Does Bitcoin have real value?

[2stout]

How could it not have real value if it has, can, and will continued to be used to obtain objects, things of value?  Of course it has value and it value has and will continue to go up in time, HODL!

[Bambozled]

It is the limited amount of bitcoin availability that gives bitcoin its value. Many investors also relate bitcoin to digital gold. As the number of bitcoins will decrease the bitcoin will be referred to as a scarce asset and the prices will increase significantly.

[Moussa Al-Basheer]

The Labour Theory of value had been criticized simply because no two human laborers are equally productive.

In a digital economy where the labor is a machine doing a specific job ( a specialized labor) the labour theory starts to make sense. For example, a  mining machine would use x Joules of energy to produce y terrahashes. This diminishes variances between the skills of a machine and another if they are identical.

However; because economic markets are driven by competing forces, this competition shifts from finding the most skillful laborer, to finding the most cost-efficient factors of production such as lower cost/kwh, lower land rents for big mining operations, or even factors that optimize the efficiency of machines, such as cooling setups.

The shift of competition from labor skills to cost efficient factors of production results in a value derived from the  "total cost of production" , aka the natural price.

[tadamichi]

(You’re a good example, because you think force gave fiat it’s value and a voluntarily adopted currency like Bitcoin is worthless)

You don't have to agree with me. If you hold the subjective theory of value as being legitimate, then you are wrong for claiming that fiat has no value since you are going against the fact that most people (including you if you're still working and paying taxes) are treating fiat as if it has value. Your own use of fiat as if it has value refutes your claim that it has no value.

Next time try reading what i wrote, because the subjective theory of value means exactly what you just described and i explained it like this. Maybe if you wouldnt ignore 90% of what people are saying your debate would even advance.

It is about behaviour, not just thinking it has no value. People are giving up what they value less for something they value more. People here are switching Fiat to Bitcoin, because they value it more. When i just needed fiat then i might exchange my Bitcoin for fiat, its an exchange where both sides benefit. That most people here hold way more Bitcoin than fiat, shows that they value Bitcoin more. It is not about absolutes. It is always subjective about what is being wanted or needed by the individual. Each good serves us a purpose with differing importance, there are many subjective and objective factors that can influence it and this can vary based on current needs and wants.

I can already deem fiat valueless in my mind, it can be almost valueless to me, i can prefer other things over it. No one here would refuse 500.000$ right now just because its fiat, because in reality they can still use it. And the same way you wouldnt refute 500.000$ in Bitcoin even tho its valueless to you. When people here say it has 0 value, they mean its purchasing power tending to go to 0 and that its not a sustainable form of money. And oftentimes people come here saying Bitcoin doesnt have value, and then coming up with the biggest bs to explain why fiat has value, but if we applied their logic to every kind of money, then nothing would have value. If you are so objective how didnt you notice it yet?

The subjective theory of value doesnt exclude: supply and demand, cost theory, objectivity, rationality. It just claims that value is something intrinsically human full of errors, uncertainty, learning, making choices, evaluating things individually. If value wasnt subjective it would just be a constant, but in reality were seeing how volatile everything is.

Humans has the capacity to be rational. It's a choice in terms of whether they want to be or not.

However, if you take the metaphysical position that human can't be rational, then I can see why you reject the epistemological concept of objectivity and its ethical derivative of objective values.

Can you read? I also never claimed humans are incapable of rationality, but oftentimes they try to rationalize their own subjectivity.

Subjectivity doesn’t exclude objectivity

I have a better question for you, is any human capable of perfect rationality forever? If yes, why do we need peer review in academia, why do centralized systems keep failing and being destructive to many people? It’s a fact that no human is capable of perfect rationality in every single issue in the world forever. Otherwise we could just elect one leader and live in a kind of utopia forever, but reality just proves this wrong. Subjectivity will strike any human at some point, because it’s inherent to us.

A human that recognizes their own irrationality and stays humble will reach far higher levels of rationality, than someone who thinks they’re capable of perfect rationality, fight against this, create more and more complex theories, try as hard as you want, but reality will always prove this again and again. The first step is to be rational about your own being, and accepting that we’re subjective and evaluate things accordingly.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I'm sorry, but what's so hard to grasp about this? People gain benefits they can't otherwise have with bitcoin. Fiat currency definitely serves a purpose currently, but this doesn't make bitcoin valueless.

- You don't gain the benefit to send money across the world, via the internet in a censorship resistant fashion with fiat.
- You don't get to enjoy cheap transaction fees via the internet with fiat.
- You don't gain the benefit to have your transaction settled within a few minutes (or instantly) via the internet with fiat.
- You don't gain privacy via the internet with fiat.
- You're not collectively responsible for fiat's monetary policy.

You do gain these benefits with bitcoin. That's why it's so valuable.

[mayfair_coin]

Similar to Fiat currency, Bitcoin (or most of the cryptocurrencies) is also not backed by any gold or silver hence does not have any intrinsic value. The value of any currency comes from the backing of the state and the trust that people have over the government

[reasonspace]

Next time try reading what i wrote, because the subjective theory of value means exactly what you just described and i explained it like this. Maybe if you wouldnt ignore 90% of what people are saying your debate would even advance.

If I didn't read what you wrote or ignored 90% of it, then how did I manage to describe what you mean by the subjective theory of value?

It is about behaviour, not just thinking it has no value. People are giving up what they value less for something they value more. People here are switching Fiat to Bitcoin, because they value it more. When i just needed fiat then i might exchange my Bitcoin for fiat, its an exchange where both sides benefit. That most people here hold way more Bitcoin than fiat, shows that they value Bitcoin more. It is not about absolutes. It is always subjective about what is being wanted or needed by the individual. Each good serves us a purpose with differing importance, there are many subjective and objective factors that can influence it and this can vary based on current needs and wants.

I can already deem fiat valueless in my mind, it can be almost valueless to me, i can prefer other things over it. No one here would refuse 500.000$ right now just because its fiat, because in reality they can still use it. And the same way you wouldnt refute 500.000$ in Bitcoin even tho its valueless to you. When people here say it has 0 value, they mean its purchasing power tending to go to 0 and that its not a sustainable form of money. And oftentimes people come here saying Bitcoin doesnt have value, and then coming up with the biggest bs to explain why fiat has value, but if we applied their logic to every kind of money, then nothing would have value. If you are so objective how didnt you notice it yet?

Subjectivity is only about behaviors. Objectivity is about behaviors AND facts. You value your life. That's why you acquire fiat currency to pay taxes (probably more than just that but let just stick with taxes for now) so that you can protect your life from government force. Now, are you doing it because of some delusional fear about the government coming after you if you don't pay taxes? If so, then that would make the value of fiat currency subjective. However, if it is factual that the government would come after you, then fiat currency has the objective utility value of keeping you out of jail or worse. You may not like it, but facts are not subject to your whims.

Humans has the capacity to be rational. It's a choice in terms of whether they want to be or not.

However, if you take the metaphysical position that human can't be rational, then I can see why you reject the epistemological concept of objectivity and its ethical derivative of objective values.

Can you read? I also never claimed humans are incapable of rationality, but oftentimes they try to rationalize their own subjectivity.

You forgot to include in the quote of my response my quote of what you wrote. This is what you wrote:

Humans
Arent
Fuckin
Rational

It was in camel case capitalization with each word on separate lines for emphasis. So yes, I read what you wrote and took it seriously.

I have a better question for you, is any human capable of perfect rationality forever? If yes, why do we need peer review in academia, why do centralized systems keep failing and being destructive to many people? It’s a fact that no human is capable of perfect rationality in every single issue in the world forever. Otherwise we could just elect one leader and live in a kind of utopia forever, but reality just proves this wrong. Subjectivity will strike any human at some point, because it’s inherent to us.

We can make mistakes. We can also be defrauded. That's why objectivity requires that you verify your assumptions against facts using logic.

[reasonspace]

How could it not have real value if it has, can, and will continued to be used to obtain objects, things of value?

Theranos stock was once usable to “obtain objects, things of value”. That doesn’t mean the stock in the company had value. So the answer to your question is, because people can be mistaken or defrauded. That’s why you want to practice objectivity and look at the supporting facts and not just go with the crowd (aka group subjectivity).

[Clochaard]

Humans are not 100% rational which is fine. This is what makes us human.
I think this is more of a philosophical concept.

[witcher_sense]

You keep repeating the same argument while not explaining why people aren't allowed to be mistaken about objects of their valuation. Take gold as an example of a valuable object that still keeps maintaining its value. Gold is seen as a valuable commodity because it is scarce in supply, has a very high stock-to-flow ratio, is very hard to destroy due to its chemical passiveness, etc. All these properties are a part of its nature and literally, all people on planet Earth recognize its significance, therefore, gold is more than just "subjectively valuable." Can all people on Earth be erroneous about the "undeniable value" of gold? Certainly yes, because once humanity comes up with a cheap way to synthesize gold or extract it from asteroids, or find better alternatives, or whatnot, gold will immediately lose all its value and turn out to be a scam or the greatest failure of all times. Or not? Maybe gold won't be called a scam but simply an obsolete type of money which are meant to be replaced by something better? People will be seeking a replacement, namely perfect money, money that can't be debased, can't be found on asteroids and other planets, can't be synthesized in a laboratory, but that can be sent digitally with a speed of light to another person without having to be dependent on the intermediary. Don't you think such money is worth being valued?

[fenican]

It has real value, but the fiat to Bitcoin conversion rate is not a very accurate assessment of it. Tends to get overbought and oversold as the mood varies from euphoria to panic.

[reasonspace]

You keep repeating the same argument while not explaining why people aren't allowed to be mistaken about objects of their valuation.

By saying "aren't allowed", are you saying that I will use force on people who are mistaken? Because I've made no such claims. People are allowed and are often mistaken. They also pay for the consequences of their mistakes all the time.

Take gold as an example of a valuable object that still keeps maintaining its value. Gold is seen as a valuable commodity because it is scarce in supply, has a very high stock-to-flow ratio, is very hard to destroy due to its chemical passiveness, etc.

It may be true that gold is scarce. It may be true that gold has high stock-to-flow ratio. It may be true that it's hard to destroy. These are not the attributes that makes gold value. Gold is valuable due to its affect on the valuer, specifically, Man. Now, those attributes may make gold expensive (i.e., cause it to have a high price), but price and value are two different things.

Let me give you an example. Water has a specific affect on Man. It is needed for survival. Now, you may think that water is of higher value to a Man who has been walking in the desert without water for several days vs. a Man living in NYC. I disagree. The need of Man for water is the same. What is different is the price. It's a lot easier to get water in NYC than it is to get water in the desert; hence a Man in the desert is willing to pay more for water than a Man in NYC.

[Piesel]

Bitcoin is a limitless currency of the Internet that gives people the freedom to financial freedom, whereas fiat currency gives a limit Bitcoin will give that freedom to go. beyond, as a decentralized currency Bitcoin is a utility coin that is used for payment over the internet and that is why Bitcoin is referred to as the currency of the Internet.

[witcher_sense]

By saying "aren't allowed", are you saying that I will use force on people who are mistaken? Because I've made no such claims. People are allowed and are often mistaken. They also pay for the consequences of their mistakes all the time.

You said the subjective theory of value is wrong because people are sometimes mistaken about value. People might well be mistaken about gold being valuable too, yet it doesn't mean that gold has no value now. For your theory to work correctly, we should assume that some things are inherently valuable in themselves, regardless of whether people value them or not. This claim does not stand up to criticism since, in order to prove its validity, we need the absence and presence of valuing human beings at the same time, which is an absurdity.

It may be true that gold is scarce. It may be true that gold has high stock-to-flow ratio. It may be true that it's hard to destroy. These are not the attributes that makes gold value. Gold is valuable due to its affect on the valuer, specifically, Man. Now, those attributes may make gold expensive (i.e., cause it to have a high price), but price and value are two different things.

Again, the same reasoning can easily be applied to bitcoin but you, for some reason, refuse to recognize that.

Let me give you an example. Water has a specific affect on Man. It is needed for survival. Now, you may think that water is of higher value to a Man who has been walking in the desert without water for several days vs. a Man living in NYC. I disagree. The need of Man for water is the same. What is different is the price. It's a lot easier to get water in NYC than it is to get water in the desert; hence a Man in the desert is willing to pay more for water than a Man in NYC.

I already gave you an answer to that here:

Things without which humans can't live are, by definition, objectively valuable. But they remain objectively valuable as long as in abundance. Once these objectively valuable things become scarce, humans start to value them subjectively, basing their reasoning on current circumstances. For example, water in the desert is valued more than that in places near rivers with fresh water. The objective value of water always remains the same - it helps you quench your thirst - but the subjective value fluctuates considerably.

The price of water depends on many factors, but the main factor that commands the price is the scarcity or abundance of the thing in question. Water in NYC is more abundant than that in the desert, hence the difference in price. If it had been otherwise - water had been distributed equally among all places, and everyone had unlimited access to it - the price of it would depend on other factors.

Bitcoin' scarcity and its fair distribution are given, unchangeable factors, the price of it fluctuates because people recognize both fundamental factors (objective) and factors that they subjectively value. Some people fail to recognize even fundamental factors, therefore, they will find nothing to subjectivity value either.

[reasonspace]

By saying "aren't allowed", are you saying that I will use force on people who are mistaken? Because I've made no such claims. People are allowed and are often mistaken. They also pay for the consequences of their mistakes all the time.

You said the subjective theory of value is wrong because people are sometimes mistaken about value. People might well be mistaken about gold being valuable too, yet it doesn't mean that gold has no value now. For your theory to work correctly, we should assume that some things are inherently valuable in themselves, regardless of whether people value them or not. This claim does not stand up to criticism since, in order to prove its validity, we need the absence and presence of valuing human beings at the same time, which is an absurdity.

It doesn't follow that the fact that the subjective theory is wrong means you have to assume that things are inherently valuable in themselves (the intrinsic theory). It is a false dichotomy to assume that it's either subjective or intrinsic. There is a third choice: the objective. Value based on facts and a valuer.

It may be true that gold is scarce. It may be true that gold has high stock-to-flow ratio. It may be true that it's hard to destroy. These are not the attributes that makes gold value. Gold is valuable due to its affect on the valuer, specifically, Man. Now, those attributes may make gold expensive (i.e., cause it to have a high price), but price and value are two different things.

Again, the same reasoning can easily be applied to bitcoin but you, for some reason, refuse to recognize that.

I applied the objective theory of value to gold. I am unable to apply the objective theory of value to Bitcoin.

Things without which humans can't live are, by definition, objectively valuable. But they remain objectively valuable as long as in abundance. Once these objectively valuable things become scarce, humans start to value them subjectively, basing their reasoning on current circumstances. For example, water in the desert is valued more than that in places near rivers with fresh water. The objective value of water always remains the same - it helps you quench your thirst - but the subjective value fluctuates considerably.

....

The price of water depends on many factors, but the main factor that commands the price is the scarcity or abundance of the thing in question. Water in NYC is more abundant than that in the desert, hence the difference in price. If it had been otherwise - water had been distributed equally among all places, and everyone had unlimited access to it - the price of it would depend on other factors.

It looks like you're conflating subjective value and price. These are two different things. Subjectivity (and objectivity) has to do with methodology. Being subjective means to go by your feelings. Being objective means to go by facts. Value and price are not methodologies, they are information about some thing. Value identifies whether that thing is positive for your life whereas price identifies the difficulty to acquire that thing. I do think that price can be determined objectively based on qualities like scarcity and the existence of alternatives. But a thing should only have a price IF it is a value. If it is not a value, then any price assigned to it is unwarranted because the scarcity of it is irrelevant.

[tbterryboy]

Bitcoin has more than one utility. Initially, people can think Bitcoin as nothing, then as a cryptocurrency, an asset, store of value, payment method but in future, it will be used for many use cases.

It will mature like the Internet. Nowadays, people use Internet very naturally and they don't mind to know what is the Internet. In future, they will use Bitcoin without a question, what is Bitcoin? Does Bitcoin has real value?

To end the fund on Bitcoin real value, I invite people to spend time and read: https://endthefud.org/money

This reminds me of that harry potter line. When harry "dies" and he is in the train station with dumbledore, he asks if any of this is real or is it in his mind, dumbledore says just because it's in your mind doesn't mean that it's not real. This is about the same thing basically for bitcoins value.

Just because we are the only ones that give it a value and make it 20k+ doesn't mean that it doesn't have a value, we have a "real" value and that's the price, we decide its value. This is how you should approach it, why? Because for the first time in all of human history, "people" have money, not governments, not nations, not armies, literally just people.

[tryingtolearn]

This reminds me of that harry potter line. When harry "dies" and he is in the train station with dumbledore, he asks if any of this is real or is it in his mind, dumbledore says just because it's in your mind doesn't mean that it's not real. This is about the same thing basically for bitcoins value.

Just because we are the only ones that give it a value and make it 20k+ doesn't mean that it doesn't have a value, we have a "real" value and that's the price, we decide its value. This is how you should approach it, why? Because for the first time in all of human history, "people" have money, not governments, not nations, not armies, literally just people.

Never ceases to amaze me how little people know of history.

[Rigon]

Of course not Bitcoin has no intrinsic value. People are very scared for this because bitcoin is being dumped a lot. But I believe bitcoin will reach a better value very soon. Currently bitcoin price is $20458. I believe bitcoin price will not be dumping anymore. But if bitcoin market behaves like this, People will stop believing in cryptocurrencies. But the current price of Bitcoin is 20458.

[Piesel]

Of course not Bitcoin has no intrinsic value. People are very scared for this because bitcoin is being dumped a lot. But I believe bitcoin will reach a better value very soon. Currently bitcoin price is $20458. I believe bitcoin price will not be dumping anymore. But if bitcoin market behaves like this, People will stop believing in cryptocurrencies. But the current price of Bitcoin is 20458.

Those who are dumping Bitcoin, are in for short term basis and the fact is since Bitcoin have the intrinsic value and that make it hard for Bitcointo totally lost that value unless it is exchange for the dollar, and even at the moment Bitcoinis still being sold at a high price, so let leave it at that and enjoy the whole process of Bitcoin development and advancement.

[nullama]

The answer of this question is very simple.

If you're able to trade Bitcoin for anything else of certain value, then the value of Bitcoin is exactly that.

There doesn't need to be intrinsic value in the money itself.

For example, today, the bills in Venezuela are worth less than the material it is printed on. That's a waste of resources.

There's no need to have intrinsic value, money has it's own value depending on many external factors.

Bitcoin is great because it's remarkably cheap to store, operate, use, etc, and it's value is designed to increase over decades.