He acted against it, so they would approve it. Now the truth is revealed. The art of the deal.
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (28)
sorted by:
Nah.
Money needs to be stable. In order to be stable, it needs to meet these 7 characteristics.
(1) It must be durable, which is why we don’t use wheat or corn, or rice.
(2) It must be divisible, which is why we don’t use artwork.
(3) It must be convenient, which is why we don’t use lead or copper.
(4) It must be consistent, which is why we don’t use real estate.
(5) It must possess value in itself, which is why we don’t use paper.
(6) It must be limited in the quantity that is available, which is why we don’t use aluminum or iron.
(7) It should have a long history of acceptance, which is why we don’t use molybdenum or rhodium.
Only GOLD and SILVER fit all seven characteristics.
EVERYTHING else is inferior which makes them credit. They are essentially Gold substitutes.
If you had a race to see who was the fastest man in the world there can only be one winner and ONLY ONE person can hold the label of the fastest man in the world. It doesn't mean that the rest are slow, it just means that they are not the fastest.
Value is ultimately determined by the person holding the money. "He who has the Gold makes the rules."
I agree to an extent.
I think in the future, we’ll have crypto based on real commodities incl silver and gold.
The ease of use, portability and privacy of blockchain would provide a great way to use your “money”.
Correct. Crypto can be currency. And I think it could be a very good currency if it's the right crypto. I however, want physical coinage or paper currency as well.
Who said that crypto is money, or is trying to be? It’s a digital asset.
And when the power dies?
Then I guess all the “money” in banks, which isn’t backed by anything, and is merely a log entry on their servers, might be lost.
That's why money needs to be tangible. Physical gold and silver is going to be there whether there's power or not. They were money long before there was such a thing as electricity. In my opinion bitcoin and fiat currency both have the same problem, there is no true worth in them, they only seem to be worth something because of the public's belief and trust. As soon as something happens and the public loses confidence in either one they become worthless.
Interesting point. In fact, your bitcoin has a better chance of being resurrected if at least a few of the millions of copies of the blockchain survive. How many copies does the bank keep of its ledger?
Why is it an asset? What inherent value does it have?
You can apply the same logic to gold.
In essence an asset is something a group of people place value in.
Gold has an inherent value. It's used in electronics, jewelry, and I guess other stuff. Bitcoin was pulled out of thin air. It's not worth the paper it's printed on.
Crypto has many qualities of money but not all. It's can be fractionalized but it's not finite. There is an unlimited supply as long as people keep making blockchains that produce it from thin air. Can't do thatbwith gold or silver.
It's not. It's a medium of exchange or currency.
An asset is merely something you own, and crypto is something you can own.
Why does it have value? Because, like any other asset, it is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it. I personally don't see much inherent value in a Picaso painting, but if someone is willing to pay millions, then it's a valued asset.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not some kind of huge crypto proponent, but I'm a realist that clearly sees our current Federal Reserve dollars rapidly depreciating in value, so I'm open minded about alternatives to store wealth.
People say that gold is the baseline, because 10 kilograms of gold would buy a nice house 50 years ago, 25 years ago, today, and theoretically in the future. So if we compare everything in relation to the baseline gold standard, then dollars are decreasing in value vs. gold, while Bitcoin is increasing in value vs. gold. Currently I have approx. 6% of my net worth in Bitcoin, about 5% in gold, and 10% in silver.
Wether or not Bitcoin, or crypto, evolves into a useful tool of some sort in the future isn't my concern at this point; maybe it will, maybe it won't, and only time will tell. But for now, at this point in time, for me, it's merely an asset that has served me well protecting my life savings against a depreciating dollar. To be honest, having only 6% in crypto seems too conservative, if anything.
TLDR: I'm not hyping crypto, I'm merely taking advantage of what it currently offers me.
a medium of exchange of value.