The Cryptocurrency Thread 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s essential to Bitcoin’s moat to understand the basics of anti-fragile Proof of Work coins vs. fragile Proof of Stake coins (per post #33 above). The difference is as fundamental as English vs. Chinese. If you think that Proof of Work is superior, as I do, then the only choice is Bitcoin. Look at the following market caps in the following list of Proof of Work coins. Now consider that ETH is converting to Proof of Stake soon, nuking and forfeiting its #2 PoW market cap shown here.

https://coincodex.com/cryptocurrencies/sector/proof-of-work/
 
Last edited:
Just to be clear, a crypto, such as bitcoin, cannot be both synthetic alternative currency and risk asset. It can only be one of these two things.



Your basis for these statements is unclear to me. Bitcoin is both a synthetic currency and a risk asset.

Bitcoin is a risk asset, like finite-supply land parcels on the island of Manhattan. As such, people buy it and stick the deed in cold, long term storage in anticipation of long term price appreciation.

Bitcoin is a synthetic alternative currency, because each Bitcoin is divisible into one hundred million Satoshis (Sats), which can be used to buy goods and services. Also, if Bitcoin is the low-velocity base layer, the Lightning network being developed on top of it makes transactions of Sats high velocity, just as fast and low fee as on another alt coin network. The Lightning network is like Bitcoin Manhattan’s Wall Street.
 
Last edited:
Bitcoin represents the ideological side of crypto standing in opposition to government systems.
It seems like it commands a value due to the fact it can be used to circumvent laws and regulations. As a payment method using all above board traditional systems is safer and can be cheaper (if the banks want to make cheaper).

China, now Russia has banned it, other governments (if they have any sense in maintaining power) will work to impede it, make it more expensive, or outright outlaw it as it gets in the way of accomplishing State objectives.
 
This is why Bitcoin is sometimes referred to as a digital replacement for Gold. Something that governments don't like, sometimes ban and generally try to keep in its corner so as not to interrupt their clever plans.

I have US$ I have Bitcoin and other things. No one here saying you should have only one. My Crypto allocations seems to need topping up for some reason.
 
Today, the dollar is widely used across the globe because of the depth and liquidity of U.S. financial markets, the size and openness of the U.S. economy, and international trust in U.S. institutions and rule of law. It is important, however, to consider the implications of a potential future state in which many foreign countries and currency unions may have introduced CBDCs. Some have suggested that, if these new CBDCs were more attractive than existing forms of the U.S. dollar, global use of the dollar could decrease—and a U.S. CBDC might help preserve the international role of the dollar.
Based on a very long timeline the USD reserve status is getting to a point that would not be out of the realm to not be the global currency anymore. The competing CBDC is interesting but also think a SDR (Special Drawing Rights) might be a little more attractive due to its diversified nature.
 
Based on a very long timeline the USD reserve status is getting to a point that would not be out of the realm to not be the global currency anymore.

Based on time? There are no competing currencies in the world right now. Do you (or anyone else) trust the Chinese, the Russians?
 
Based on time? There are no competing currencies in the world right now. Do you (or anyone else) trust the Chinese, the Russians?
Last I saw the ruble was not included but the Yuan is in basket. It is not an issue of trust, hence the need to diversify. Much like an Index fund of currencies or am I misunderstanding your point?
<https://www.imf.org/en/About/Factsheets/Sheets/2016/08/01/14/51/Special-Drawing-Right-SDR>

Was speaking of the history of reserve currencies
world-reserve-currency-chart.jpg
 
Your basis for these statements is unclear to me. Bitcoin is both a synthetic currency and a risk asset.

Bitcoin is a risk asset, like finite-supply land parcels on the island of Manhattan. As such, people buy it and stick the deed in cold, long term storage in anticipation of long term price appreciation.

Bitcoin is a synthetic alternative currency, because each Bitcoin is divisible into one hundred million Satoshis (Sats), which can be used to buy goods and services. Also, if Bitcoin is the low-velocity base layer, the Lightning network being developed on top of it makes transactions of Sats high velocity, just as fast and low fee as on another alt coin network. The Lightning network is like Bitcoin Manhattan’s Wall Street.
Do you mean bitcoin is currently a risk asset but it aspires to be a currency? Or is transitioning from risk asset to currency? A currency by definition must have a stable and predictable value or it cannot satisfy its purpose as a medium of exchange. A risk asset can lose 100% of its value by insolvency or bankruptcy. For that reason a risk asset could never be a currency.

This is why Bitcoin is sometimes referred to as a digital replacement for Gold. Something that governments don't like, sometimes ban and generally try to keep in its corner so as not to interrupt their clever plans.
Actually, central banks are the biggest holders of physical gold, and the US central bank has the biggest holding of all. So, central banks love gold. What they don’t love is tying the value of currency to physical availability of gold. Good thing for all of us, too. But everyone already knows that.
 
The "stablecoin" idea like Tether is a modern day wildcat bank from the 1800s. Issuance of unbacked bank notes is fine until a bank run happens, then a thing like Tether will suddenly drop to zero value. It is just a matter of time before this happens and a lot of people are going to learn the hard way how bad this is.
 
I see the point about risk assets vs. alternative currency now. I think, yes, Bitcoin is currently a risk asset that aspires to be a currency. I think proponents’ vision for it as a global currency requires Bitcoin to reach the majority of its Total Addressable Market in coming years or decades. At that point, the volatility should be largely ironed out and its value will proceed in tandem with the global economy. For now, in the early adoption stage, it is a highly risky and volatile property.
 
This chart was discussed by Invest Answers yesterday. It shows the previous drops, recovery time and post drop appreciation for BTC.

It assumes that we are still in a bull market and that this is a bearish period price drawdown that will recover and continue upwards.

I assume it is ok to post the screen shot since he posted it on Twitter and also showed it in a public Youtube video.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2022-01-21 at 5.14.35 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-01-21 at 5.14.35 PM.png
    119.1 KB · Views: 32
Last edited:
^^^^ Interesting. haven’t heard the episode but from this it looks like, in recent years, the # of days to reach the high is usually roughly 2 or 3 times the # of days that the prior correction lasts. Of course, we can’t say that this correction is only 71 days, since the price has been falling this weekend.
 
Last edited:
I see the point about risk assets vs. alternative currency now. I think, yes, Bitcoin is currently a risk asset that aspires to be a currency. I think proponents’ vision for it as a global currency requires Bitcoin to reach the majority of its Total Addressable Market in coming years or decades. At that point, the volatility should be largely ironed out and its value will proceed in tandem with the global economy. For now, in the early adoption stage, it is a highly risky and volatile property.

This may exceed the declared bounds of this thread, but... if the world economy continues its long-term trend of growing at an accelerating pace with a finite digital money supply, I would expect a lot of deflationary pressure, just as when money was based on the value of largely finite supplies of precious metal.
 
Not a hedge against inflation

I thought bitcoin could be a good hedge against inflation, as gold used to be.
Based on recent pullback, looks like it is not.
 
My feeling is BTC is still not fully understood by the wider traditional market and as such is lumped in with the tech stock basket.

Over longer time frames I think it will prove an inflation hedge particularly in the kind of inflation we're likely to see in the next couple of years. At present its percieved as a risk on speculative play and so it gets clobbered the hardest and first when the traditional markets get skittish. However I'm not sure in the future this correlation will be maintained. We'll see I suppose this is the 2nd 50%ish drawdown this year so I'm not getting too excited. I think the range between 20k-30k would be decent DCA area if we get there.
 
I thought bitcoin could be a good hedge against inflation, as gold used to be.

Based on recent pullback, looks like it is not.



It’s gone from $1 to $33,000 in ten years but it’s not an inflation hedge. OK.
 
Last edited:
I thought bitcoin could be a good hedge against inflation, as gold used to be.
Based on recent pullback, looks like it is not.

When times REALLY get tough, solid gold and silver coins, gold bars and diamonds may be best to keep in your possession (don't forget the gun and ammo - LOL). If there is no internet, there is no Bitcoin transactions.

Inflation, that's just easy stuff in comparison.
 
Like they say. Everyone needs a nonzero allocation to semi precious metals like lead, copper and brass in case things really go sideways.
 
If things really go that sideways, I’d prefer a good aluminum baseball bat to word getting out in my neighborhood that I own a gold stash.
 
There is a basis for gold as a safe asset and store of value. It’s rooted in over a thousand years of warfare and invasion across Europe, where there was a real possibility of being dislocated without warning. Having some wealth that was easy to hide, transport, store and use was part of survival.

Gold as an inflation hedge is not an easy case to make. In fact, over time, there are really two hedges against inflation. One is rent producing land, the other equities. Land has hundreds of years of history documenting its value, and the inflation protection is derived from rent or productive agricultural use, which grows over time. Equities are a more recent phenomenon, with a financial history limited to this past century. They do protect against inflation, but only over longer periods of time, also because of the continuous increase in productivity and output.

Crypto currency as a hedge against inflation is a thesis, an assertion based on an assumption. To choose a period of time and call the change in price proof of anything is just data mining. We all know past performance does not predict future performance. There needs to be an underlying mechanism, like there is in land (productive use) or equities (value add economic activity).

There is none with crypto assets. They generate no economic activity. They promise scarcity, but because crypto assets can be created out of nothing, there’s no reason to believe any will have a future value. They are infinitely abundant.
 
There is a basis for gold as a safe asset and store of value. It’s rooted in over a thousand years of warfare and invasion across Europe, where there was a real possibility of being dislocated without warning. Having some wealth that was easy to hide, transport, store and use was part of survival.

Gold as an inflation hedge is not an easy case to make. In fact, over time, there are really two hedges against inflation. One is rent producing land, the other equities. Land has hundreds of years of history documenting its value, and the inflation protection is derived from rent or productive agricultural use, which grows over time. Equities are a more recent phenomenon, with a financial history limited to this past century. They do protect against inflation, but only over longer periods of time, also because of the continuous increase in productivity and output.

Crypto currency as a hedge against inflation is a thesis, an assertion based on an assumption. To choose a period of time and call the change in price proof of anything is just data mining. We all know past performance does not predict future performance. There needs to be an underlying mechanism, like there is in land (productive use) or equities (value add economic activity).

There is none with crypto assets. They generate no economic activity. They promise scarcity, but because crypto assets can be created out of nothing, there’s no reason to believe any will have a future value. They are infinitely abundant.

Good points. I agree, except for he last paragraph about creating digital assets out of nothing.
 
When times REALLY get tough, solid gold and silver coins, gold bars and diamonds may be best to keep in your possession (don't forget the gun and ammo - LOL). If there is no internet, there is no Bitcoin transactions.

Inflation, that's just easy stuff in comparison.

Don't forget that year's worth of freeze-dried food in the basement.

If living meant surviving on stuff like that, I don't think I'd want to go on.
 
Don't forget that year's worth of freeze-dried food in the basement.

If living meant surviving on stuff like that, I don't think I'd want to go on.

MRE's are better. Like the one's I ate in the mid 1960's on my free military tour. I'll bet I can still buy the same ones today! But I'll bet the crackers will be stale.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom