Bitcoin is gold and not Tulip????
Bitcoin is a "ponzi by proxy"
- Thread starter orbit23
- Start date
Bitcoin is gold and not Tulip????
Yeah, that was the point.
Just because a ponzi last a decade it doesn't make it not a ponzi. By the way I NEVER said not to trade a ponzi.
Technically speaking social security is a ponzi and it lasted like 9 decades.
For purists we came up with a slightly different definition and we can call it a cponzi.
So the sellers of shovels during the gold rush in San Francisco were fighting to sell at a loss?
As a bitcoiner, I find it fascinating the tables are turned, the fools are all in a rush wanting to become the preferred seller of pick and shovels
Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, ain't it?
That is an excellent post from Nic and makes a lot of sense. Plus, how much work is going to be involved in managing this ETF? Since none of these issuers, other than Vanguard, is going to custody the bitcoin, then I just don't see where the costs are, other than administrative. Imagine being a gold ETF that actually self custodies the actual gold. Jesus that must be a huge expense. To self custody bitcoin is orders of magnitude cheaper, and almost all of these ETFs aren't even doing this. The fact that Coinbase is going to custody the bitcoin for almost every single ETF is in my mind a huge, huge worry.
Bro... the world's largest stablecoin is backed by nothing... and it will never have an approved audit. And you're worried of Coinbase?
Fidelity is also doing their own self-custody
If there is another GFC, it will be worse and 6102 or bail-in for these bitcoins will be easy
Btc spot etf is a shitty replacement for the real bitcoin controlled by private keys but it's better than nothing
The truth is the average retail investors, especially the majority of the boomers will not buy bitcoin unless an RIA tells them they need the allocation to the Blackrock or Fidelity bitcoin etf
$100 Trillion AUM by these RIA's and starting as early as Thursday, they will be able to allocate to bitcoin spot etf
Honestly, this is overall a net positive. Of course people having their bitcoin stolen is bad, but what it means is that governments recognize the value of bitcoin and recognize that fiat is dead. If they cannot just print fiat and have that save the system, which is what they always did, but instead have to confiscate bitcoin instead, then technically, this means bitcoiners win.
Once again, the confiscation is horrible for those involved, but I would happily give up all my bitcoin I own if it meant the government, from this day forward, was on a hard money standard. This means they couldn't spend what they don't collect in taxes, and any spending has to be accounted for.
This is also why I think the way forward for bitcoin is sidechains that are backed by bitcoin. I see both banks and governments issuing their own currency. Transaction fees are a hot topic now, and honestly, I'm not a fan of lightning simply because you still need those initial transactions. So if the future really is that most people will never interact with the base layer, if we can insure that any form of future money is backed up by the base layer, this means winning to me.
Now of course I worry about a CBDC style money, where even if its backed by bitcoin, it still leads to giving up privacy, but once again, just knowing the government is forced to stick to balancing budgets is a major win. I don't imagine this is the outcome, so I don't worry too much about it, but it would still be winning somewhat.
One of the only things that could crush Bitcoin will be the Tether collapse. (Though, BTC could rise again after the ashes.) However, there is another case... it's a long-tailed event and unlikely.. but possible.
If governments were threatened by blue-chip cryptos enough, it is possible there would be a strong push to some sort of gold-standard again. If this happened, and there was enough faith/trust that another Nixon wouldn't default on the obligations, and voters united to hold liberal politicians accountable for voter-buying/hand-outs. Then demand for BTC would fall off a cliff. It would be what hedge funds refer to as a 'catastrophic loss event' for Bitcoin.
But again, we are talking about the average voter here... keeping short-term politicians accountable and going through some austerity to bring back the gold-standard. Extremely unlikely knowing the foolishness and greed of humans.
Maybe... it could be done by force though.
If governments were threatened by blue-chip cryptos enough, it is possible there would be a strong push to some sort of gold-standard again. If this happened, and there was enough faith/trust that another Nixon wouldn't default on the obligations, and voters united to hold liberal politicians accountable for voter-buying/hand-outs. Then demand for BTC would fall off a cliff. It would be what hedge funds refer to as a 'catastrophic loss event' for Bitcoin.
But again, we are talking about the average voter here... keeping short-term politicians accountable and going through some austerity to bring back the gold-standard. Extremely unlikely knowing the foolishness and greed of humans.
Maybe... it could be done by force though.