Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,589
Please Wolfie, you're better than that
Please Wolfie, you're better than thatOk, I have no real desire to recycle the past three years, but bitcoin is already a medium of exchange. It may be a relatively scarce medium of exchange but so is gold. When is the last time you bought and sold anything in gold other than for decorative jewellery or for fiat currency?
I do not think bitcoin has the propensity to be traded abundantly in our daily lives for groceries and electricity bills any day soon.
Instead, I would consider bitcoin having the prospect of being a great equaliser. Acting as a bulwark against manipulation (human nature) and offering economic opportunity and autonomy to anyone with an internet connection.
And your and Nouriel's point is that it's a store of value - which I agree with.The John Kelleher point is that the only possible utility that bitcoin can achieve is as MOE.
As acknowledged by I think everyone, it is available to be used as a medium of exchange today and is used for that purpose. However, it suits the exchange of large amounts of value right now - and not a cup of coffee. There's plenty that needs to change before it becomes a reasonable prospect for micro-transactions.Of course it has been used on some occasions to buy latte, or so I am told but we are a galaxy away from its MOE utility value justifying a price of $15k.
Real Estate has no utility as a MOE. Neither does precious art.
The John Kelleher point is that the only possible utility that bitcoin can achieve is as MOE.
Gotcha NourielNouriel Roubini on twitter said:Bitcoin is NOT a currency: it is not a unit of account, it is not a single numéraire, it is not a scalable means of payments, it is not backed by any asset, it is not legal tender, its price is highly manipulated & thus its partial store of value function is based on nothing
tecate said:However, just like many in crypto I see Nouriel's acknowledgement of bitcoin as a store of value as a complete change
You remember the part your Dukeness when I said that Nouriel is the most poisonous, venomous critic of bitcoin? No claim was being made that the guy has changed his ways. The claim was that he's changed his response, knows he's got this wrong and he's trying to create wriggle room.Gotcha NourielYou said "store of value". This is a great boost to bitcoin cultists.
@tecate I never heard of Nouriel until you introduced him to me. That the bitcoin community are in a celebratory "gotcha" over his use of the words "store of value" is, frankly, sad.You remember the part your Dukeness when I said that Nouriel is the most poisonous, venomous critic of bitcoin? No claim was being made that the guy has changed his ways. The claim was that he's changed his response, knows he's got this wrong and he's trying to create wriggle room.
Tell me this - what is a 'partial store of value'? Either it is or it isn't! - but he's trying to fudge things now to cover his tracks (because he's in 'fax machine guy' territory). I've never heard anyone refer to a "partial store of value". When you google the phrase, guess what comes up? Nouriel! ONLY Nouriel.
The tweet that you saw is him lashing out at crypto peeps who called him out on his preparatory fudge/u-turn.
and your point is?@tecate I never heard of Nouriel until you introduced him to me.
The 'gotcha' comment is yours - and its an insight into how you approach and perceive this 'discussion'.@tecate That the bitcoin community are in a celebratory "gotcha" over his use of the words "store of value" is, frankly, sad.
Thought experiment. If someone offers me a bitcoin for $100 but on condition I do not sell it for a month. I would bite their hand off even though it's BOHA - gotme!, I must think it has part store of value.
This isn't about your or my happiness, Duke but a discussion of the topic itself.@tecate if you believe Mr Roubini has made a U-turn and is now supportive of the store of value case for bitcoin, and that makes you happy; it would be unfair of me to rain on your parade.
This isn't about your or my happiness, Duke but a discussion of the topic itself.
Are you suggesting that we shouldn't believe Mr. Roubini when he says that bitcoin is a 'partial store of value'?
You agreed with him on that. Should I not believe him or you? Or are you/he being misrepresented in some way?
I had asked you before what the difference is between a 'partial store of value' and a 'store of value'. Is there one? My initial thought was that there wasn't - that there couldn't be a half way house for such a thing. I googled the phrase and it seems the only guy on the planet to use it is Mr. Roubini. To me, it looks like he's covering his tracks - when in later years he's asked about his views on bitcoin.
If there's something I'm missing, please do clarify.
@tecate if you still believe that this is Mr Roubini having made a U-turn and supporting the store of value case for bitcoin, I am not going to try and convince you otherwise.Roubini latest tweet said:...its partial store of value function is based on nothing...
Firstly, I'm not asking you to convince me of anything your Dukeness. However, I see an opportunity for you to provide a valuable contribution towards advancing the discussion here.@tecate if you still believe that this is Mr Roubini having made a U-turn and supporting the store of value case for bitcoin, I am not going to try and convince you otherwise.
I don't think the ongoing personal reference to anyone who has contributed to this discussion over the course of the past three years - when they present with a point of view contrary to your own (as said commentary is nowhere to be seen when it's a viewpoint you share) - is in any way helpful to the discussion.Aside: I hope like you me that you will ignore the noise from the hydra which has sprouted a few more heads after the earlier ones were chopped off.
I don't know what he meant by a "partial" store of value. I only heard of the guy when you introduced him to me and have no knowledge of his linguistic style.At the third(?) time of asking, can you confirm what a 'partial store of value' is? How could something have a 'partial' store of value?
Really? This was your response to his declaration of bitcoin having a 'partial store of value' ->I don't know what he meant by a "partial" store of value.
He uses the words "part store of value". Obviously it has a part store of value.
I never suggested this as a 'ringing endorsement. As I've pointed out to you twice already, there has never been anyone in economist circles who has been as poisonous in directing his bile at the crypto community and at bitcoin. I never suggested this was a ringing endorsement because precisely as I said, he will do everything in his power to diss bitcoin/crypto.I know where he stands now and unlike you I do not see it as a ringing endorsement of the store of value case for bitcoin.
Once again, the only person talking about a 'gotcha' is you. Secondly, the crypto community will hold anyone to account for their public comments - and rightly so.That there are a "wealth of people" in the bitcoin community chasing down what they think is a "gotcha" on Mr Roubini tells its own story.
I don't know what that means. However, if you disagree with the actual contributions of someone, then normal procedure is to deal with that - not to attack people personally - or criticise if they click on the 'like' tab, etc.Beware of posters of 35 posts standing showing you fausse empathy.
I have reported the post to the moderators.I don't know what that means. However, if you disagree with the actual contributions of someone, then normal procedure is to deal with that.
At the fourth time of asking
I had no idea that I was getting involved in a fierce semantic "gotcha" row between the bitcoin community and their nemesis.- can you explain what is the distinction between a 'store of value' and a 'partial store of value'? How could there be a half way house for such a thing? Surely it either is a store of value or it isn't?
Again, the only one mentioning the word 'gotcha' is yourself - no-one else.I had no idea that I was getting involved in a fierce semantic "gotcha" row between the bitcoin community and their nemesis.
Well, if you didn't know what it meant, I'm surprised that you decided to mirror his comments - and state the same thing i.e. that bitcoin is a 'part' store of value.I did note the use of the word "part" when I looked at the link and it seemed to mean something. I surmised that it might refer to time qualification but I don't know exactly what he meant.
Because it's totally unclear what either of you are claiming. Are you claiming that bitcoin IS or IS NOT a store of value? If the latter, why did you back up Nouriel's commentary on it?Why are you making such a big deal of this?
It's been a total pleasure your Dukeness. I've no doubt yourself and Nouriel are kindred spirits - so you're very welcome.@tecate you have given me wonderful links on bitcoin which have greatly increased my understanding of the debate. You have also given me a new hero - Mr Roubini who I have put on my to follow list on Twitter. This particular debate has run its course IMHO but I look forward to future engagements, hopefully without the pollution of trolls.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?