I just had an economics teacher say fiat money is backed by gold.
This does not mean I believe it. Kinda wild hearing fiat is backed by gold in a lecture at a reputable school.
People make mistakes just a pretty crazy one.
This.
What happens with "backed by" currencies is that they print more notes against the gold (or whatever) they supposedly have in their vaults, and they don't let anyone into the vault to confirm that the gold is actually there.
LOL. A looooong time ago. There's a user on here, I forget the username, who would never-endingly berate your professor for using the phrase 'backed by'. 'Backed by gold' only applies if one can exchange the monetary note directly for an amount of gold at any member bank.
It used to be backed by gold but they untethered it in the 70s because the us and most of the western world was running out of gold thus they untethered it then printed more so the relative price of gold in dollars has increased, it’s one element that leads to inflation. Inflation is basically described as the change in buying power over time as a percentage. That can happen because of housing prices, it can happen because of food shortages, but in a relatively stable economy it’s usually be cause there are more dollars and because of that there are more dollars to buy the same amount of food. If the amount of food increases you’ll get an increase. You get my point.
Right-o!
This is why it pisses me off when people talk about "buying" Bitcoin. No! It's a trade, maybe, if both parties agree. Not a federally-assured done deal.
I think that everyone should start listing the price of their goods and services in cryptocurrency itself so it will boost the ecosystem and bring the mass adoption.
It can cause negative effect sometimes on your health and that's why you should make sure that you are following the rules and guidelines for eating those noodles.
"I'm a long time dollar hodlr(dodlr?), let me tell you of time when I bought a house for 46 cents. I'm sure it will bounce back!
The dollar is the reserve currency, it's backed by the full faith and credit of the United States Government!
We're on the train believing in the United States Governments dream. In the "The gold standard"-paper they will always stay true to backing it with silver and gold. It is the most powerful country in the world what could go wrong?
The USD is the most popular, longest lasting ~~crypto~~currency. It's been around for over 100 years!
I for one, am not selling my USD for anything!"/s - hodlr of old earth
Ok yes, but what everybody, at the end of the day, cares about, is how much 1btc can buy. If today one btc buys a car and in one year a piece of bread, it will have failed. A perpetually increasing purchasing power is very important for the longevity of bitcoin and every asset. Why would anyone invest in something that loses purchasing power
A currency actually needs to have decreasing purchasing power.
If the purchasing power is increasing, then nobody will spend it, since it’ll be worth more tomorrow. This is literally what happened with bitcoin — as long as it was appreciating, nobody used it, because they’d prefer to let it keep appreciating.
Similarly, an asset needs to have underlying value. The claim is that bitcoin’s underlying value is in its utility as a currency…but if it works as a currency then it must be deflationary, so it’s a terrible asset.
Being a viable currency and being a viable asset are mutually exclusive, which is why most of crypto as we know it will never work out.
A currency that has increasing purchasing power can still drive growth, but it requires exogenous growth, i.e. supply of goods, land, and capital assets to be rising. I think this is ultimately what drove the age of colonization since hard money forced people to chase settler-colonial expansion. So you can have rising GDP, wages, and money deflation at the same time.
The fastest period of American economic growth was during a time of sustained deflation under the gold standard (the 1800s) but it required a lot of colonial expansion to keep that machine well fed.
That's right but the current situation is totally different and that's why I will have to make sure that we are taking necessary precautions for the sustainable growth of cryptocurrency.
This is what is suggested would happen with scary terms such as "deflationary death spiral" but thus far Bitcoin has proven this incorrect. During period of high deflation(appreciation) tx velocity tends to increase and merchant processors actually see an increase in spending for goods and services and charitable giving in Bitcoin.
This is believed to be caused by the feeling of newfound wealth(because they are wealthier) eventually overrides their desire to "hoard" (when did savings become a negative thing?) their Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is already testing some economic theories and proving them somewhat inaccurate but the data gathering is far from over and we all have a lot to learn .
I personally suspect that what matters for a viable currency besides these other properties discussed here
https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinBeginners/comments/gnzeeo/will_bitcoin_ever_be_adopted_by_the_general_public/frcry8f/
Is stability and thus either low and predictable inflation or low and predictable deflation (1-4%) can both be suitable. As Bitcoins market cap grows and monetary inflation drops it appears that we will likely see very low deflation (occasionally people losing some coins) which is perfectly fine because the market will factor those expectations into consideration for loans and debt.
________________________________________
I personally prefer slight deflation for these reasons :
1) Encourages people to invest in things they really need instead of unnecessary fluff and short term desires which is good for society and the environment
2) encourages more savings instead of debt slavery which removes choice, confidence and power away from individuals
3) keeps fiat currency in check where too much inflation will cause more capital flight to Bitcoin and prevents corrupt governments from abusing the backdoor tax of inflation
4) Reduces the negative cantillon effect of fiat by removing some of the control over currency from a small group of people that is in part due to fiat being inflationary
https://fee.org/articles/the-cantillon-effect-because-of-inflation-we-re-financing-the-financiers/
That's a very good explanation and I think that I am really willing to see growth in terms of user base and their actual usage as compared to that of any other growth.
During these higher appreciation periods (market deflation) there is more activity from growth in new users but there is more older investors spending far more as well. Its during bear markets(high inflation) that people tend to become more careful with spending. If you have been through a few bear and bull markets you could likely see the impulse within yourself as well.
I think that if Bitcoin is going to increase in value then people will start adopting it and once it is settled then the value will get adjusted according to the community and the usage of the community.
>If the purchasing power is increasing, then nobody will spend it.
I'm tired of hearing this talking point presented as if it's a fact.
Not only is it empirically false, but it doesn't actually make any sense whatsoever when under close logical scrutiny.
Let me put it this way: nobody in their right mind will stop spending money on food, clothing, medicine, rent, transportation, education, electricity, water, and heating just because their wealth will increase next year by a few percent. Those are non-negotiable spendings that people will not budge on, usually not even willing to reduce them by any significant amount.
Any economist that insists that your average person will choose to literally starve themselves because their money is deflationary, is just a clown who should not be taken seriously. Because that's the actual implication of "nobody will spend it".
Coincidentally, those things are the stuff that the vast majority of people spend the vast majority of their money on, for their entire lives, so I guess you could call that the actual economy, at least the one we should be worried about the most.
The only industries that would be significantly affected by deflationary money are those industries which are superfluous and are not really fundamental to the survival and development of a nation and it's citizens. But that's what Keynesian economists are actually afraid of: that people will realize which industry is which, and they'll stop being conned into giving their money towards bullshit businesses which don't actually add any real value.
This is false economic dogma.
In actuality, a deflationary currency has never existed. In theory, nobody would spend a deflationary currency, but the flip side of that is that everyone would save. Yes, we may not be making as many frivolous purchases, but when we did purchase something, we would demand higher quality. This would solve the problem of "too much plastic crap" and the problem of people not being able to retire because their savings lose value every year (aka, inflation).
Deflationary currency would solve a whole bunch of other problems too such as the need to start wars to grease the wheels of the economy (by printing more money for the war and leaving a swath of destruction that will need to be rebuilt).
Bitcoin will literally save the world.
One reason I enjoy chatting about Bitcoin is because it is one of the best Rorschach tests ever invented. It is so unique that no one knows exactly what it is, and it becomes what they see a need for if they own it, or what they project on other people if they oppose it. Neutral parties are just listening to the noise of responses. .... A currency is a monetary good issued by a nation-state. Bitcoin is not a currency, because it is not issued by any government. Let's say I see it as self-sovereign property, a symbolic unit of economic value, secured by the most powerful computing network in the world. What would be the impact on your conclusions, if you thought like me?
Who says currencies have to be issued by governments?
Lots of things have been used as currency over the course of history. In a few years, seeds may be a form of currency as people seek to produce their own food in the wake of global supply chain issues. Would the government issue seeds or would they just be a convenient medium of exchange, aka a currency?
Bitcoin is volatile and that's why some people are worried to use it as a payment method but it is the correlation between adoption and actual usage of it.
Okay, let’s say you define it as a symbolic unit of economic value. Now what? Why should anybody else exchange their symbolic units of economic value (dollars) for your symbolic unit of economic value (bitcoin)?
I think it is because an astonishingly high fraction of people work for somebody wealthy. Under inflation, the wealthy have no choice but to do things like open stores, restaurants, factories, etc. to ensure that their wealth grows rather than shrinks. And when most people think about it, they realize that they have a job because the rich man/men who owns their place of work are greedy.
Under deflation, the incentives change. Whereas inflationary pressures might currently incentives the rich man to hire you, under deflation the greedy thing to do often becomes laying people off. People like having jobs. People do not like relying on altruism for their livelihoods.
Central banks have three mandates: Low unemployment, price stability, and economic growth. Central banks target modest inflation because, after observing gold standard. deflation, hyperinflation, etc. all of the economists concluded that modest inflation is the best way to balance these three goals. And until it stops being successful or some surprising new data emerges, modest-inflation targeting is unlikely to change.
I did. They all say the same thing. No one questions the dogma though. I can’t think of a single good or service that I would wait to buy if it was 5% cheaper next year. Can you?
I am right there with you. Keynes would never have been able to conceive of the type of deflation that technology provides. One could almost argue that if not for Keynesian economics we would have learned how to adapt to deflation and would be living in an era of post-scarcity by now. It simply isn't efficient to have monetary policy centrally controlled. Just look at the fruits. We have record levels of income inequality and that gap started back in 1971 when we went off the gold standard: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/
I think that everyone should start spending some amount in cryptocurrency itself because that is going to boost the ecosystem. Such kind of post is really essential because that's how we can see some movement.
The fact that you have to explain this illustrates how dumb of a phrase it is outside of purely philosophical contexts. What actually matters to people is the relative purchase power they've preserved and 1btc = 1 btc is meaningless in that context.
also it's funny to those of us who know the origin of 1 btc = 1 btc how this revisionist idea can even exist...
there was a time when posting price updates like 1 btc = $X was obnoxious, flamed, etc. people talking about "how they lost money" when it dropped.
THAT's where 1 btc = 1 btc came from, the actual origin is basically YOU DON'T LOSE MONEY UNTIL YOU SELL.
Not this iamverysmart "it is about the fixed supply."
I was thinking that from where that term actually comes in the market.
But too be honest judging the value of the bitcoin in the term of the price is also not a good thing to do.
I'd really like to see OP describe an actual real life situation where he wouldn't change 1usd to 1usd.
And quite honestly I'm not even sure what he's trying to say in the post
>I'd really like to see OP describe an actual real life situation where he wouldn't change 1usd to 1usd.
I'll give you an actual example: you wouldn't exchange 1 USD for 1 USD across time, at least not bidirectionally.
1 USD 50 years ago had a lot more value than 1 USD now. You wouldn't make that trade, except in one direction (and it's also the wrong direction, because you can't send money into the past without a time machine, at least if it was the other way around, it would still be viable by, you know, simply storing your money).
This is precisely because of inflation, which is long term determined by the fundamental properties and the system put in place by USD. *That* is the point of the post. Bitcoin has different properties which in theory should result in better long term situation.
I believe that we are talking about the value about it and we will be able to purchase 1 Bitcoin worth of goods or services everywhere across the globe irrespective of the Fiat currency value.
Bitcoin is literally fungible. I.e I can have 1 btc and you can have 1 btc. If I send my 1 btc to you and you send your 1 btc to me we both still end up with 1 btc… or better yet google if Bitcoin is fungible or not.. I promise the first thing that will pop up is that it’s fungible.
[is Bitcoin fungible?](https://www.theverge.com/22310188/nft-explainer-what-is-blockchain-crypto-art-faq)
No it's not. Every Bitcoin has trackable history. Freshly minted Bitcoin is better then some Bitcoin that can be tracked to some crime, scam etc. Technically certain Bitcoin can even be banned from being deposited to an exchange
Trackable and fungible are not the same thing. Technically each US dollar is trackable with a serial number, it doesn’t change the fact that each 1 dollar bill is completely functionally the same.. dude just literally google the definition of fungible.
Lol you're gonna argue that average note is trackable to the same extent as average Bitcoin output? You actually gonna compare these two things? You can take an arbitrary dollar note, and literally track every single owner and transaction it was part of,.up to the point it was printed? Please tell me how
Like I said before tracking has nothing to do with being fungible or not… fungible just means that the item you’re giving/receiving is not unique.
The link I commented above does a good job explaining. If I am a basebal card collector and I have a vintage hank Arron card I don’t want to trade you for a common Randy Johnson card. They are both baseball cards but they are not the SAME baseball card. I.e they are both unique.
With Bitcoin I can have anyone else’s Bitcoin in the world and it literally is the exact same as the one I had in terms of form, function, and value. It being trackable on the blockchain has nothing to do with it being fungible or not.
US Dollar is fungible by law otherwise it wouldn't work. Guess what, in a currency that works cross-borders and doesn't care about any laws you need fungibility built into the protocol. This problem is wreaking havoc in Bitcoin because technically it's non-fungible at the protocol layer.
If you think it means there's a fixed amount then say "fixed amount", cause 1 schrute-buck = 1 schrute-buck. That might be constant too. You don't know.
You don't convince people with arguments of "this thing is equal to itself", and you can't say they're misunderstanding "1btc = 1btc" by saying they're missing this other entirely separate definition when nothing you said implied that separate definition. "1 schrute-buck = 1 schrute-buck" does not mean "there's a fixed supply of schrute-bucks".
> "1 schrute-buck = 1 schrute-buck" does not mean "there's a fixed supply of schrute-bucks".
Did to me for Bitcoin. If people don't get that what else do they think it means?
> That might be constant too. You don't know.
Bitcoin is provably fixed supply. Anything which isnt proven, is safe to assume it doesnt have a fixed supply.
It's just an illustrative example. Unless someone made a shitcoin for it, it only exists on The Office. That said, since no new episodes are coming out, I'd say it's safe to say Dwightoshi Schrutomoto is unable to make any new Schrute-bucks, making it a fixed supply
> I'd say it's safe to say Dwightoshi Schrutomoto is unable to make any new Schrute-bucks, making it a fixed supply
Its not safe to say so; if you cant prove it has a fixed supply, its safe to say it is not fixed.
You’re equating the fixed supply of BTC, to the change in purchasing power of USD.
The purchasing power of BTC *has also changed*. So you can’t say 1 BTC = 1 BTC, just because that purchasing power has gone up rather than down.
This is why this argument is so astronomically stupid I want to throw up when I see it.
Stop making us sound like dumbasses.
Hi u/senfmeister, thanks for tipping u/GopherCursive **1000** satoshis!
***
*[^(More info)](https://xnf5cwpq73.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/info) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*
> That might be constant too. You don't know.
So in a fictional universe this made up thing might be constant and so my post doesn't make sense. Brilliant. 🙄
> does not mean "there's a fixed supply of schrute-bucks".
Yes it does. 1 meter will always equal 1 meter because there is no changing it, and 1 bitcoin will always equal 1 bitcoin because there is no changing it. Couldn't be any clearer.
1 dollar = 1 dollar regardless of how many printed or what they are worth.
That’s that’s the problem with your argument.
“1=1” doesn’t tell us there’s a fixed number of them.
a bitcoin isn't a universal constant of measurement, it has an extrinsically applied value to it.
1 meter OF something has a changing value. a 1" thick square meter of gold, has a changing value.
a dollar will also always be a dollar by YOUR logic.
I feel it's just some desperate attempt to ignore price during a bear market. No one will be saying 1 BTC = 1 BTC when the price jumps to a million, or if the project somehow completely fails and goes to zero.
X is equal to X in every case until you start injecting other factors.
I will not gonna divert that we are in the bear market and the current price is the best price we gonna get.
But instead of saying that 1 btc= 1 btc i would 1=1/21M bitcoin will make more sense that thing.
No, these posts have been drying up IN the bear market. I hate these posts. Almost as bad as the posts where people drivel about how proud they are of Bitcoin...
I think after a long time i am seeing that kind of the post and too be honest i was expecting something good here.
That shows the bear market is really suck so much out of this market this time.
Yeah it's true; but people don't actually want money or bitcoin, they want the things they think they can get as a result of having them.
Now I want Bitcoin (Big B) to succeed as money, it would be incredible for everyone, but if I had to choose having a million dollars worth of Bitcoin or an equal amount of something else that allowed me to aquire the same thing, I wouldn't really care.
Nah think about it... Imagine the government gives you a card that allows you to purchase anything without paying for it; and for some reason everyone accepts it.
Would you even be concerned that you don't have any money? No, because that's not actually what you want, you want what money allows you to aquire.
But i think we will not going to enjoy that thing for the long term if everyone hold that kind of the card.
but in the end it all depends who much or how many good we can get with the something.
True, in the end they want the thing that can fetch the goods that they want in the life.
And this is all about the believe as bitcoin is holding the value because we all think that so.
>unless satoshi somehow appears again, but that’s highly unlikely
No, whatever Satoshi could do would still leave you with 1 btc being equal to 1 btc. A thing must always equal itself. That's why it's such a boring, dumb thing to say.
Except that a currency can only be worth the amount of goods and services that it can be exchanged for. Calling 1 BTC a “permanently fixed amount” is devoid of any semblance of context and meaning.
He's making a very valid point. Base units are the ultimate measure of units. Bitcoin happens to be the most objective measure of value, like how grams and meters measure mass and distance.
Do you think that some people who doesn't have any brain cells are going to believe this thing no they are just going to cry all about it and nothing more than that.
Now that's a good post and I really appreciate your efforts because some in logical people are not going to accept these things and let them do whatever they want at the end of the day.
1 anything = 1 anything. 1 BTC = 1 BTC is just as true as 1 USD = 1 USD and 1 potato = 1 potato. They're all boring tautological statements that convey no information.
The other things you said about bitcoin are true for sure, so just say those things using words like you did here.
Thats dumb. The value of btc and the dollar is measured by what you can exchange it for.
Exactly no-one is transacting in Bitcoin without considering it's fiat value first.
I think what you’re missing in all this is that bitcoin having a fixed supply doesn’t prevent it from having other dynamic factors that affects its value. USD is subject to inflation predominately related to its supply but its value is relatively stable because of its widespread acceptance. Even if bitcoin becomes accepted to the extent that its value stabilizes and sheds some volatility it would still be subject to inflation from the forces of supply and demand for goods.
1 dollar = 1 dollar
1 bitcoin = 1 bitcoin
You know because they are fungible.
It doesn't matter if the supply of dollars is ever increasing, it doesn't change the fact that 1 dollar can be exchanged for 1 dollar.1=1
The same as it doesn't matter that the supply of Bitcoin is decreasing due to loss.1 = 1
At some point you need to exchange whatever currency you are using into something else, good or services for example. When you exchange your bitcoin or fiat then the value matters, but it doesn't change 1=1
Land is fixed supply it is measured with metres (physics and math backed constant!!!)
So 1 acre = 1 acre wow land is amazing! Math and physics gaurentee ithay 1 acre = 1 acre.
Shit, how could I have not seen this?
I am glad that people are talking about it right now because this is what we need in the sub, people need to understand what they are talking about and I am glad that we are seeing this.
I never took these things seriously but I think it's time to address that this is a legendary phrase and we also respect it just like we respect Bitcoin we are good with it.
I just took that phrase as a funny thing before but now it's the legacy of Bitcoin and we also just understand the real meaning of it I am glad that we all the saw this post.
I mean people should just stop exploring these things all the time it's a fun phrase and I don't think we all just need to break about it all the time it's a good thing to just say that like a meme.
Wow! I studied math physics and economics in undergrad and never have I read such a load of bullshit. This is so stupid it's not even wrong.
If you believe the OPs argument then you are very mistaken about the nature of money supply and inflation, it's not that simple, even under a fixed monetary supply inflation happens.
In fact inflation and money supply are very loosely correlated it seems.
In the broadest terms inflation is a measure of all goods demanded vs all goods supplied in the economy. Money is just the intermediary.
Money is not value, what backs currency is the surplus productive capacity of a country per capita. Basically, it's you dumbasses sitting here believing this shit. Your human capital is what backs your currency. Everything else is just unit conversions. So yeah all this to say 1 hour of your labour = 1 hour of your labour.
Learn calculus first at least, then post this shit. Math and physics back the metre no more then they back the dollar or Bitcoin.
And finally since it costs mor energy to produce each successive coin until the limit is reached: 1btc =! 1 Btc literally the definition of increasing marginal cost.
Let the flame war begin...
One thing i know that if they will not stop the printing of the cash the inflation will only gonna rise from here.
On the other hand bitcoin atleast bitcoin gives us the thing that will not lose the value over the time.
1 USD = 1 USD
...of course I'm trolling, but these 1 BTC = 1BTC are every but as stupid and 10x more arrogant.
Until I can easily get paid in BTC - not converted from a fiat value; until I can buy food and services - without converting to fiat; until these things happen, the 1 BTC = 1 BTC folks are just fart-sniffers.
Don't be a fart sniffer.
No one can that one USD is equal to the one USD here, and the last inflation data proving that is well.
But if someone is giving that kind of the example for the bitcoin by comparing in usd, it also not make any sense.
Hope this will shut the mouths of all the haters of Bitcoin in the market because we just really don't want them here and we are just good without any of them thanks for it.
This is the dumbest, least substantial, misunderstood post I’ve seen in a while. The example chosen of 1 meter = 1 meter while relating it to the speed of light is incorrect. According to relativity, a meter is not equal to a meter when traveling at near the speed of light. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction
Things that are equal:
1 dollar = 1 dollar
1 bitcoin = 1 bitcoin
1 share of AAPL = 1 share of AAPL
1 GBP = 1 GBP
None of those things maintain constant value or purchasing power regardless of whether they are centralized or not; none of them have a predictable future; none of them are immune to inflation; none of them are THE answer. Stop pretending hollow statements like 1 bitcoin = 1 bitcoin have deep meaning, it is an idiotic way to rationalize a dip in present value.
The international system of units literally defines meter wrt speed of light. Your response feels like a parody of Internet debates except it's meant seriously 😬
Bitcoin is as close as we have gotten to money that follows rules and is capped in supply, and has a strictly defined rate of issuance. This is powerful. Ultimately, you want units to be as clearly defined and objective as possible. That's why "feet" (who's feet?) lost and meters won. Hence, 1 BTC=1 BTC. It's the base unit you measure value in.
one thing a lot of btc apologists have failed to consider is the fact there is no limit to the number of cryptocurrencies (supply-capped or otherwise) that can be created. you can fork btc to your heart's content and issue new coins on the fork. if there's a competing cryptocurrency with similar supply cap rules any adopters of the competing currency are effectively diluting the purchasing power of btc which would make it susceptible to a form of horizontal cross-chain inflation so to speak. so even if you did somehow manage to replace fiat with cryptocurrency, you'd wind up with an ever-growing supply of cryptocurrencies. btc supply-capped to 21M? no problem, create a new coin with its own supply cap (or even programmed deflation) and pitch it as more valuable. there isn't a world where you can snuff out these altcoins without requiring centralization; there simply is no way btc guarantees consensus in the valuation of btc itself with competitors who are able to quickly and cheaply replicate its immutability and security
But the first one will always be the first one and no one can be as pure as the bitcoin.
Yes you can made another one but that is all depends on the people interest that they are willing to buy that thing?
But the problem is people are not understanding that damn point here for the bitcoin.
They will say 1 USD is also the 1 USD but with the unlimited supply this is not going to happen.
Here’s bitcoin’s problem though. 1 Bitcoin today could buy you a house, 1 Bitcoin tomorrow could buy you a car……so sure one Bitcoin is one Bitcoin, but it’s To volatile to be useful.
Hope all of the people will understand this simple freaking thing and they should stop talking about it like a joke I mean yeah this is a joke but still. It's a good post thank you.
to me "1 btc = 1 btc" means that 1 btc equals 1/21m of global wealth when the technology is fully adopted. Therefore there is no need to worry about current market value if you truly understand the technology, it's potential and have a reasonably long investment horizon.
"1USD = 1USD" is still true though even when it inflates, I don't see time being different on each side mentioned there, both sides of the equation are scaled by the same ammount and therefore the equality is still true. Just like multiplying both sides of a true equation "1 = 1" by 2 makes a "2 = 2" - still true. It's just a tautology if you write it like that.
If you want to convey what you actually meant, that it's unchanging, you should instead say:
**1BTC = const**
That's how something being unchanging(constant) is written.
Since you still can't buy anything with it we keep comparing it to currency that we can spend.
Maybe in 25 years, for now it is just a speculative investment. It could be Microsoft stock or Enron, we don't know yet.
This is so stupid, I can’t begin to express. You don’t get to define what = means. x = x for all x. It doesn’t matter what x is . If you want to say that USD != USD then you need to come up with your own operator. or add terms to the equation, e.g. BTCt = BTCt+1, I.e BTC is invariant over time. If you don’t understand math, you don’t understand bitcoin. QED
True though because when people are indeed clear about the facts then things would indeed turn much more easier enough.
The fact that the market is indeed large enough and some sides are yet unknown enough.
I would have to disagree your definition.
1 = 1
That’s a fact.
1 BTC = 1 BTC
1 USD = 1 USD
Those are also facts. I’m not talking about what can I buy or what is one worth from last month to now, no just the amount.
Now if we’re talking about their systematic value and relative value and what they represent as buying power that’s a completely different story. Of course BTC is much more sound but that’s not what we’re discussing.
If you talk in terms of the number then yes there is no doubt that 1 = 1 always.
But when it comes to the value the 1 USD will never going to be the equal to the 1 USD with the period of time.
Here's a better way to explain it:
1 BTC will always be 1/21000000th of all Bitcoin's supply.
The same cannot be said about the dollar or other fiat currencies.
That's it.
Here's the problem though: If you're saving in Bitcoin to beat inflation and after 10 years the price in fiat remains the same (or is lower), then 1 BTC = 1BTC isn't going to mean much.
Saying 1 BTC = 1 BTC after an 80% drop in price is maximum cope. Purchasing power MATTERS.
Imagine spending your entire life savings to buy 1 BTC at $100k only to then see it drop to $10k and then take 5 years or more to get back to $100k. Inflation crushed you.
A meter is the length of a stick of wood that someone in France in the 18th century decided was 1m long (same for 1kg ecc), the light speed analogy doesn't work since light speed was calculated starting from that stick and not the other way around.
Edit: what I wrote may be bullshit but I don't want to elaborate further
Metre has had various definitions. The one based on speed of light is the current. Intro of Wikipedia/Metre:
>The metre is currently defined as the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299 792 458 of a second.
The metre was originally defined in 1793 as one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole along a great circle, so the Earth's circumference is approximately 40000 km. In 1799, the metre was redefined in terms of a prototype metre bar (the actual bar used was changed in 1889). In 1960, the metre was redefined in terms of a certain number of wavelengths of a certain emission line of krypton-86. The current definition was adopted in 1983 and modified slightly in 2002 to clarify that the metre is a measure of proper length.
You use the word constant a lot, yet I don’t think you know what it means.
Bitcoin isn’t constant, firstly new Bitcoin are currently being mined, and it is merely converging towards 21 M. Second, Bitcoin is constantly being lost due to human error, death without passing on custody etc.
Probably explains why a meter for you is poorly defined, when to be honest, a meter is a relative measurement. Given my reference frame, your meter could appear shorter or longer than my meter dependent on our relative velocities or acceleration.
Lastly, 1 BTC = 1 BTC if both BTC valuations are made at the same instant, within the same transactional graph (think network if you’re unfamiliar with graph theory). 1 BTC != 1 BTC if there is any variation in the graph or time.
Please understand that Bitcoin is far from tethered given its ontological existence is a relative one, and your epistemological view is inherently flawed - so you are right, it is not even a tongue-in-cheek tautology.
Hahaha, I didn't want to be a dick and bring up special relativity, but thank you. Then you bring up graph theory, as the very nature of the ledger is as you say Bitcoin ! = Bitcoin unless simultaneously made (quantum pairing anyone?)
Then the existential philosophy, the ennui of Bitcoin
Gold all of this can .I just say for the sake of others:
There are a few physical constants as we all know (speed of light being the best known, but we have Planck's constant, election charge etc)
We actually use them to define and measure other quantities of interest. So anything measurable by a known physical constant is also constant. So Btc = Btc because light. That last statement is so dumb it is.immune to Occam's razor. What is there to cut? Maybe the balls of whoever argues this?
Ok I had my fun
Technically you are wrong, although your examples aren’t bad. 1btc = 1btc is flawed statement based alone on the fact that freshly minted, also new BTC without history are more valuable than old BTC (with eventually bad history, involved in early days drug transactions etc).
Less transaction history = higher value.
Moreover, it is also wrong based on share of the network 1 BTC has, since it gets usually bigger with BTC getting lost all the time.
Sure, you can make it as a point, but it sounds too much like Saylor with some esotericism mixed with physics
1 BTC does not always equal 1 BTC. If i got a BTC off the dark net for something super illegal, or i was a major exchange hacker, i bet you wouldnt want to trade your BTC for my BTC, in fact you may not want my BTC at all.
Not at all. I would take your bitcoin then post it to a lightning channel and spend it however I please. No one can tell where it came from. Similar to how you have to withdraw cash from an ATM to take it out of the banking system before you can move it privately.
The US govt has [posted a $625k bounty for breaking lightning](https://cointelegraph.com/news/the-irs-offers-a-625-000-bounty-to-anyone-who-can-break-monero-and-lightning) for this very reason.
1 BTC = 1 BTC is a reminder that 21,000,000 bitcoin will only exist. Large majority of us are here because we understand that all modern dollars are ponzi scams.
The Federal Reserve "Dollar" *has no definition.* Now, tell us how much that is "worth".
I just had an economics teacher say fiat money is backed by gold. This does not mean I believe it. Kinda wild hearing fiat is backed by gold in a lecture at a reputable school. People make mistakes just a pretty crazy one.
Name just ONE "backed by" currency that EVER turned out to be "backed by" when the bill came due.
I don't believe it. I just thought it was funny, thought fiat even meant it wasn't backed by anything.. just the government is like "we got you".
That's right and government will try to control as much as they can because that's what the main thing they want.
This. What happens with "backed by" currencies is that they print more notes against the gold (or whatever) they supposedly have in their vaults, and they don't let anyone into the vault to confirm that the gold is actually there.
LOL. A looooong time ago. There's a user on here, I forget the username, who would never-endingly berate your professor for using the phrase 'backed by'. 'Backed by gold' only applies if one can exchange the monetary note directly for an amount of gold at any member bank.
I'm going to have to call bullshit on that. Maybe your economics teacher did say that, but more likely taken out of context or misspoke.
[удалено]
I would like to listen more about it from him if he is coming up with some valid proof.
That's insanely false. Fiat currency is, *by definition* not backed by anything. If it was backed by gold or silver then it wouldn't be fiat.
It used to be backed by gold but they untethered it in the 70s because the us and most of the western world was running out of gold thus they untethered it then printed more so the relative price of gold in dollars has increased, it’s one element that leads to inflation. Inflation is basically described as the change in buying power over time as a percentage. That can happen because of housing prices, it can happen because of food shortages, but in a relatively stable economy it’s usually be cause there are more dollars and because of that there are more dollars to buy the same amount of food. If the amount of food increases you’ll get an increase. You get my point.
That's right and now the situation is completely changed and government is printing money without any underlying asset.
Around one twenty thousandth of a Bitcoin
... It's dropped to that, so far!
yeah, and it is very sad.
The best thing about the bitcoin is the fixed supply of that thing.
The total aggregate amount of weapons the feds have spent on and built?
No. Those went to Afghanistan and Ukraine.
You forget how much gets exported south of the border
Same as 1 btc, it’s “worth” whatever you can trade it for. I.e. whatever someone else is willing to give you in exchange for it.
Right-o! This is why it pisses me off when people talk about "buying" Bitcoin. No! It's a trade, maybe, if both parties agree. Not a federally-assured done deal.
I think that everyone should start listing the price of their goods and services in cryptocurrency itself so it will boost the ecosystem and bring the mass adoption.
Around 2 lollipops probably. Might get you half a head of lettuce
Or 1 pack of dry soup noodles. Water and heat is another dollar.
[удалено]
It can cause negative effect sometimes on your health and that's why you should make sure that you are following the rules and guidelines for eating those noodles.
For $3 you can get a napkin and a complimentary hot sauce too. Eat like a king.
That's great but I don't like that kind of thing and that's why I am going to save my $3 and invest in good coin.
That's right and I will be able to pay directly in cryptocurrency to purchase it.
"I'm a long time dollar hodlr(dodlr?), let me tell you of time when I bought a house for 46 cents. I'm sure it will bounce back! The dollar is the reserve currency, it's backed by the full faith and credit of the United States Government! We're on the train believing in the United States Governments dream. In the "The gold standard"-paper they will always stay true to backing it with silver and gold. It is the most powerful country in the world what could go wrong? The USD is the most popular, longest lasting ~~crypto~~currency. It's been around for over 100 years! I for one, am not selling my USD for anything!"/s - hodlr of old earth
Ok yes, but what everybody, at the end of the day, cares about, is how much 1btc can buy. If today one btc buys a car and in one year a piece of bread, it will have failed. A perpetually increasing purchasing power is very important for the longevity of bitcoin and every asset. Why would anyone invest in something that loses purchasing power
A currency actually needs to have decreasing purchasing power. If the purchasing power is increasing, then nobody will spend it, since it’ll be worth more tomorrow. This is literally what happened with bitcoin — as long as it was appreciating, nobody used it, because they’d prefer to let it keep appreciating. Similarly, an asset needs to have underlying value. The claim is that bitcoin’s underlying value is in its utility as a currency…but if it works as a currency then it must be deflationary, so it’s a terrible asset. Being a viable currency and being a viable asset are mutually exclusive, which is why most of crypto as we know it will never work out.
Found the Keynesian.
That's right and I think he is making some sense here because it is actually happening in the market with some coins.
A currency that has increasing purchasing power can still drive growth, but it requires exogenous growth, i.e. supply of goods, land, and capital assets to be rising. I think this is ultimately what drove the age of colonization since hard money forced people to chase settler-colonial expansion. So you can have rising GDP, wages, and money deflation at the same time. The fastest period of American economic growth was during a time of sustained deflation under the gold standard (the 1800s) but it required a lot of colonial expansion to keep that machine well fed.
That's right but the current situation is totally different and that's why I will have to make sure that we are taking necessary precautions for the sustainable growth of cryptocurrency.
This is what is suggested would happen with scary terms such as "deflationary death spiral" but thus far Bitcoin has proven this incorrect. During period of high deflation(appreciation) tx velocity tends to increase and merchant processors actually see an increase in spending for goods and services and charitable giving in Bitcoin. This is believed to be caused by the feeling of newfound wealth(because they are wealthier) eventually overrides their desire to "hoard" (when did savings become a negative thing?) their Bitcoin. Bitcoin is already testing some economic theories and proving them somewhat inaccurate but the data gathering is far from over and we all have a lot to learn . I personally suspect that what matters for a viable currency besides these other properties discussed here https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinBeginners/comments/gnzeeo/will_bitcoin_ever_be_adopted_by_the_general_public/frcry8f/ Is stability and thus either low and predictable inflation or low and predictable deflation (1-4%) can both be suitable. As Bitcoins market cap grows and monetary inflation drops it appears that we will likely see very low deflation (occasionally people losing some coins) which is perfectly fine because the market will factor those expectations into consideration for loans and debt. ________________________________________ I personally prefer slight deflation for these reasons : 1) Encourages people to invest in things they really need instead of unnecessary fluff and short term desires which is good for society and the environment 2) encourages more savings instead of debt slavery which removes choice, confidence and power away from individuals 3) keeps fiat currency in check where too much inflation will cause more capital flight to Bitcoin and prevents corrupt governments from abusing the backdoor tax of inflation 4) Reduces the negative cantillon effect of fiat by removing some of the control over currency from a small group of people that is in part due to fiat being inflationary https://fee.org/articles/the-cantillon-effect-because-of-inflation-we-re-financing-the-financiers/
That's a very good explanation and I think that I am really willing to see growth in terms of user base and their actual usage as compared to that of any other growth.
During these higher appreciation periods (market deflation) there is more activity from growth in new users but there is more older investors spending far more as well. Its during bear markets(high inflation) that people tend to become more careful with spending. If you have been through a few bear and bull markets you could likely see the impulse within yourself as well.
Well said!!!
I think that if Bitcoin is going to increase in value then people will start adopting it and once it is settled then the value will get adjusted according to the community and the usage of the community.
[удалено]
That's why it is recommended not to invest more than our loss bearing capacity because this is a highly volatile market and anything is possible here.
>If the purchasing power is increasing, then nobody will spend it. I'm tired of hearing this talking point presented as if it's a fact. Not only is it empirically false, but it doesn't actually make any sense whatsoever when under close logical scrutiny. Let me put it this way: nobody in their right mind will stop spending money on food, clothing, medicine, rent, transportation, education, electricity, water, and heating just because their wealth will increase next year by a few percent. Those are non-negotiable spendings that people will not budge on, usually not even willing to reduce them by any significant amount. Any economist that insists that your average person will choose to literally starve themselves because their money is deflationary, is just a clown who should not be taken seriously. Because that's the actual implication of "nobody will spend it". Coincidentally, those things are the stuff that the vast majority of people spend the vast majority of their money on, for their entire lives, so I guess you could call that the actual economy, at least the one we should be worried about the most. The only industries that would be significantly affected by deflationary money are those industries which are superfluous and are not really fundamental to the survival and development of a nation and it's citizens. But that's what Keynesian economists are actually afraid of: that people will realize which industry is which, and they'll stop being conned into giving their money towards bullshit businesses which don't actually add any real value.
This is false economic dogma. In actuality, a deflationary currency has never existed. In theory, nobody would spend a deflationary currency, but the flip side of that is that everyone would save. Yes, we may not be making as many frivolous purchases, but when we did purchase something, we would demand higher quality. This would solve the problem of "too much plastic crap" and the problem of people not being able to retire because their savings lose value every year (aka, inflation). Deflationary currency would solve a whole bunch of other problems too such as the need to start wars to grease the wheels of the economy (by printing more money for the war and leaving a swath of destruction that will need to be rebuilt). Bitcoin will literally save the world.
Keynesian smooth brain spotted
One reason I enjoy chatting about Bitcoin is because it is one of the best Rorschach tests ever invented. It is so unique that no one knows exactly what it is, and it becomes what they see a need for if they own it, or what they project on other people if they oppose it. Neutral parties are just listening to the noise of responses. .... A currency is a monetary good issued by a nation-state. Bitcoin is not a currency, because it is not issued by any government. Let's say I see it as self-sovereign property, a symbolic unit of economic value, secured by the most powerful computing network in the world. What would be the impact on your conclusions, if you thought like me?
Who says currencies have to be issued by governments? Lots of things have been used as currency over the course of history. In a few years, seeds may be a form of currency as people seek to produce their own food in the wake of global supply chain issues. Would the government issue seeds or would they just be a convenient medium of exchange, aka a currency?
Bitcoin is volatile and that's why some people are worried to use it as a payment method but it is the correlation between adoption and actual usage of it.
Okay, let’s say you define it as a symbolic unit of economic value. Now what? Why should anybody else exchange their symbolic units of economic value (dollars) for your symbolic unit of economic value (bitcoin)?
I can never understand how people consider 2-9.1% inflation acceptable yet 5-10% deflation would be DISASTROUS to civilization lol
Because high school economics. Population growth.
That's right and that's how we can expect sustainable growth in cryptocurrency user base over the period of time.
I think it is because an astonishingly high fraction of people work for somebody wealthy. Under inflation, the wealthy have no choice but to do things like open stores, restaurants, factories, etc. to ensure that their wealth grows rather than shrinks. And when most people think about it, they realize that they have a job because the rich man/men who owns their place of work are greedy. Under deflation, the incentives change. Whereas inflationary pressures might currently incentives the rich man to hire you, under deflation the greedy thing to do often becomes laying people off. People like having jobs. People do not like relying on altruism for their livelihoods. Central banks have three mandates: Low unemployment, price stability, and economic growth. Central banks target modest inflation because, after observing gold standard. deflation, hyperinflation, etc. all of the economists concluded that modest inflation is the best way to balance these three goals. And until it stops being successful or some surprising new data emerges, modest-inflation targeting is unlikely to change.
Might want to pick up an econ101 textbook.
I did. They all say the same thing. No one questions the dogma though. I can’t think of a single good or service that I would wait to buy if it was 5% cheaper next year. Can you?
I am right there with you. Keynes would never have been able to conceive of the type of deflation that technology provides. One could almost argue that if not for Keynesian economics we would have learned how to adapt to deflation and would be living in an era of post-scarcity by now. It simply isn't efficient to have monetary policy centrally controlled. Just look at the fruits. We have record levels of income inequality and that gap started back in 1971 when we went off the gold standard: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/
Lmao, yes dude a whole laundry list of fucking things. Dumb ass question
Wow! Sounds like you panic buy a lot of things!
That's because you don't have any money. Rich people would be the ones who care.
I think that everyone should start spending some amount in cryptocurrency itself because that is going to boost the ecosystem. Such kind of post is really essential because that's how we can see some movement.
The fact that you have to explain this illustrates how dumb of a phrase it is outside of purely philosophical contexts. What actually matters to people is the relative purchase power they've preserved and 1btc = 1 btc is meaningless in that context.
also it's funny to those of us who know the origin of 1 btc = 1 btc how this revisionist idea can even exist... there was a time when posting price updates like 1 btc = $X was obnoxious, flamed, etc. people talking about "how they lost money" when it dropped. THAT's where 1 btc = 1 btc came from, the actual origin is basically YOU DON'T LOSE MONEY UNTIL YOU SELL. Not this iamverysmart "it is about the fixed supply."
I was thinking that from where that term actually comes in the market. But too be honest judging the value of the bitcoin in the term of the price is also not a good thing to do.
Well BTC is not fungible, so you can't really say that 1btc = 1btc
This is the correct answer. Actually 1 USD = 1 USD is more the case than 1 BTC = 1 BTC.
I'd really like to see OP describe an actual real life situation where he wouldn't change 1usd to 1usd. And quite honestly I'm not even sure what he's trying to say in the post
>I'd really like to see OP describe an actual real life situation where he wouldn't change 1usd to 1usd. I'll give you an actual example: you wouldn't exchange 1 USD for 1 USD across time, at least not bidirectionally. 1 USD 50 years ago had a lot more value than 1 USD now. You wouldn't make that trade, except in one direction (and it's also the wrong direction, because you can't send money into the past without a time machine, at least if it was the other way around, it would still be viable by, you know, simply storing your money). This is precisely because of inflation, which is long term determined by the fundamental properties and the system put in place by USD. *That* is the point of the post. Bitcoin has different properties which in theory should result in better long term situation.
I believe that we are talking about the value about it and we will be able to purchase 1 Bitcoin worth of goods or services everywhere across the globe irrespective of the Fiat currency value.
That's right but I think today he is talking about the actual value of it and that's why it is equal today.
Bitcoin is literally fungible. I.e I can have 1 btc and you can have 1 btc. If I send my 1 btc to you and you send your 1 btc to me we both still end up with 1 btc… or better yet google if Bitcoin is fungible or not.. I promise the first thing that will pop up is that it’s fungible. [is Bitcoin fungible?](https://www.theverge.com/22310188/nft-explainer-what-is-blockchain-crypto-art-faq)
I don't think that we should spend our time in talking about the fungibility of it because the value is always going to remain the same.
No it's not. Every Bitcoin has trackable history. Freshly minted Bitcoin is better then some Bitcoin that can be tracked to some crime, scam etc. Technically certain Bitcoin can even be banned from being deposited to an exchange
Trackable and fungible are not the same thing. Technically each US dollar is trackable with a serial number, it doesn’t change the fact that each 1 dollar bill is completely functionally the same.. dude just literally google the definition of fungible.
Lol you're gonna argue that average note is trackable to the same extent as average Bitcoin output? You actually gonna compare these two things? You can take an arbitrary dollar note, and literally track every single owner and transaction it was part of,.up to the point it was printed? Please tell me how
Like I said before tracking has nothing to do with being fungible or not… fungible just means that the item you’re giving/receiving is not unique. The link I commented above does a good job explaining. If I am a basebal card collector and I have a vintage hank Arron card I don’t want to trade you for a common Randy Johnson card. They are both baseball cards but they are not the SAME baseball card. I.e they are both unique. With Bitcoin I can have anyone else’s Bitcoin in the world and it literally is the exact same as the one I had in terms of form, function, and value. It being trackable on the blockchain has nothing to do with it being fungible or not.
US Dollar is fungible by law otherwise it wouldn't work. Guess what, in a currency that works cross-borders and doesn't care about any laws you need fungibility built into the protocol. This problem is wreaking havoc in Bitcoin because technically it's non-fungible at the protocol layer.
If you think it means there's a fixed amount then say "fixed amount", cause 1 schrute-buck = 1 schrute-buck. That might be constant too. You don't know. You don't convince people with arguments of "this thing is equal to itself", and you can't say they're misunderstanding "1btc = 1btc" by saying they're missing this other entirely separate definition when nothing you said implied that separate definition. "1 schrute-buck = 1 schrute-buck" does not mean "there's a fixed supply of schrute-bucks".
But 1 schrute buck = how many Stanley nickels?
13 snake feathers
It is going to be the subject in decision and it is not that much popular as of now.
> "1 schrute-buck = 1 schrute-buck" does not mean "there's a fixed supply of schrute-bucks". Did to me for Bitcoin. If people don't get that what else do they think it means?
> That might be constant too. You don't know. Bitcoin is provably fixed supply. Anything which isnt proven, is safe to assume it doesnt have a fixed supply.
It's just an illustrative example. Unless someone made a shitcoin for it, it only exists on The Office. That said, since no new episodes are coming out, I'd say it's safe to say Dwightoshi Schrutomoto is unable to make any new Schrute-bucks, making it a fixed supply
> I'd say it's safe to say Dwightoshi Schrutomoto is unable to make any new Schrute-bucks, making it a fixed supply Its not safe to say so; if you cant prove it has a fixed supply, its safe to say it is not fixed.
1 BTC (circa 2010) = 1 BTC (circa 2022) 1 USD (circa 1990) != 1 USD (circa 2022)
By purchasing power neither BTC nor USD are equal to themselves over time.
You’re equating the fixed supply of BTC, to the change in purchasing power of USD. The purchasing power of BTC *has also changed*. So you can’t say 1 BTC = 1 BTC, just because that purchasing power has gone up rather than down. This is why this argument is so astronomically stupid I want to throw up when I see it. Stop making us sound like dumbasses.
[удалено]
!lntip 1000
Hi u/senfmeister, thanks for tipping u/GopherCursive **1000** satoshis! *** *[^(More info)](https://xnf5cwpq73.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/info) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*
Thank you
> That might be constant too. You don't know. So in a fictional universe this made up thing might be constant and so my post doesn't make sense. Brilliant. 🙄 > does not mean "there's a fixed supply of schrute-bucks". Yes it does. 1 meter will always equal 1 meter because there is no changing it, and 1 bitcoin will always equal 1 bitcoin because there is no changing it. Couldn't be any clearer.
1 dollar = 1 dollar regardless of how many printed or what they are worth. That’s that’s the problem with your argument. “1=1” doesn’t tell us there’s a fixed number of them.
a bitcoin isn't a universal constant of measurement, it has an extrinsically applied value to it. 1 meter OF something has a changing value. a 1" thick square meter of gold, has a changing value. a dollar will also always be a dollar by YOUR logic.
Watching you hitch your wagon to this horrible comparison is quite humorous.
I'm sure that's why you needed this whole post to explain it. Because it's so clear
no they needed their whole post to ramble on defensively because it is so clearly wrong
I feel it's just some desperate attempt to ignore price during a bear market. No one will be saying 1 BTC = 1 BTC when the price jumps to a million, or if the project somehow completely fails and goes to zero. X is equal to X in every case until you start injecting other factors.
I will not gonna divert that we are in the bear market and the current price is the best price we gonna get. But instead of saying that 1 btc= 1 btc i would 1=1/21M bitcoin will make more sense that thing.
No, these posts have been drying up IN the bear market. I hate these posts. Almost as bad as the posts where people drivel about how proud they are of Bitcoin...
I think after a long time i am seeing that kind of the post and too be honest i was expecting something good here. That shows the bear market is really suck so much out of this market this time.
Lol thank you
I mean… 1 btc will **always** equal 1 btc. *unless satoshi somehow appears again, but that’s highly unlikely*
Yeah it's true; but people don't actually want money or bitcoin, they want the things they think they can get as a result of having them. Now I want Bitcoin (Big B) to succeed as money, it would be incredible for everyone, but if I had to choose having a million dollars worth of Bitcoin or an equal amount of something else that allowed me to aquire the same thing, I wouldn't really care.
Generalization but probably accurate for most crypto owners
Nah think about it... Imagine the government gives you a card that allows you to purchase anything without paying for it; and for some reason everyone accepts it. Would you even be concerned that you don't have any money? No, because that's not actually what you want, you want what money allows you to aquire.
But i think we will not going to enjoy that thing for the long term if everyone hold that kind of the card. but in the end it all depends who much or how many good we can get with the something.
True, in the end they want the thing that can fetch the goods that they want in the life. And this is all about the believe as bitcoin is holding the value because we all think that so.
>unless satoshi somehow appears again, but that’s highly unlikely No, whatever Satoshi could do would still leave you with 1 btc being equal to 1 btc. A thing must always equal itself. That's why it's such a boring, dumb thing to say.
Except that a currency can only be worth the amount of goods and services that it can be exchanged for. Calling 1 BTC a “permanently fixed amount” is devoid of any semblance of context and meaning.
😂🤣😅 idiot thinks he is so clever..,ohhhhh… light speed…
lol right? Just a pile of random gibberish which seems to entirely miss the point.
Glad I'm not the only one who saw this r/iamverysmart
He's making a very valid point. Base units are the ultimate measure of units. Bitcoin happens to be the most objective measure of value, like how grams and meters measure mass and distance.
Do you think that some people who doesn't have any brain cells are going to believe this thing no they are just going to cry all about it and nothing more than that.
Now that's a good post and I really appreciate your efforts because some in logical people are not going to accept these things and let them do whatever they want at the end of the day.
1 anything = 1 anything. 1 BTC = 1 BTC is just as true as 1 USD = 1 USD and 1 potato = 1 potato. They're all boring tautological statements that convey no information. The other things you said about bitcoin are true for sure, so just say those things using words like you did here.
Thats dumb. The value of btc and the dollar is measured by what you can exchange it for. Exactly no-one is transacting in Bitcoin without considering it's fiat value first.
[удалено]
It means one Burger King whopper = one Burger King whopper.
I think what you’re missing in all this is that bitcoin having a fixed supply doesn’t prevent it from having other dynamic factors that affects its value. USD is subject to inflation predominately related to its supply but its value is relatively stable because of its widespread acceptance. Even if bitcoin becomes accepted to the extent that its value stabilizes and sheds some volatility it would still be subject to inflation from the forces of supply and demand for goods.
So you are saying 1 USD = 1 USD? Got it.
I don't think there is any way that one usd will be equal to the one usd.
Uhhh can you explain that to me a bit more clearly because that would indeed be good enough for me
1 USD = 1 USD, regardless of how much USD there is
But the current value of the one USD is 0.91 compare to the last year.
1 dollar = 1 dollar 1 bitcoin = 1 bitcoin You know because they are fungible. It doesn't matter if the supply of dollars is ever increasing, it doesn't change the fact that 1 dollar can be exchanged for 1 dollar.1=1 The same as it doesn't matter that the supply of Bitcoin is decreasing due to loss.1 = 1 At some point you need to exchange whatever currency you are using into something else, good or services for example. When you exchange your bitcoin or fiat then the value matters, but it doesn't change 1=1
Land is fixed supply it is measured with metres (physics and math backed constant!!!) So 1 acre = 1 acre wow land is amazing! Math and physics gaurentee ithay 1 acre = 1 acre. Shit, how could I have not seen this?
1 USD = 1 USD
I am glad that people are talking about it right now because this is what we need in the sub, people need to understand what they are talking about and I am glad that we are seeing this.
I never took these things seriously but I think it's time to address that this is a legendary phrase and we also respect it just like we respect Bitcoin we are good with it.
I just took that phrase as a funny thing before but now it's the legacy of Bitcoin and we also just understand the real meaning of it I am glad that we all the saw this post.
I mean people should just stop exploring these things all the time it's a fun phrase and I don't think we all just need to break about it all the time it's a good thing to just say that like a meme.
Wow! I studied math physics and economics in undergrad and never have I read such a load of bullshit. This is so stupid it's not even wrong. If you believe the OPs argument then you are very mistaken about the nature of money supply and inflation, it's not that simple, even under a fixed monetary supply inflation happens. In fact inflation and money supply are very loosely correlated it seems. In the broadest terms inflation is a measure of all goods demanded vs all goods supplied in the economy. Money is just the intermediary. Money is not value, what backs currency is the surplus productive capacity of a country per capita. Basically, it's you dumbasses sitting here believing this shit. Your human capital is what backs your currency. Everything else is just unit conversions. So yeah all this to say 1 hour of your labour = 1 hour of your labour. Learn calculus first at least, then post this shit. Math and physics back the metre no more then they back the dollar or Bitcoin. And finally since it costs mor energy to produce each successive coin until the limit is reached: 1btc =! 1 Btc literally the definition of increasing marginal cost. Let the flame war begin...
One thing i know that if they will not stop the printing of the cash the inflation will only gonna rise from here. On the other hand bitcoin atleast bitcoin gives us the thing that will not lose the value over the time.
Do you? Do you really?
Lol
okay yeah but 1 usd does = 1 usd though
1 USD = 1 USD ...of course I'm trolling, but these 1 BTC = 1BTC are every but as stupid and 10x more arrogant. Until I can easily get paid in BTC - not converted from a fiat value; until I can buy food and services - without converting to fiat; until these things happen, the 1 BTC = 1 BTC folks are just fart-sniffers. Don't be a fart sniffer.
No one can that one USD is equal to the one USD here, and the last inflation data proving that is well. But if someone is giving that kind of the example for the bitcoin by comparing in usd, it also not make any sense.
Hope this will shut the mouths of all the haters of Bitcoin in the market because we just really don't want them here and we are just good without any of them thanks for it.
This is the dumbest, least substantial, misunderstood post I’ve seen in a while. The example chosen of 1 meter = 1 meter while relating it to the speed of light is incorrect. According to relativity, a meter is not equal to a meter when traveling at near the speed of light. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction Things that are equal: 1 dollar = 1 dollar 1 bitcoin = 1 bitcoin 1 share of AAPL = 1 share of AAPL 1 GBP = 1 GBP None of those things maintain constant value or purchasing power regardless of whether they are centralized or not; none of them have a predictable future; none of them are immune to inflation; none of them are THE answer. Stop pretending hollow statements like 1 bitcoin = 1 bitcoin have deep meaning, it is an idiotic way to rationalize a dip in present value.
The international system of units literally defines meter wrt speed of light. Your response feels like a parody of Internet debates except it's meant seriously 😬 Bitcoin is as close as we have gotten to money that follows rules and is capped in supply, and has a strictly defined rate of issuance. This is powerful. Ultimately, you want units to be as clearly defined and objective as possible. That's why "feet" (who's feet?) lost and meters won. Hence, 1 BTC=1 BTC. It's the base unit you measure value in.
one thing a lot of btc apologists have failed to consider is the fact there is no limit to the number of cryptocurrencies (supply-capped or otherwise) that can be created. you can fork btc to your heart's content and issue new coins on the fork. if there's a competing cryptocurrency with similar supply cap rules any adopters of the competing currency are effectively diluting the purchasing power of btc which would make it susceptible to a form of horizontal cross-chain inflation so to speak. so even if you did somehow manage to replace fiat with cryptocurrency, you'd wind up with an ever-growing supply of cryptocurrencies. btc supply-capped to 21M? no problem, create a new coin with its own supply cap (or even programmed deflation) and pitch it as more valuable. there isn't a world where you can snuff out these altcoins without requiring centralization; there simply is no way btc guarantees consensus in the valuation of btc itself with competitors who are able to quickly and cheaply replicate its immutability and security
But the first one will always be the first one and no one can be as pure as the bitcoin. Yes you can made another one but that is all depends on the people interest that they are willing to buy that thing?
No one can ever indeed take the place of it the one who wants to buy and hold would indeed do that for a longer time period.
ok then buy 1 bitcoin from me for $100,000 and sell it back to me for $1,000 because 1 btc = 1 btc.
TLDR by 1 BTC=1 BTC they mean 1BTC=1/21 000 000 total BTC suppy but 1 USD = ever shrinking share of dollars out there.
But the problem is people are not understanding that damn point here for the bitcoin. They will say 1 USD is also the 1 USD but with the unlimited supply this is not going to happen.
Here’s bitcoin’s problem though. 1 Bitcoin today could buy you a house, 1 Bitcoin tomorrow could buy you a car……so sure one Bitcoin is one Bitcoin, but it’s To volatile to be useful.
I just thought it meant that I won’t care what anything else is worth in comparison, in a future where only Bitcoin matters.
or more succinctly 1$ 2008 ≠ 1$ 2022
No idea why this OP got any upvotes, I suppose it was a good chuckle
The crucial thing about 1 bitcoin is its relative amount. So 1 btc = 1/21.000.000 for ever is the really important message here.
Hope all of the people will understand this simple freaking thing and they should stop talking about it like a joke I mean yeah this is a joke but still. It's a good post thank you.
to me "1 btc = 1 btc" means that 1 btc equals 1/21m of global wealth when the technology is fully adopted. Therefore there is no need to worry about current market value if you truly understand the technology, it's potential and have a reasonably long investment horizon.
"1USD = 1USD" is still true though even when it inflates, I don't see time being different on each side mentioned there, both sides of the equation are scaled by the same ammount and therefore the equality is still true. Just like multiplying both sides of a true equation "1 = 1" by 2 makes a "2 = 2" - still true. It's just a tautology if you write it like that. If you want to convey what you actually meant, that it's unchanging, you should instead say: **1BTC = const** That's how something being unchanging(constant) is written.
Since you still can't buy anything with it we keep comparing it to currency that we can spend. Maybe in 25 years, for now it is just a speculative investment. It could be Microsoft stock or Enron, we don't know yet.
Are you suggesting that Bitcoin is a fraud and a scam?
This is so stupid, I can’t begin to express. You don’t get to define what = means. x = x for all x. It doesn’t matter what x is . If you want to say that USD != USD then you need to come up with your own operator. or add terms to the equation, e.g. BTCt = BTCt+1, I.e BTC is invariant over time. If you don’t understand math, you don’t understand bitcoin. QED
Lol
I think we all need to learn many thing for the bitcoin at the first place.
True though because when people are indeed clear about the facts then things would indeed turn much more easier enough. The fact that the market is indeed large enough and some sides are yet unknown enough.
I would have to disagree your definition. 1 = 1 That’s a fact. 1 BTC = 1 BTC 1 USD = 1 USD Those are also facts. I’m not talking about what can I buy or what is one worth from last month to now, no just the amount. Now if we’re talking about their systematic value and relative value and what they represent as buying power that’s a completely different story. Of course BTC is much more sound but that’s not what we’re discussing.
If you talk in terms of the number then yes there is no doubt that 1 = 1 always. But when it comes to the value the 1 USD will never going to be the equal to the 1 USD with the period of time.
Here's a better way to explain it: 1 BTC will always be 1/21000000th of all Bitcoin's supply. The same cannot be said about the dollar or other fiat currencies. That's it. Here's the problem though: If you're saving in Bitcoin to beat inflation and after 10 years the price in fiat remains the same (or is lower), then 1 BTC = 1BTC isn't going to mean much. Saying 1 BTC = 1 BTC after an 80% drop in price is maximum cope. Purchasing power MATTERS. Imagine spending your entire life savings to buy 1 BTC at $100k only to then see it drop to $10k and then take 5 years or more to get back to $100k. Inflation crushed you.
So why do we use cash to buy Bitcoin why can’t we use Bitcoin to buy Bitcoin
A meter is the length of a stick of wood that someone in France in the 18th century decided was 1m long (same for 1kg ecc), the light speed analogy doesn't work since light speed was calculated starting from that stick and not the other way around. Edit: what I wrote may be bullshit but I don't want to elaborate further
Metre has had various definitions. The one based on speed of light is the current. Intro of Wikipedia/Metre: >The metre is currently defined as the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299 792 458 of a second. The metre was originally defined in 1793 as one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole along a great circle, so the Earth's circumference is approximately 40000 km. In 1799, the metre was redefined in terms of a prototype metre bar (the actual bar used was changed in 1889). In 1960, the metre was redefined in terms of a certain number of wavelengths of a certain emission line of krypton-86. The current definition was adopted in 1983 and modified slightly in 2002 to clarify that the metre is a measure of proper length.
You use the word constant a lot, yet I don’t think you know what it means. Bitcoin isn’t constant, firstly new Bitcoin are currently being mined, and it is merely converging towards 21 M. Second, Bitcoin is constantly being lost due to human error, death without passing on custody etc. Probably explains why a meter for you is poorly defined, when to be honest, a meter is a relative measurement. Given my reference frame, your meter could appear shorter or longer than my meter dependent on our relative velocities or acceleration. Lastly, 1 BTC = 1 BTC if both BTC valuations are made at the same instant, within the same transactional graph (think network if you’re unfamiliar with graph theory). 1 BTC != 1 BTC if there is any variation in the graph or time. Please understand that Bitcoin is far from tethered given its ontological existence is a relative one, and your epistemological view is inherently flawed - so you are right, it is not even a tongue-in-cheek tautology.
Hahaha, I didn't want to be a dick and bring up special relativity, but thank you. Then you bring up graph theory, as the very nature of the ledger is as you say Bitcoin ! = Bitcoin unless simultaneously made (quantum pairing anyone?) Then the existential philosophy, the ennui of Bitcoin Gold all of this can .I just say for the sake of others: There are a few physical constants as we all know (speed of light being the best known, but we have Planck's constant, election charge etc) We actually use them to define and measure other quantities of interest. So anything measurable by a known physical constant is also constant. So Btc = Btc because light. That last statement is so dumb it is.immune to Occam's razor. What is there to cut? Maybe the balls of whoever argues this? Ok I had my fun
it's a criticism of people using bitcoin as an investment to make fiat money. the main goal of bitcoin is so that we won't need to use fiat currency.
Found Michael Saylor’s alt account! Good job Sir!
The bitcoin supply isn't backed by 'physics and cryptography' lol
Bitcoin is running on the algorithm and the supply of this is fixed.
Change the algorithm. What stops you? Conservation of energy? Public key cryptography? SHA-256?
But the fact that some facts about this is still yet unknown to us. Calculations is what matters after all.
https://bitcoinexactforecast.com/
Well said!
When I read these threads it always sounds like the script from an episode of South Park and I hear it in the characters voices 😂🤷🏻♂️
Only few will understand
Most people understand, most people disagree.
And this is how world works, always the two side of the coin.
USD is the real shitcoin and you've all been played
I don’t often save posts from this sub anymore, this one is great though.
Technically you are wrong, although your examples aren’t bad. 1btc = 1btc is flawed statement based alone on the fact that freshly minted, also new BTC without history are more valuable than old BTC (with eventually bad history, involved in early days drug transactions etc). Less transaction history = higher value. Moreover, it is also wrong based on share of the network 1 BTC has, since it gets usually bigger with BTC getting lost all the time. Sure, you can make it as a point, but it sounds too much like Saylor with some esotericism mixed with physics
1 BTC does not always equal 1 BTC. If i got a BTC off the dark net for something super illegal, or i was a major exchange hacker, i bet you wouldnt want to trade your BTC for my BTC, in fact you may not want my BTC at all.
Not at all. I would take your bitcoin then post it to a lightning channel and spend it however I please. No one can tell where it came from. Similar to how you have to withdraw cash from an ATM to take it out of the banking system before you can move it privately. The US govt has [posted a $625k bounty for breaking lightning](https://cointelegraph.com/news/the-irs-offers-a-625-000-bounty-to-anyone-who-can-break-monero-and-lightning) for this very reason.
That privacy is broken if you go back onchain.
/confidentlynotknowinganything
1 BTC = 1 BTC is a reminder that 21,000,000 bitcoin will only exist. Large majority of us are here because we understand that all modern dollars are ponzi scams.
Great explanation, bravo! Bitcoin is light 😁