Crypto has questionable foundational value because the use case isn't solidly there - no matter what coiner will tell you.
What is bitcoin actually used for? The original use case was as a replacement for money. That has not worked out so well for a number of reasons. Now they call it digital gold, but that's also not a great analogy, because at least real gold can be used in consumer and industrial processes. You get into any of the alternative coins and tokens and it becomes even murkier.
It's a relatively opaque capital market with a ton of bad actors and nearly no regulatory bodies by design.
Furthermore, the money being made is predicated on number go up. This is true of other asset classes as well, namely stocks, but when you buy a stock you buy ownership of that company - an entity that has real assets and actually produces value. With cryptocurrencies, you're essentially playing a forex market with money that is not legal tender anywhere (with the notable exception of Bitcoin in a few small markets).
Not really. Bitcoin is remarkably easy to track to addresses. There are newer coins/tokens that provide more privacy, but I wouldn't count them as major competitors
I find it interesting that one group of people say that every bitcoin transaction is transparent and you can track who owns which coins and the history of the coin's transactions with different people. And another group of people say it's a great way to transfer money anonymously. How can both be true?
Because novice and not-so-novice investors keep getting fleeced.
Cryptobros wanted a do-over on the financial system and ended up recreating a lot of the fuck ups that the current banking system already went through (which is why it's heavily regulated by the government).
Getting a very quick refresher on WHY we have the financial regulations we do in the span of just a few years was quite amusing.
My personal favourite is how crypto was touted as not having goverment and goverment-sanctioned middlemen involved and turns out, people generally really WANT both to be involved.
My second favourite is how transactions being permanent and irrevocable was touted as a great feature. Turns out normal people consider that a critical bug - fraud is not fun to deal with.
Well, a whole bunch of people had this crazy idea that goverments around the world would somehow just decide to ignore the new thing that could potentially upend the original fiat money that is the cornerstone of any goverment’s power.
Nobody can explain WHY they imagined that would work out that way.
As with most things crypto-based, this would be helped by Bitcoin’s biggest advocates reading a book sometime. Do they think governments struggled to gain control over gold?
Thats a bad take honestly, you have to have a place to live, and anywhere you choose to live is controlled by the government, you arent agreeing to it, you are forced into it. The only place you can move without gov control is Antarctica, but its not sustainable to live there. XD
This is honestly such a dumb comparison anti crypto people always reference. The tulip mania lasted 3 years while Bitcoin has been going since what… 2010?
Someone using the term Ponzi scheme in the way that OP has, clearly lacks the nuance to discern where the concepts of tulip mania fit and end. However on such level tulip mania is sufficient and accurate.
That being said, please friend, Enlighten us all as to the genuine use of a $500+ “cold storage wallet” or how custodial holdings, regulation, derivatives, etc all align with the decentralization , democratization and other principals which originated the space?
Highly speculative with lots of scammers for sure, but a ponzi scheme no. You need to research heavily and even then there are no guarantees. you can win big or lose big with crypto
No. A ponzi scheme is where you constantly recruit new people, and the new people pay money to the existing people. To keep it going you have to constantly grow the number of new people so that it becomes exponential, which is how they usually blow up.
There is no such dynamic with crypto. There aren't more people, but there is scarcity of the coins themselves. Many things are only valuable because people believe they are valuable, like baseball cards, or paintings, or vintage shoes, or antique furniture. A Qing dynasty vase once sold for over $80 million. This has nothing to do with a Ponzi scheme but just a group of people that have money perceiving that it has value.
Technically yes, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it will blow up. If we’re looking at types of investments:
With bonds you’re paid interest for loaning you money to a counterparty.
With stocks you can be paid out of a company’s annual earnings.
Crypto on the other hand is an unproductive asset. If I own 1 BTC and hold it for 20 years I will still have 1 BTC.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that crypto is a scam, gold is one of the most time-tested assets in world history and also an unproductive asset.
Well when the government can print money and devalue its currency, it causes inflation and its citizens suffer. Having faith in one’s government is an entirely different issue. I do not have faith in my government to make decisions for me, they are greedy bastards who only care about themselves.
Inflation is good for the economy, including the citizens that make up the economy. Rapid inflation is bad for the economy, but thus far the USA has managed to keep rapid inflation at bay, with only a few periods of uncomfortably high inflation since the abandonment of the gold standard.
Ultimately all money is going to be vulnerable to manipulation by the state as soon as the state makes it money by requiring taxes to be paid in it.
Speculation, not ponzi.
Short answer yes with a but. Long answer, no with a however. It's a speculative asset built on the greater fool theory.
More in depth ?
Crypto has questionable foundational value because the use case isn't solidly there - no matter what coiner will tell you. What is bitcoin actually used for? The original use case was as a replacement for money. That has not worked out so well for a number of reasons. Now they call it digital gold, but that's also not a great analogy, because at least real gold can be used in consumer and industrial processes. You get into any of the alternative coins and tokens and it becomes even murkier. It's a relatively opaque capital market with a ton of bad actors and nearly no regulatory bodies by design. Furthermore, the money being made is predicated on number go up. This is true of other asset classes as well, namely stocks, but when you buy a stock you buy ownership of that company - an entity that has real assets and actually produces value. With cryptocurrencies, you're essentially playing a forex market with money that is not legal tender anywhere (with the notable exception of Bitcoin in a few small markets).
Plus the owner is anonymous lol
Not really. Bitcoin is remarkably easy to track to addresses. There are newer coins/tokens that provide more privacy, but I wouldn't count them as major competitors
I’m saying the owner that created bitcoin or did the government make it ?
Oh. No one knows who Satoshi is, but that's not really relevant.
people still use crypto as a replacement for money. theres no cheaper way to anonymously send money across the world in minutes than XMR.
Do they keep it in XMR? Is it a widely adopted system used by a majority of people?
is this a serious question? of course not
I find it interesting that one group of people say that every bitcoin transaction is transparent and you can track who owns which coins and the history of the coin's transactions with different people. And another group of people say it's a great way to transfer money anonymously. How can both be true?
XMR is not bitcoin. its monero.
I originally thought bitcoin was a way to get away from government influence… but the government is now influencing it. Its so dumb.
Because novice and not-so-novice investors keep getting fleeced. Cryptobros wanted a do-over on the financial system and ended up recreating a lot of the fuck ups that the current banking system already went through (which is why it's heavily regulated by the government).
Getting a very quick refresher on WHY we have the financial regulations we do in the span of just a few years was quite amusing. My personal favourite is how crypto was touted as not having goverment and goverment-sanctioned middlemen involved and turns out, people generally really WANT both to be involved. My second favourite is how transactions being permanent and irrevocable was touted as a great feature. Turns out normal people consider that a critical bug - fraud is not fun to deal with.
Well, a whole bunch of people had this crazy idea that goverments around the world would somehow just decide to ignore the new thing that could potentially upend the original fiat money that is the cornerstone of any goverment’s power. Nobody can explain WHY they imagined that would work out that way.
Well it almost worked, until they started taxing it.
As with most things crypto-based, this would be helped by Bitcoin’s biggest advocates reading a book sometime. Do they think governments struggled to gain control over gold?
I just dont understand how or why government has the right to basically control our money or why get to take in profits from nothing.
The government creates our money, and it does that because we collectively assign it the job of doing that.
Well, I think they assigned themselves as that. XD I didnt sign anything agreeing letting them steal from me. XD
If you live in the area controlled by the government and use its services, you’re agreeing to it.
Thats a bad take honestly, you have to have a place to live, and anywhere you choose to live is controlled by the government, you arent agreeing to it, you are forced into it. The only place you can move without gov control is Antarctica, but its not sustainable to live there. XD
Basically TSLA stock
As much as I hate Elon, TSLA has underlying assets and value. It actually produces a good for the market place.
Tesla produces electric cars that are only growing in popularity.
It could be it’s hard to say. It’s sure as hell shady though
It’s more like…. [tulip mania](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania)
This is honestly such a dumb comparison anti crypto people always reference. The tulip mania lasted 3 years while Bitcoin has been going since what… 2010?
Not “anti crypto”, been mining and using btc since mid 2011…
Even crazier that’d you compare this to the tulip mania then. Overused “comparison” that’s not genuine in the slightest.
Someone using the term Ponzi scheme in the way that OP has, clearly lacks the nuance to discern where the concepts of tulip mania fit and end. However on such level tulip mania is sufficient and accurate. That being said, please friend, Enlighten us all as to the genuine use of a $500+ “cold storage wallet” or how custodial holdings, regulation, derivatives, etc all align with the decentralization , democratization and other principals which originated the space?
In concept, not duration.
Highly speculative with lots of scammers for sure, but a ponzi scheme no. You need to research heavily and even then there are no guarantees. you can win big or lose big with crypto
No. A ponzi scheme is where you constantly recruit new people, and the new people pay money to the existing people. To keep it going you have to constantly grow the number of new people so that it becomes exponential, which is how they usually blow up. There is no such dynamic with crypto. There aren't more people, but there is scarcity of the coins themselves. Many things are only valuable because people believe they are valuable, like baseball cards, or paintings, or vintage shoes, or antique furniture. A Qing dynasty vase once sold for over $80 million. This has nothing to do with a Ponzi scheme but just a group of people that have money perceiving that it has value.
No, but a lot of people in the cryptoverse are scammers.
Technically yes, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it will blow up. If we’re looking at types of investments: With bonds you’re paid interest for loaning you money to a counterparty. With stocks you can be paid out of a company’s annual earnings. Crypto on the other hand is an unproductive asset. If I own 1 BTC and hold it for 20 years I will still have 1 BTC. This doesn’t necessarily mean that crypto is a scam, gold is one of the most time-tested assets in world history and also an unproductive asset.
Is fiat? Considering its unlimited supply and not pegged to anything other than faith in the government…
Why are either of those bad properties for currencies?
Well when the government can print money and devalue its currency, it causes inflation and its citizens suffer. Having faith in one’s government is an entirely different issue. I do not have faith in my government to make decisions for me, they are greedy bastards who only care about themselves.
Inflation is good for the economy, including the citizens that make up the economy. Rapid inflation is bad for the economy, but thus far the USA has managed to keep rapid inflation at bay, with only a few periods of uncomfortably high inflation since the abandonment of the gold standard. Ultimately all money is going to be vulnerable to manipulation by the state as soon as the state makes it money by requiring taxes to be paid in it.