Bitcoin an opportunity like land

[Shishir99]

That’s not how it happens. $200k just like that? The halving doesn’t directly bring scarcity but reduces the amount of tokens that are being added to supply. Now, what of the ones that are already in circulation? They are going to always be in circulation. So let’s stop speaking about halving like it’s slashing out what’s in existence. At the end of the day, all 21M Bitcoins will be generated.

This is not the main fact. The main fact is the number of Bitcoin users will increase over time but the supply won't increase that much. The scarcity increases when the number of Bitcoin users increases every year. However, the halving increases the scarcity as well by cutting the block reward in half. If you talk about what will happen after five more years, you never know how many people will start to use Bitcoin and will want to buy Bitcoin to hold it. We need more than 40 more years to finish the mining. Till then, new Bitcoins will continue to adding to the network and miners will continue to sell it to pay their electricity bill.

[legendbtc]

Total supply is limited but if we start counting how many buildings are been built in a single country the numbers will be in millions, yet there are lands left that are still bushes or jungles, saying land is limited is nonsense, there are still many lands available,  development is the problem, there are places where you won't find single houses or you don't have undeveloped areas in your country?

Bitcoin max supply is just 21 million, that's all there will ever be, but lands are available everywhere, this can't be compare to bitcoin, come to Africa you will see so many lands filled with bushes and jungles, no one dares to build on them because it's not a developed area.

Drive my people out, they will find a new land somewhere else to live and cultivate, this have happened even in the Bible, this world is massive, so massive than the max supply of Bitcoin, so please let's stop comparing lands with Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is far more smaller than lands in the world, and Bitcoin holds the true value appreciation than lands.

Yes, the bitcoin supply is much smaller than the land area but you forgot one thing. Land is not only used for housing but also in all fields and industries around the world.

Many people are still living a good and rich life without bitcoin, but everyone will need land. That shows the demand for land is hundreds of times higher than that of bitcoin, so don't just compare the supply of bitcoin with the land area in the world and say that bitcoin is more important. Furthermore, real estate prices do not fluctuate as strongly as bitcoin but always increase every year and show no signs of stopping. And even many investors own bitcoin but not so many can own real estate, which shows which one is more valuable.

[bala87]

There are many factors in which bitcoin definitely loses out to land in value. Here are the most important points:
Tangible Asset✔
Utility and Productivity✔
Finite Supply✔
Historical Value Stability✔
Legal and Governmental Recognition✔
Diverse Market Appeal✔
Resilience to Technological Changes✔

[glendall]

How's the price of land in your country?
Have you ever thought been in the time where land was cheap and bought alot?
Are you boarding the train(cheap) of Bitcoin holders or you want to wait for private jets?

1. The price of land in your country is almost the same as in my country, where investing in land is very popular in my country, even though sales are not as fast as Bitcoin, land is a favorite as an investment.

2, have ever felt, but the possibility of buying a lot of land is very unlikely because when the price is cheap the funds you have cannot be allocated to it completely

3.It's better to take a cheap train than a private jet, but with a big risk, taking a cheap train will feel like a struggle to get a private jet, so at least we will get a lesson from every decision maker

[oktana]

That’s not how it happens. $200k just like that? The halving doesn’t directly bring scarcity but reduces the amount of tokens that are being added to supply. Now, what of the ones that are already in circulation? They are going to always be in circulation. So let’s stop speaking about halving like it’s slashing out what’s in existence. At the end of the day, all 21M Bitcoins will be generated.

This is not the main fact. The main fact is the number of Bitcoin users will increase over time but the supply won't increase that much. The scarcity increases when the number of Bitcoin users increases every year. However, the halving increases the scarcity as well by cutting the block reward in half. If you talk about what will happen after five more years, you never know how many people will start to use Bitcoin and will want to buy Bitcoin to hold it. We need more than 40 more years to finish the mining. Till then, new Bitcoins will continue to adding to the network and miners will continue to sell it to pay their electricity bill.

I’ve come to understand what you mean but there are still some points I don’t entirely agree with. More users will cause scarcity, but I don’t think that at this point, halving is really causing any scarcity because we have at least 90% of Bitcoin in circulation, what difference would the 10% make right now? Even if there wouldn’t be any more halving that reduces the block reward, It will not be significant. It was impactful in the beginning when the block reward was a whole lot bigger. But I totally understand what you mean.

[gunhell16]

That’s not how it happens. $200k just like that? The halving doesn’t directly bring scarcity but reduces the amount of tokens that are being added to supply. Now, what of the ones that are already in circulation? They are going to always be in circulation. So let’s stop speaking about halving like it’s slashing out what’s in existence. At the end of the day, all 21M Bitcoins will be generated.

This is not the main fact. The main fact is the number of Bitcoin users will increase over time but the supply won't increase that much. The scarcity increases when the number of Bitcoin users increases every year. However, the halving increases the scarcity as well by cutting the block reward in half. If you talk about what will happen after five more years, you never know how many people will start to use Bitcoin and will want to buy Bitcoin to hold it. We need more than 40 more years to finish the mining. Till then, new Bitcoins will continue to adding to the network and miners will continue to sell it to pay their electricity bill.

I’ve come to understand what you mean but there are still some points I don’t entirely agree with. More users will cause scarcity, but I don’t think that at this point, halving is really causing any scarcity because we have at least 90% of Bitcoin in circulation, what difference would the 10% make right now? Even if there wouldn’t be any more halving that reduces the block reward, It will not be significant. It was impactful in the beginning when the block reward was a whole lot bigger. But I totally understand what you mean.

I can agree with what you are saying that the halving is not the reason for the scarcity. But it is said in the title made here by OP that, indeed, Bitcoin is also like an opportunity for us to buy land, which as time goes on, the value increases.

The only difference is the volatility because there are times when Bitcoin's volatility is aggressive and Bitcoin's is normal because it is a volatile asset, while land is not like that and the land is held by the government.

[Zanab247]

The obvious similarity between the two is that both have limited supply, but the crucial difference is that land has undeniable utility. It could be agricultural or you could build something on it. But Bitcoin's utility is less clear. It is used as a currency or a store of value, but how do you calculate the value of those use cases? So far no one came up with a good model for that, and it makes Bitcoin so different from other assets that can be evaluated by calculating how much money would they make.

You can invest money in both and hodl it for a long period of time before you can sell to take back your capital and profits which is the similarity of both, but the difference between the two land and BTC is that you can store your BTC in your wallet and you cannot store land in your wallet which is the major advantage that is giving people the confidence to try their best to own BTC.

 Another difference is that someone can come up one day to drag the land you claim to be the owner not knowing that the documents given to you during the course of purchase are not real, but the moment you buy or earn BTC in your wallet, it's totally be yours until you feel like releasing the BTC for sale or for donations.

[snowpega]

I don't like comparing land with bitcoin anyway. Land is a real-life asset that is mandatory for our lives. So we are obligated to own land. But for Bitcoin, a lot of the population still doesn't know about it. In that scenario, it doesn't make sense to compare Bitcoin with land. I know both have an investment opportunity, but land prices always increase and are not volatile. Bitcoin is highly risky and highly volatile. So these assets are separate from each other.

indeed investing in Bitcoin or buying land are two different things and both give us the golden opportunity of earning money. In my opinion, Bitcoin can generate more profits as compared to Land in the coming future for those who hold it faithfully for the long term and buy only when it gives them a golden opportunity of billing bags can eran alot well if we talk about those people who have accumulated bitcoin from 2013 will be the richer person in the current time span.

Let me give an example Those who bought Bitcoin when it had very less popularity and now when it has gained some popularity you can have an idea by looking at its price where Bitcoin is standing and as you are saying many of people are still not aware of this digital currency what do you think when majority of people comes to know about bitcoin and interested in buying it what do you think where will the price of bitcoin go on that time dear.

The same scenario here in the land case the best buying time of land is when there is no development in the area you bought land and when development gets started near your land like Marts, Shopping malls, Hospitals, parks, and Schools your land price will go high due to surrounding geographical demand. You said very well the price of land does not fluctuate but in the case of Bitcoin, it is a volatile currency.So both have their own pros.

[Nechiequ]

I don't like comparing land with bitcoin anyway. Land is a real-life asset that is mandatory for our lives. So we are obligated to own land. But for Bitcoin, a lot of the population still doesn't know about it. In that scenario, it doesn't make sense to compare Bitcoin with land. I know both have an investment opportunity, but land prices always increase and are not volatile. Bitcoin is highly risky and highly volatile. So these assets are separate from each other.

Yes I agree with your opinion, it is indeed very unreasonable if we compare the two well although there is a chance of success from both, but I also feel that land is more stable and less risky. I remember the past where the price of bitcoin slid drastically and could make people suddenly rich, even the price at that time was only a few dollars and saving for so many years and selling it at the right time would make someone rich because of it, but for now I feel that things like before are impossible. Well, although it doesn't rule out the possibility of it happening again.

[gabbie2010]

I agreed that both land and Bitcoin are valuable assets especially if the bought land is the highbrow area however a person also needed some funds to buy at a cheaper price, personally I buying of Bitcoin at a cheaper price is preferable than buying a land because the might have a fixed price which might be affordable with the available fund this is where Bitcoin has a comparative advantage over land because whatever available amount can be used to buy Bitcoin compared to buying a land, with reference to all the previous bearish runs in the price of Bitcoin firstly in the wake of COVID-19 epidermic it price dumped it provides opportunity to buy dip with any available fund unlike buying of land.

[Shishir99]

I’ve come to understand what you mean but there are still some points I don’t entirely agree with. More users will cause scarcity, but I don’t think that at this point, halving is really causing any scarcity because we have at least 90% of Bitcoin in circulation, what difference would the 10% make right now? Even if there wouldn’t be any more halving that reduces the block reward, It will not be significant. It was impactful in the beginning when the block reward was a whole lot bigger. But I totally understand what you mean.

Even though 90% of the total Bitcoin has already been mined, you never know what is the real circulation at this moment. There is a fact that satoshi owns close to one million Bitcoins which never moved anywhere. There are thousand of BTC that have been lost from people's accounts in several ways. A large part of Bitcoin never moved after the initial transaction.

Don't you notice a simple 10000 Bitcoin sell affects the whole market? If a 10000 Bitcoin sell can down the market 10 to 20% how much it would affect when someone will sell 100K Bitcoin? When you see large movement on the market just because of some small transactions, you have to understand that there are not much active Bitcoin on the circulation.

[umbara ardian]

So, what's the verdict? Why not have both? Think of it like building your financial kingdom. Land is the fertile ground, giving you that slow and steady growth, maybe even some rent money from a friendly unicorn B&B. Bitcoin is the hidden treasure chamber, holding the potential for that life-changing boom.

The key is to spread your bets, like a gambling grandma with a diversified portfolio of bingo cards and penny slots. That way, you've got something to fall back on if one of them goes belly-up.

Remember, there's no one-size-fits-all approach to this financial game. Choose what fits your risk tolerance and your dreams. Just don't forget to have fun with it, and who knows, maybe you'll build an empire that makes both land and Bitcoin proud.

[skarais]

Land prices here are quite expensive, especially in strategic locations. In rural areas, land prices are relatively standard, where the price is neither too expensive nor too cheap. In general, land prices here are still affordable and the average person with $200 per month can still buy land in a year. If you have enough budget, buy both assets, but if not then maximize your opportunities to invest in bitcoin and take some of the returns from it to invest in land.

In most cases, land prices will not depreciate, but bitcoin can still lose value. I own land and also own bitcoin, but I have different plans for these two assets. Both assets have the potential to give me returns, but land price movements tend to be slow, unless there is high demand.

[South Park]

Land prices here are quite expensive, especially in strategic locations. In rural areas, land prices are relatively standard, where the price is neither too expensive nor too cheap. In general, land prices here are still affordable and the average person with $200 per month can still buy land in a year. If you have enough budget, buy both assets, but if not then maximize your opportunities to invest in bitcoin and take some of the returns from it to invest in land.

In most cases, land prices will not depreciate, but bitcoin can still lose value. I own land and also own bitcoin, but I have different plans for these two assets. Both assets have the potential to give me returns, but land price movements tend to be slow, unless there is high demand.

Fortunately thanks to the internet people now can work from anywhere around the world, so a person that may not be earning enough to live in a big city, can easily move out to a rural area with good connectivity and do their job as usual, with the difference they will be paying way less for their everyday expenses and save money this way, money which can be later used to buy bitcoin or a piece of real estate on your current place of residence.

[hatshepsut93]

You can invest money in both and hodl it for a long period of time before you can sell to take back your capital and profits which is the similarity of both, but the difference between the two land and BTC is that you can store your BTC in your wallet and you cannot store land in your wallet which is the major advantage that is giving people the confidence to try their best to own BTC.

 Another difference is that someone can come up one day to drag the land you claim to be the owner not knowing that the documents given to you during the course of purchase are not real, but the moment you buy or earn BTC in your wallet, it's totally be yours until you feel like releasing the BTC for sale or for donations.

Land is rarely bought as a speculative investment, it's either for rent or to use it. And offering land for rent is much more appealing investment for most people than buying Bitcoin, because it's a relatively predictable investment with timed dividends. The fact that land goes up in value is a nice addition, but it's not the main reason to invest in it.

Basically, land has utility and it gives it value, and with Bitcoin its price growth is its main utility, which is a vicious circle.

[MJSO22]

That’s not how it happens. $200k just like that? The halving doesn’t directly bring scarcity but reduces the amount of tokens that are being added to supply. Now, what of the ones that are already in circulation? They are going to always be in circulation. So let’s stop speaking about halving like it’s slashing out what’s in existence. At the end of the day, all 21M Bitcoins will be generated.

This is not the main fact. The main fact is the number of Bitcoin users will increase over time but the supply won't increase that much. The scarcity increases when the number of Bitcoin users increases every year. However, the halving increases the scarcity as well by cutting the block reward in half. If you talk about what will happen after five more years, you never know how many people will start to use Bitcoin and will want to buy Bitcoin to hold it. We need more than 40 more years to finish the mining. Till then, new Bitcoins will continue to adding to the network and miners will continue to sell it to pay their electricity bill.

Yes, new people will join Bitcoin.  However, the amount of Bitcoin will not increase.  It's mining  the way it's mining.  Day by day it will be used by more and more people.  Bitcoin will be such that people will recognize it as Bitcoin and there will be no such thing as money.  People are getting more addicted to it day by day.Slowly it will spread and increase.  People will use it more and more.  But it won't grow.  But there will be mining.  It will increase.

[Luzin]

The fact that land goes up in value is a nice addition, but it's not the main reason to invest in it.

Basically, land has utility and it gives it value, and with Bitcoin its price growth is its main utility, which is a vicious circle.

But most people are interested in investing in land because it increases in value. Besides land is a clearly valuable instrument recognized by the government. So many buy land to make a profit by reselling it or creating another business. Even I would buy land for investment if I had more money. I consider land also a pretty good investment instrument. So I don't think it's wrong, everyone has different thoughts and expectations.

[mamesso]

I really understand your point in this topic. Comparing Bitcoin to Land is not a bad thing because its availability is increasingly scarce. The similarity between the two is in the context of scarcity because Bitcoin and land can be divided, Bitcoin can be divided into smaller fractions and land can also be purchased in small plots. Interest in Bitcoin has increased over time and will have an impact on the steady supply of Bitcoin, so the scarcity of Bitcoin will increase as time goes by. Growing demand with limited supply will have a positive impact on the price, but Bitcoin remains a top priority because of its very flexible uses.

[Shishir99]

Yes, new people will join Bitcoin.  However, the amount of Bitcoin will not increase.  It's mining  the way it's mining.  Day by day it will be used by more and more people.  Bitcoin will be such that people will recognize it as Bitcoin and there will be no such thing as money.  People are getting more addicted to it day by day.Slowly it will spread and increase.  People will use it more and more.  But it won't grow.  But there will be mining.  It will increase.

What did you try to say actually? You seem to repeat the same thing over and over but do not add anything new. Bitcoin is not any kind of drug or something where people could get addicted. If you consider it as addiction, then everyone in this world is money addicted except some people without working brains. I don't understand what you mean by it won't grow and then again saying it will increase. Your post is full of contradictions which should fix and post again. I am sorry to say but I didn't understand anything.

[JayTrain]

I believe land will always be a good investment opportunity. The comparison between the growth in land prices and Bitcoin is quite intriguing. In the past, land had significant value, and now the current generation has the opportunity to invest in Bitcoin. In my opinion, it's better to invest in Bitcoin. I have regretted not buying Bitcoin at a lower price multiple times. So, the key is always to act in a timely manner, but there's never a perfect time or sufficient funds for that.