1BTC (69,000 loaves) ≠ 1BTC (20,000 loaves) if Bitcoin is a currency

[Poker Player]

I have commented on this in another thread but it seems to me that this deserves a dedicated thread specifically.

When there are market downturns, and in bear markets like this one, the community repeats the mantra that 1BTC is 1BTC as a consolation.

And I understand that it has its logic for someone who acquires Bitcoin and will HODL it for a long time, but not if we conceive it as a currency, as a P2P cash as Satoshi conceived it, because if it is a currency we are going to use it frequently, in the day to day to acquire goods and services. If it is a currency, the purchasing power has been reduced by 70% or more.

If Bitcoin is a currency, you are going to use it to buy things, and the fact is that months ago, assuming that for example buying a loaf of bread cost you $1 or its equivalent in Bitcoin, with 1BTC you would buy 69,000 loaves, and today you buy only 20,000, which is a considerable difference.

If you acquire Bitcoin as an investment, and you are going to HODL it for a long time, I understand that you repeat the mantra that 1BTC is 1BTC.

Tautologies are apparently evident true statements, but if we stop to analyze them, they have many nuances.

For example: Poker Player is Poker Player. Do we agree with that? Surely we do. But is Poker Player when he was 7 years old the same as Poker Player when he is 70 years old? No way.

[1714923376]

1714923376

[avikz]

If you acquire Bitcoin as an investment, and you are going to HODL it for a long time, I understand that you repeat the mantra that 1BTC is 1BTC

Not necessarily! Because this statement is not practical!

Bitcoin has not yet reached to such a stage where we can consider it as an independent currency. To be honest, bitcoin is a great investment but not a good currency to transact on a daily basis for number of reasons. If bitcoin was really a great currency, it would have become a dominant payment method by now which certainly didn't happen. But it has become a great investment because of its upside potential. It has become a great trading currency because of its volatility and that's pretty much it!

[KennyR]

If you acquire Bitcoin as an investment, and you are going to HODL it for a long time, I understand that you repeat the mantra that 1BTC is 1BTC

Not necessarily! Because this statement is not practical!

Bitcoin has not yet reached to such a stage where we can consider it as an independent currency. To be honest, bitcoin is a great investment but not a good currency to transact on a daily basis for number of reasons. If bitcoin was really a great currency, it would have become a dominant payment method by now which certainly didn't happen. But it has become a great investment because of its upside potential. It has become a great trading currency because of its volatility and that's pretty much it!

I had the same thought, without a supporting currency bitcoin can't be used as a currency. It is good as an investment, but it requires lot of support to be used as a currency. Even if bitcoin is valued in terms of Satoshi, every Satoshi will be valued in USD which is how it hold its value.

Bitcoin can be used as a currency on daily basis if each and everything is priced in terms of bitcoin. This is tedious, because for a product that we pay with bitcoin might cost 0.01BTC, and the same when paid in USD will be lower or higher depending on bitcoin's price fluctuation. Here people wish to pay through which they can enjoy the lowest price for the particular product.

[lovesmayfamilis]

t is also interesting that such a mantra is repeated only by those who more or less believe in bitcoin, and probably have some investment in it. To maintain the sequence of their correct actions, as people tend to evaluate themselves better. But at a time when the market is falling, I see nasty statements from my acquaintances that this is not so. An even more popular solution is that bitcoin is simply obliged to grow and regularly make a profit, and when something does not work, panic and sales begin, as many expect quick profits and are not ready to wait.

[_act_]

What is a currency? Anything that has value that is spent by people, but the value is not what that makes it a currency, it is the physical form it has. A dollar note is a currency but if changed to new type, the old note becomes useless.

What is money? The intrinsic value of anything that people spend often makes it money.

Is bitcoin a currency? Bitcoin is money, not having a physical form but a digital form that we heard about and that we use to know that it is of value, even if not called a currency, it can still be referred to as a cryptocurrency.

Types of currency: if it can be physical and digital currency, bitcoin being a currency will lead to another debate.

For example: Poker Player is Poker Player. Do we agree with that? Surely we do. But is Poker Player when he was 7 years old the same as Poker Player when he is 70 years old? No way.

You age does not change that you are a man. The amount of food you can buy with dollar or any fiat in the last ten years, you can not use the same amount of dollar or fiat to buy it this year, fiat value also decline.

[NeuroticFish]

If you acquire Bitcoin as an investment, and you are going to HODL it for a long time, I understand that you repeat the mantra that 1BTC is 1BTC.

Indeed, this 1BTC = 1BTC is pretty much similar to "unrealized loss is not loss" (unless you sell).

Tautologies are apparently evident true statements, but if we stop to analyze them, they have many nuances.

The universe is not the same in (any) 2 different moments. So unless in some very strict mathematical (abstract) setup I would not be surprised if none of those tautologies stand.


Now related to the title... this is much more complicated imho. It's not only the fluctuations in Bitcoin price that matters, it's also the country. Because 69k loaves in your country may have been 280k loaves in another country. However, I do get your point and I also feel that this wild fluctuations in the price, while they do bring Bitcoin into the news (especially in the bull runs), they are a barrier in getting it used globally as a currency and also as a store of value.
Many (or maybe all) institutional investors advocating buying Bitcoin, the investors that should drive global acceptance are in trouble now and pretty much silent, since even if it's unrealized loss, it still looks bad on the papers.
So while I do tell that 1BTC=1BTC, indeed, the context matters, hence you're right.

[Poker Player]

For example: Poker Player is Poker Player. Do we agree with that? Surely we do. But is Poker Player when he was 7 years old the same as Poker Player when he is 70 years old? No way.

You age does not change that you are a man. The amount of food you can buy with dollar or any fiat in the last ten years, you can not use the same amount of dollar or fiat to buy it this year, fiat value also decline.

The universe is not the same in (any) 2 different moments. So unless in some very strict mathematical (abstract) setup I would not be surprised if none of those tautologies stand.

This point is a quasi-philosophical discussion that I'm not going to get into.

What I wanted to emphasize with this thread is that if you use Bitcoin to buy things, you are affected by the considerable drop in purchasing power that has occurred these months, because you buy less than half as much stuff.

1BTC=1BTC can comfort you if you don't spend the Bitcoin you have to buy goods and services, but HODL it.

[Coin_trader]

Hahaha. This will surely raise a tons of debate like chicken and egg scenario.

There will be no exact answer here to satisfy most of the user here because we have different beliefs and self interest on Bitcoin. For some Bitcoin is a currency and satisfied some condition for being but for others, It’s only an investment instrument because of its design and volatility.

For me, I threat Bitcoin both currency and investment base on my purposed of buying it. I sometimes purchased Bitcoin for digital payment purposes and sometimes buying it for holding in long term. I think it’s all about our perspective.

[tranthidung]

Indeed, this 1BTC = 1BTC is pretty much similar to "unrealized loss is not loss" (unless you sell).

You should say both that 1 BTC = 1 BTC is similar to either

• Unrealized profit is not profit
• Unrealized loss is not loss

If anyone says buying Bitcoin only because of fun, it can be true if it is a trial purchase with very small amount.
If the purchase is big enough, it is not for fun, but for profit. So if it relates to profit motivation, the buyer will have plan to take profit. Just when.

Loss is a loss and even you don't sell your Bitcoin, you still have a loss temporarily. Fortunately, in history, Bitcoin always makes new all time high with each halving and a new bull run.

• Bitcoin profitable days
• HODL camp
• From these charts, 87%+ of holding days are profitable and you won't get loss if you hold Bitcoin more than 4 years, 6 months and 21 days.

[_act_]

This point is a quasi-philosophical discussion that I'm not going to get into.

What I wanted to emphasize with this thread is that if you use Bitcoin to buy things, you are affected by the considerable drop in purchasing power that has occurred these months, because you buy less than half as much stuff.

1BTC=1BTC can comfort you if you don't spend the Bitcoin you have to buy goods and services, but HODL it.

I noticed that on this forum that some people will say 1 BTC is 1 BTC, it is right but I too see it as a wrong statement to be used during bear market, but in cases like when a newbie is confused, thinking that the value of his bitcoin can be altered when investing, the newbies can be corrected that no alteration because 1 BTC is 1 BTC. I have noticed that because of the volatility, some newbies are confused.

Bitcoin is a speculative asset in this regard, it is not suitable to be used as a currency. But let us see it in another way too, I still do not have option than to convert my bitcoin to fiat whenever I want to spend, what if I can just spend it directly, that does not differ. But some people do not know how bitcoin price may fluctuate, these are the type of people that should be discouraged from using it as a currency because they may not know when to convert from unstable coin to stable coin and from stable coin back to unstable coin.

You are not wrong.

[dragonvslinux]

If you acquire Bitcoin as an investment, and you are going to HODL it for a long time, I understand that you repeat the mantra that 1BTC is 1BTC.

Indeed, this 1BTC = 1BTC is pretty much similar to "unrealized loss is not loss" (unless you sell).

To me this statement isn't just a reference to unrealized loss, but rather reflecting that the fundamentals of Bitcoin remain the same. Ie at $69K 1 BTC = 1 BTC, and the same is true at $20K. So the considerable decline in price isn't related to Bitcoin's fundamentals, but merely market movements or cycles. Though of course I agree without selling at a loss, 1 BTC can easily return to ATH.

The irony being that there is more of an argument for Bitcoin's lack of fungibility these days, with some people arguing 1 BTC ≠ 1BTC due to various centralized exchanges/services blacklisting UTXOs. But at the same time, this was also the case when Bitcoin was at $69K, as well as years prior, so doesn't appear relevant to price changes. Also to note the network treats each Bitcoin as equal, regardless of centralized providers suggesting otherwise. There will also be one company or product that can claim Bitcoins aren't equal, but this doesn't mean that they aren't...

[franky1]

When there are market downturns, and in bear markets like this one, the community repeats the mantra that 1BTC is 1BTC as a consolation.

the first problem is not the end of the sentence. but the first part. and also this part

If it is a currency, the purchasing power has been reduced by 70% or more

by this i mean. you are assuming and taking judgement of the value of bitcoin to have been worth/valued and in your eyes that it should have stayed at $70k where by the change to $20k was the unexpected, death nail.
with words like reduced, downturn, crash, drop. decline

what you need to understand is that the $70k price point was not where value was, it was not meant to sustain. it was not meant to be the purchasing power.
the $70k was the premium, the temporary bubble event . a price that exceeded expectations and was the exception

bitcoin is now back at good value rate. back in the realm of good pricing.

..
once you can flip your mindset into the notion that low=value and high=premium.
then you see that different mindset at play. where by getting 17,000 loaves of bread was the minimum wage. and the 69,000 was the lucky special christmas bonus. rather than the other way round

its not the case of 69,000 loaves was the minimum wage everyone expects to get and then the 20,000 loaves is the below poverty killer income that causes people to starve and die

[pooya87]

What I wanted to emphasize with this thread is that if you use Bitcoin to buy things, you are affected by the considerable drop in purchasing power that has occurred these months, because you buy less than half as much stuff.

I wonder if it is only the drop that led you to this conclusion (not both rise and falls) and whether you would have said the same if price had kept going up (increased purchase power).
Because if it's just because of sudden big drops, then a lot of other currencies in the world are not currencies considering they too dump a lot. For example a couple of years ago the Venezuela's bolívar kept dumping every day, you could wake up every morning to see your purchase power has decreased or euro which got dumped hard recently. People using those currencies lost their purchase power even though they still call these things "currency".

[PrivacyG]

I will comment strictly based on your title.  You say that one Bitcoin worth 69 thousand loaves is not equal to one Bitcoin worth 20 thousand loaves.  I think it is pretty clear even from your own title that one Bitcoin is still one Bitcoin, but what differs is the quantity of stuff you get from it.

But on the other hand, while you can now get say 3 times less loaves with 1 Bitcoin, you can for example get a ton more Shitcoins using it than you could when Bitcoin was 69k.  And while for you loaves may be more important, maybe for me Shitcoins are.  In that case, you are in disadvantage while I am not.

Then think about it.  While there are things you can now buy in less quantity and other things you can buy in higher quantity due to changing purchasing power, there are some things that are still priced the same they used to be years, maybe even decades ago.  For example, the cost of Bitcointalk VIP membership.

So if we are talking about purchasing power, we will enter a long debate that, at least on my end, finishes the same way:  one Bitcoin is still one Bitcoin and just because what it was worth yesterday is different from what it is worth today does not make two Bitcoins different.

Think Dollar.  You have $100 in your wallet.  Yesterday you saw a t-shirt that was up for sale at $100 and today it was reduced by a discount of 50%.  Yesterday you could get the t-shirt for 100% of your money and have 0% left in your wallet while today you can get the t-shirt for 50% of your money and still have 50% in your wallet to buy other stuff with or just hold on to.  Does that make your $100 from today different to the $100 from yesterday?

Does inflation change your $1 bill that you are still holding from a decade ago?  Besides purchasing power in some cases, there is no difference that I see.  $1 is still $1.

Anyway.  The discussion about 1 Bitcoin still being 1 Bitcoin no matter what has pretty much started from the debate whether Bitcoin is or is not fungible.  Some people say my Bitcoin is different from yours because they have a different history.  Some people say they are the same, because 'tainted history' is a made-up term that appeared only after Bitcoin was created and a decade ago there was no such thing.  I tend to agree with both sides.  I also agree with what Loyce or o_e_l_e_o once said here.  The most successful attack over Bitcoin is that they introduced this term, 'taint', which made us believe Bitcoin is not fungible at all.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[Poker Player]

I wonder if it is only the drop that led you to this conclusion (not both rise and falls) and whether you would have said the same if price had kept going up (increased purchase power).

I don't know what would have happened if what happened had not happened. Getting into thinking about that is quasi-philosophizing too, but surely it was the drop and the debate with you that led me to the conclusion, and, leaving aside what would have happened if what has happened hadn't happened, I think the argument would be equally valid if Bitcoin today was worth $0.4M as some theory predicted last year. The thing is that we could say that 1BTC ≠ 1BTC in a more positive way, because the purchasing power would have multiplied by almost 7 in less than a year.

Because if it's just because of sudden big drops, then a lot of other currencies in the world are not currencies considering they too dump a lot. For example a couple of years ago the Venezuela's bolívar kept dumping every day, you could wake up every morning to see your purchase power has decreased or euro which got dumped hard recently. People using those currencies lost their purchase power even though they still call these things "currency".

What happens is that if we leave aside fiat shitcoins like Venezuela's, major currencies like the USD or the Euro lose purchasing power much more slowly. Like the British pound sterling, which was worth a pound of sterling silver in its origins and today is worth almost nothing in comparison but hundreds of years have passed.

[kryptqnick]

What a coincidence! I've been just writing up a presentation on laws of logic and issues with them, and one of them is the law of identity, which is true only with certain limitations that we're talking about something in the same respect and of the same time. When 1 BTC = 1 BTC is presented, it's a simple identity of logic, A=A. However, it is only true when we're talking about 1 BTC in the same respect (in this case, purely as one unit of the Bitcoin currency) and at the same time (which also helps to fix the issue with the price, as the price changes over time). Each time I see it, I also tend to write that this is incorrect because of the purchasing power of Bitcoin that changes over time, and the disregard of this purchasing power is unforgivable if we're considering Bitcoin as a currency. So good job, op, I agree with your point.

[franky1]

I also agree with what Loyce or o_e_l_e_o once said here.  The most successful attack over Bitcoin is that they introduced this term, 'taint', which made us believe Bitcoin is not fungible at all.

Regards,
PrivacyG

taint was not introduced about fungibility.. taint was about the tracing of a coins audit back to its origin coinbase reward that validated that the coin was created by the rules

it later become re-branded as a blacklist of treating different coins differently due to the purpose of who previously handled the coins and why


but here is the thing. fiat has [new definition of]taint too
when you receive fiat.
you have to fill in a taint report.. AKA a tax form where you have to inform the IRS where your income came from
where each form of income comes with different tax % levels.
yep a $100 received from a pension is treated differently than a $100 from an employer. vs different than a $100 gift from a relative
and yes the police treat a $100 from a drug dealer differently than $100 you got from your family.

a retailer may refuse to accept a single bank note of $100 or refuse to accept 1000 dimes. retailers would prefer to accept 10x $10 or 20x$5

currencies "fungibility" is not what people think it is. a $100 is not treated like another $100

[tomahawk9]

What I wanted to emphasize with this thread is that if you use Bitcoin to buy things, you are affected by the considerable drop in purchasing power that has occurred these months, because you buy less than half as much stuff.

back when we were around the 45k price range, i wanted to buy a graphics card for around 450 bucks (around 0.009btc at the time on newegg), but i didn't pull the trigger, i was so naive, i expected this btc price to hold and i thought i'd wait a little longer for gpu prices to go lower ... now the same graphics card costs around $350 but 0.0177 btc 🤡, so yeah, this bear market fcked me

1BTC=1BTC can comfort you if you don't spend the Bitcoin you have to buy goods and services, but HODL it.

i've come to the conclusion that this mantra some ppl use when there's a major downtrend is one of many coping mechanisms, these people only see btc as an investment (some even as a get rich but-not-so-quick scheme) and nothing more, "hodl hodl until 250k next year" and never spend, they prolly never read the btc whitepaper and don't knowt btc was supposed to be used for

Because if it's just because of sudden big drops, then a lot of other currencies in the world are not currencies considering they too dump a lot. For example a couple of years ago the Venezuela's bolívar kept dumping every day, you could wake up every morning to see your purchase power has decreased.

you had to used one of the most extreme scenarios in the world right now (a country with triple digits inflation) to try to prove your point about purchasing power, hmm... what about the dollar or the yen? you know, fiat currencies in countries that have had economic stability over the past few years

[pooya87]

you had to used one of the most extreme scenarios in the world right now (a country with triple digits inflation) to try to prove your point about purchasing power, hmm... what about the dollar or the yen? you know, fiat currencies in countries that have had economic stability over the past few years

Yes, because that is the closest we can get to another currency that lost its value hard and fast otherwise if you want to see weakening purchase power you can use any other currency you like like "dollar or yen"  but in most other cases this loss has a slow pace which can be seen as inflation rate and if you want to know the real value of currencies you have to look at price of groceries, utility bills, rent, etc. which is obviously rising against all fiat currencies at all times, sometimes slower and sometimes faster.

[0verseer]

1BTC=1BTC can comfort you if you don't spend the Bitcoin you have to buy goods and services, but HODL it.

i've come to the conclusion that this mantra some ppl use when there's a major downtrend is one of many coping mechanisms, these people only see btc as an investment (some even as a get rich but-not-so-quick scheme) and nothing more, "hodl hodl until 250k next year" and never spend, they prolly never read the btc whitepaper and don't knowt btc was supposed to be used for
...

It was the basic defense mechanism, you know. You lap on something to make you feel good and justify your shortcoming or missed chance. If anyone here got another chance to sell their BTC back when it was at ATH which was over $60k, I think everyone would take it in a heartbeat. Who knows, maybe a few more years when BTC price at $100k or goes as low as $5k. People wish they were buying or didn't sell at $20k.

Basically, we're human and build around that unreasonable gloating to overcome our mistakes or miss a good chance to do something, cope as you said. If anyone here thinks I was shiting on them for that, please don't. I think it's completely normal behavior to pull ourselves forward and make our lives easier, and less negative. If not then it will be full of depression and can lead to suicide which you guys must saw it occasionally on the news: "Man kills himself because lost his money in crypto". It's just sad.