldview where they believe economists work for them. They have never met an economist, talked to an economist, bought an economist a drink or a coffee. But they somehow expect that economists should have their best interests at heart. It is a strange thing. The same precedent applies to experts and the media.

[Gyfts]

Kind of the arguments that are used to diminish bitcoin are actually counter arguments. Example: bitcoin is just a string of numbers. Sure, and gold is just a metal with not that many applications other than looking good and making great electrical contacts. The problem is that we are so used to certain things such as the money and gold that people even believe that these actually have any intrinsic value on themselves other than the one that comes from adoption, supply and demand. It takes a mental leap to break from that and not everyone is able to take it.

Not a great rebuke, Bitcoin is in fact a string of numbers with no inherent value. The value of gold isn't necessarily determined by its usage in manufacturing products, but there is inherent value with gold with respect to its real world applications, though the price of gold is inflated because we determine it to be a precious metal.

The premise of comparing Bitcoin to gold is a tad bit flawed, because for the most accurate comparison you could do Bitcoin and something like fine art.

Take the Mona Lisa, for example - The Mona Lisa is objectively worthless if you define value as concept applicable to the real world uses of any given item. Yet it's worth nearly 1 billion dollars because we say it has value. Bitcoin works the same way -- so the easiest way to prove Bitcoin has value, despite it being useless by virtue of real world applications is to provide the counter argument that we assign value, at times arbitrarily, to a multitude of things like fine art.

This argument could be used for NFT's as well, which I'm not a fan of, because people sell their Microsoft Paint art for thousands due to an inflated market like gold, but there are some nuances between NFT's and fine art.

[doomloop]

This shouldn't be a debate any longer, people knows their choice and that's what they would go for. I don't need anyone to tell me whether I should go for Gold or Bitcoin, boring already done my research and I know the both of them which is going to be better for me. I started with gold investment, as time goes on I came to discover bitcoin. It took me some more years of investing in the both of them to know which is going to be a better choice.

As time goes on I decided to choose Bitcoin because it seemed like a better choice, since what I am making from it is far more bigger than what I have been getting since I started in Gold. The both of them are good, gold investment is less risky because the volatility is not as high Bitcoin.

[Charles-Tim]

This shouldn't be a debate any longer, people knows their choice and that's what they would go for.

Because you know the better one to go for does not mean many other people are not newbies to both, or to bitcoin most especially.

As time goes on I decided to choose Bitcoin because it seemed like a better choice, since what I am making from it is far more bigger than what I have been getting since I started in Gold. The both of them are good, gold investment is less risky because the volatility is not as high Bitcoin.

Bitcoin investment is not also risky if the holder do not panic when the price is plummeting, the price will increase back and reach all-time-high. Also is a fact that gold is only deflationary if compared with US dollars or fiat which are highly inflationary. Bitcoin is younger and still the better one to go for as it is more deflationary with limited supply.