Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,636
See PropertiesDisingenuous much? I'll ask you once more. Please post a link to the information you refer to in post #230.
As was explained to you (and as you well knew from the outset), those are the characteristics of a means of exchange and NOT a store of value.See Properties
Fiat as a medium of exchange is not meant to be a long term store of value. Its guardians have openly declared their intention to try and devalue it by 2% p.a. But monetary assets earning interest have proved not too bad as a store of value in the past.
As was explained to you (and as you well knew from the outset), those are the characteristics of a means of exchange and NOT a store of value.
Are my posts not showing up properly on your computer? I'll try again. What have Fungability, Portability and Divisibility got to do with store of value? Or let me ask a supplementary. The Wiki list contains "Cognizability: its value must be easily identified" Surely if you think Fungability, Portability and Divisibility are important tests of store of value, you would accept that Cognizability is more important than these, after all it actually references the word "value". Why did you drop Cognizability from your universal tests?tecate a few pages back said:You have not once answered as regards consideration of Bitcoin vs. FIAT and these nonsensical examples you try and suggest Bitcoin is equal to - and compared them on the basis of the characteristics of a store of value. That is the following;
- Durability
- Fungability
- Portability
- Verifiability
- Divisibility
- Scarcity
- Established History
- Censorship Resistance.
Once again, you incorrectly quoted the characteristics of a medium of exchange/currency and not those of a store of value.Are my posts not showing up properly on your computer? I'll try again. What have Fungability, Portability and Divisibility got to do with store of value? Or let me ask a supplementary. The Wiki list contains "Cognizability: its value must be easily identified" Surely if you think Fungability, Portability and Divisibility are important tests of store of value, you would accept that Cognizability is more important than these, after all it actually references the word "value". Why did you drop Cognizability from your universal tests?
Okay, you won't answer the question. Ever think of a career in politics?Once again, you incorrectly quoted the characteristics for a medium of exchange/currency and not those for a store of value.
Not so fast, Brendan.Gold might be worth zero. I don't really mind what it's worth as I am not a fan of it as a store of value, or a medium of exchange, or to adorn myself with.
Double Standards
So far you've presented with three double standards in this discussion:
1. Bitcoin has been considered in terms of seven universally accepted characteristics of what makes for a good store of value but you won't assess any of the nonsensical things that you liken Bitcoin to on the basis of those same fundamentals.
2. The core of your argument is that Bitcoin has zero intrinsic value* and on that basis alone you say that it is worth zero. However, you don't apply the same standard to intrinsically valueless FIAT money (i.e. €uro, USD, GBP, etc.).
3. In the absence of a neat formula to determine the fair price of Bitcoin, you say that it has zero value. Yet when I ask you to apply the same standard to gold, you tell me that's irrational.
*Bitcoin does actually have intrinsic value as it's an energy standard.
I see Wolfie has been so excited that Microsoft have reinstated the facility to buy games with btc (had been suspended due to volatility) that he has decided that he has to break his vow of silence.
It's like you never leftNot really. I simply acted a bit rashly a few months back. A time-out from cyber space was called for.
Could it be that they can actually look at things objectivelyWhy would one of the largest technology companies in the world have a support page for bitcoin usage?
tecate has mentioned a figure of $9trn...…..
it 'might be worth zero'...
Could it be that they can actually look at things objectivelyand they see what's coming down the tracks?
It's like you never left
Speaking of Folsom, did you know that Folsom is a hotel that features in the book Bitcoin Billionaires? How's that for coincidenceThanks Firefly, I almost detect the veiled sarcasm in your
The Big Short (unjustly banned), Folsom (created to get around the unjust banning of The Big Short, but then unjustly banned).
Speaking of Folsom, did you know that Folsom is a hotel that features in the book Bitcoin Billionaires? How's that for coincidence???
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?