Is bitcoin a productive capital?

[Oshosondy]

Bitcoin is infrastructure, not digital gold.Opinion by: Thomas Chen, CEO of Function, not me.

I saw it on https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-is-infrastructure

He said bitcoin is not a store of value but a productive capital.

What are productive capital?

Bitcoin is generally not considered productive capital in the traditional economic sense. Productive capital refers to assets that are used to create new goods or services, like a factory, machinery, or tools. Bitcoin, on the other hand, does not intrinsically produce anything. Its value is primarily derived from its use as a speculative asset, medium of exchange, and store of value.

This is what I read today that is totally the opposite of what bitcoin is.

Bitcoin is a store of value.

[Rikafip]

Bitcoin is a store of value.

And electronic cash as well.

One of the good things about bitcoin is that it can (and is) be many things, its all about how you see it and how you use it.

[melinoe]

Bitcoin can be used for any kinds of services and can be considered the cryptocurrency, form of money, and so on - each decides for himself, but I didn't hear the meaning of productive capital before.

[Ambatman]

Bitcoin is money. I don't understand why he would consider it such
But Bitcoin is first money and other attributes are just secondary effect of it been a decentralized money.


If it was Ethereum then I would understand his view especially with respect to DEFI and creating tokens.

[_act_]

If it was Ethereum then I would understand his view especially with respect to DEFI and creating tokens.

You make a good point with this, this is how bitcoin can also be seen as a productive capital but also as a store of value, although I still doubt the use of bitcoin this way can be seen as a productive capital but I think it is.

Bitcoin also has tokens but most of them are also seen to not be of long term useful as their prices have fallen significantly. Also are the Ordinals NFTs while I was referring to BRC20 before.

Also there are altcoins that are backed by bitcoin like the wBTC and the BTCB and many other, also are liquid network and others.

I think you understand the twists.

[BitGoba]

Bitcoin is infrastructure, not digital gold.Opinion by: Thomas Chen, CEO of Function, not me.

I saw it on https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-is-infrastructure

He said bitcoin is not a store of value but a productive capital.

What are productive capital?

Bitcoin is generally not considered productive capital in the traditional economic sense. Productive capital refers to assets that are used to create new goods or services, like a factory, machinery, or tools. Bitcoin, on the other hand, does not intrinsically produce anything. Its value is primarily derived from its use as a speculative asset, medium of exchange, and store of value.

This is what I read today that is totally the opposite of what bitcoin is.

Bitcoin is a store of value.

Bitcoin is money

Money is basically a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and a store of value.

Medium of exchange – It allows you to buy and sell things without bartering. For example, instead of trading eggs for bread, you use money.
Unit of account – It allows you to measure and compare value. For instance, if bread costs 2,000 sats and milk costs 3,000 sats, you can easily see which is more expensive.Just as we measure mass in kilograms and length in meters, we measure the value of goods and services in money.

Store of value – You can save it for later and use it without losing value

Bitcoin is better money than bank‑issued and state fiat paper/digital currencies it is a deep pit that everyone should know about,I recommend reading books like  Bitcoin and Fiat Standard and Broken Money If you want to better understand why Bitcoin is a better form of money

[Fiasem20]

Bitcoin is a store of value.

Many people have their own definition of what Bitcoin is.You can wake up on special day and call bitcoin whatever you want but that doesn't guarantee your definition to be used in the crypto industry.Bitcoin is money that is in a decentralized digitalized form and it mostly referred by enthusiasts as a digital gold.Bitcoin is indeed a store of value because it is a good investment used as a hedge against inflation and it also protect it users from currency devaluation.It can also be considered as a store of value because it be used to store wealth for the long term.No matter the definition of others,don't be misled by other people's opinions.

[Joy- maker]

He said bitcoin is not a store of value but a productive capital.

I can't agree with him, because I see bitcoin as both store of value and a productive capital, and bitcoin is a store of value because it's has a limited supply and it is also a big hedge against inflation, so for that reason both investors and institutions now see bitcoin as a safe heaven for storing their wealths, on the other hand why bitcoin is also see as  a productive capital is because, bitcoin is a digital money used to facilitate fast and secured transactions, and it underlying technology has also paved way for countless innovations that is beyond digital currency. although every body is free to have their own view about bitcoin, wether bitcoin is both or just one among the things mentioned by thomas chen, but what I have said above is how I view bitcoin.

[palle11]

Bitcoin is infrastructure, not digital gold.Opinion by: Thomas Chen, CEO of Function, not me.
.....

Bitcoin is a store of value.

Bitcoin wears many sheds including being a digital currency and digital gold.

It is a digital currency because right from online or internet you transfer or transact using bitcoin for payment through Blockchain without going to bank and being exposed to third party. The internet is a space where two people can do whatever they like through their personal communication without third party involvement except when they choice to. Therefore, bitcoin perform the role of fiat online. You can have a personal dealing with someone concerning your bitcoin with P2P and no third party.

The second aspect I mentioned is digital gold and bitcoin does that as a store of value. Just like gold is bought and kept in a safe place to rise in value to be used as fiat or other use, bitcoin too is transferable as store of value transparently without government and banks through Blockchain.

So if Thomas Chen says bitcoin is not digital gold, I think he just wants to make himself relevant and get attention to be discussed just as we are discussing him now. We all know bitcoin has the capacity of store of value, digital currency and gold, investment asset etc.

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

Bitcoin is infrastructure, not digital gold.

He said bitcoin is not a store of value but a productive capital.

This is what I read today that is totally the opposite of what bitcoin is.

Bitcoin is a store of value.

He can said anything about Bitcoin, but you know, Bitcoin is Bitcoin, it's fact and never change.

People can say Bitcoin as digital gold, digital diamond, whatever but it's only name calling used by the community while Bitcoin is always Bitcoin. About Bitcoin use cases, no need to debate about it, you can use Bitcoin in a different way than what the others use it.

Store of value, productive capital, transaction mean, payment mean and others are all possible to use with Bitcoin. Bitcoin can be used as a foundation for other derivative products on the market, and I don't judge they are good or bad but their existence are enough to consider Bitcoin as a Productive capital.

[Cryptohygenic]

Bitcoin is generally not considered productive capital in the traditional economic sense. Productive capital refers to assets that are used to create new goods or services, like a factory, machinery, or tools. Bitcoin, on the other hand, does not intrinsically produce anything. Its value is primarily derived from its use as a speculative asset, medium of exchange, and store of value.

Bitcoin is a store of value.

It is even senseless to think or argue in the first place that bitcoin is a product or material that should be used for factory produces like the gold and silver that are used for metal manufactures.
Bitcoin is a pure money in digital form that has the potentials of monetary values such that can be used for payments with the characteristics of store of values.
You can call it a reformed cash like the fiat which volatilities and limited supplies With the implications and attributes of speculations and adoption increase gives it the edge to react like the gold while it digitality makes it digital gold. Very common as thou.

[Mighty97]

I see where you are coming from. The view of Thomas Chen treats Bitcoin more as a foundation for new financial systems than a passive investment. Yet saying it is not a store of worth is a miss of point.
The functions of Bitcoin is clearly as a store of worth, users hold it for the purpose of preserving or growing wealth, mostly against inflation or shaking fiat currencies. It may not be producing goods like factories, but it stores economic energy same way goold does, only in digital form.
Therefore while Chen is correct that Bitcoin supports financial innovation, yet it does not cancel away it duty as a store of worth. It is both , a digital foundation and modern form of savings.

[Odusko]

Regardless of what's the individual opinion and assumptions of Bitcoin, the bottom line of it all is that, Bitcoin is definitely a store of value with an intrinsic value and a static calculating supply, Bitcoin is not like other currency that government or central banks can produce tons of it just to increase the inflation ratio in the economy, but Bitcoin is an edge against inflation between Bitcoin is a highly volatile assets.

[Satofan44]

Bitcoin is infrastructure, not digital gold.Opinion by: Thomas Chen, CEO of Function, not me.

I saw it on https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-is-infrastructure

He said bitcoin is not a store of value but a productive capital.

What are productive capital?

Bitcoin is generally not considered productive capital in the traditional economic sense. Productive capital refers to assets that are used to create new goods or services, like a factory, machinery, or tools. Bitcoin, on the other hand, does not intrinsically produce anything. Its value is primarily derived from its use as a speculative asset, medium of exchange, and store of value.

The reality is that judging Bitcoin using traditional definitions is simply wrong. This is why some of those stuck up corrupt individuals like the corrupt grandma of ECB continues to say that Bitcoin has no intrinsic value, because the definition for intrinsic value is complete bullshit. I can create definitions according to which only Bitcoin will have any value and all fiat and gold will be worthless. What of it? Just because a definition is being used due to prevalent consensus that does not mean that:
1) The definition is correct.
2) The definition should be used for everything.

If it was Ethereum then I would understand his view especially with respect to DEFI and creating tokens.

Ethereum and DeFi is mostly junk though. If you create problems and then you provide solutions to those problems that is not productive. At the very beginning ETH was advertised in a way as if smart contracts are going to change the world. Fast forward a decade and not even 1% of smart contract usage has anything to do with the real world. Shitcoiners created problems and then provided solutions to their problems. You can see this also in the emergence of projects whose sole purpose is to connect chains and facilitate the liquidity flows between them, which is also what? An artificial problem that was created by greedy shitcoin founders.

What most of you fail to understand is that Bitcoin is a little bit of everything and most brains can't wrap themselves around this idea. Bitcoin does almost everything but to different degrees. Whether something is productive capital or store of wealth it is not a binary objective measurement with a TRUE or FALSE response. If one wants to be honest about these things one will use a scale with at least 4: no, weak, medium, strong. Bitcoin is already infrastructure. Whether from a technological or a financial view, it already fulfills both to some extent.

I don't think that you understood his argument.

• Digital gold is passive capital. You buy it, you hold it and that it is. Similar to gold in a vault, valuable but it does not do anything.
• Bitcoin is evolving into productive capital too: this does not mean it fully stops being digital gold. Even the simple act of using Bitcoin as collateral or lending it to earn interest turns it into productive capital.

The users that are dismissive of this view neither understand the definitions of things that are involved, nor have they stopped to think for 1 minute about this before writing their useless shitpost. In conclusion: Bitcoin is both digital gold and a productive capital.

[Mrbluntzy]

I don't disagree with Thomas Chen, I feel him in his definition of Bitcoin as an infrastructure and a productive asset. I only disagree with him for saying that Bitcoin is not a store of value.

Still in line with the accurate definition of what infrastructure and a productive capital is, we should not forget that infrastructure has both the hard and soft system, that is why by definitioni,  we would learn that modern infrastructure also including digital elements like 5G networks, digital grid, mobile financing, mobile money, et cetera. What does these things do, they enhance the system of life, instead things running in the old fashioned way, it's not enhanced and made easier. So, to think of it, infrastructure is not just the basic physical facilities or system needed for the operation of a country or business, it also includes digital facilities like Bitcoin (easy decentralized payment, destroys the need for third party)

From this explanation, we can understand how Bitcoin fill the gap, for payment or generating enough profit to aid for more capital in a business.

The benefits of Bitcoin or the way in which Thomas used Bitcoin made him defined it like that, so he is correct in his own way.

[Alpha Marine]

  He's not making a lot of sense. Because he has made Bitcoin into something else, he struggles to explain what Bitcoin actually is from his point of view.

In traditional finance (TradFi) markets, allocators don’t park up their assets indefinitely. They rotate, hedge, optimize and continually adjust them to maximize yield (risk-adjusted). With Bitcoin, however, allocators are still in the accumulation phase, but eventually, like any other asset, they’ll need to start putting their Bitcoin to work.

Look at what he said here. How did he convince himself to believe this? People hold their shares in a company indefinitely. People hold gold indefinitely, so what does he mean by "traditional finance", or is equity and gold not traditional finance?

Bitcoin is a currency and an asset. It has all the features of a currency and all the features of an asset. So if bitcoin is money, then it cant be considered productive capital because money is not productive capital. You use money to buy productive assets.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Bitcoin is infrastructure, not digital gold.Opinion by: Thomas Chen, CEO of Function, not me.

I saw it on https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-is-infrastructure

He said bitcoin is not a store of value but a productive capital.

As soon as I read the OP, I thought of Strategy, and sure enough, the article mentions it. Saylor's idea is that bitcoin is like oil, and just as oil can be used to make petrol and kerosene, but also all kinds of plastics, for example, with bitcoin you can create a whole range of products, which is what he is doing.

I see that most responses do not take this idea into account. Whether he is right or not, only time will tell, but if he is right, he will be remembered as a genius.

[macson]

Many people say that Bitcoin is a store of value, productive capital, or other things, but they never consider that Bitcoin is decentralized money, which is the true meaning of Bitcoin.

Satoshi didn't develop Bitcoin solely as productive capital, he created it as an alternative to a centralized financial system that is vulnerable to abuse and control by certain parties.

Even though many people use Bitcoin as a store of value or a long-term investment, that doesn't change its fundamental function as decentralized money.

[ColdLava40]

Bitcoin is not productive capital. We know it's a flexible system, but its primary role is monetary.

Even if your investment grows, it doesn't make Bitcoin a productive asset. It's best defined as a store of value and an alternative financial system that can be used for any purpose its owner chooses.

[peter0425]

Bitcoin can be used for any kinds of services and can be considered the cryptocurrency, form of money, and so on - each decides for himself, but I didn't hear the meaning of productive capital before.

Productive capital from my own understanding is just that it is something that produces something. As mentioned for example machines. That’s a productive capital because it produces something could be food or clothing or whatever. Bitcoin doesn’t really do that but it doesn’t mean it doesn’t have any value nor is it not productive.