Can Bitcoin Become the World’s Money? A Soho Forum Debate
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- Financial consultant John Vallis vs. George Mason University economist Lawrence H. White
------------------
Subscribe to our RUclips channel: www.youtube.co...
Like us on Facebook: / reason.magazine
Follow us on Twitter: / reason
Reason is the planet's leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of view you won't get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.
----------------
U.S. national debt held by the public is at almost $22 trillion, or about $67,000 per citizen, surpassing the country's annual gross domestic product (GDP) for the first time since World War II. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts that it'll reach 102 percent of GDP by the end of 2021, rise to 107 percent by 2031, and hit 202 percent by 2051.
The federal government's "growing debt burden would increase the risk of a fiscal crisis and higher inflation as well as undermine confidence in the US dollar," the CBO concluded in its 2021 Long-Term Budget Outlook.
If the world were to lose confidence in the dollar, what could replace it-another fiat currency, gold, or bitcoin? That was the topic of a recent Oxford-style debate hosted by the Soho Forum.
John Vallis, a financial consultant and host of the Bitcoin Rapid-Fire podcast, believes that bitcoin will eventually replace governments' fiat money as the preferred medium of exchange. He argues that bitcoin's global adoption is a matter of when, not if.
Lawrence H. White, an economics professor at George Mason University, is skeptical of bitcoin's future as money. He believes it may have a future as a financial asset, but isn't suitable to become a global medium of exchange.
The debate was moderated by Soho Forum Director Gene Epstein and held before a live audience at the Porcupine Freedom Festival-better known as PorcFest-in Lancaster, New Hampshire.
Narrated by Nick Gillespie; edited by John Osterhoudt; camera by Chris Silk
Photos: Brett Raney
"So long as the inflation rate stays below 5%" that didn't age well
That rate is year over year for like a month or two. The inflation rate is gonna start drifting downward again as the economy normalizes postcovid and stimulus packages.
@@robm2681 So they said when it hit 3%. Transitory they said.
@@BlakeGillman lmao. When are you talking about? Two or three months ago? That's not a longterm trend..
@@robm2681 How's that working out?
@@robm2681 updates???
For me the best line by far was “what would it look like if the earth was spinning?” Lol. The best part of really learning about Bitcoin is learning about the acceptance of change throughout history. It’s never been well accepted. Antonopoulos points out that cars didn’t have steering wheels until 30 years after the invention of the car….because they had 2 leather straps you would pull left or right. Lastly- today’s train tracks are the width they are….because that’s how much room 2 horses need to walk side by side.
1:03:30 that's David Friedman.
I could recognise that dude's voice from a mile away
Hahahaha White's expression while Friedman argues with the other guy is priceless
He's always great. Would love to see him debate Richard Epstein on anarchy vs minarchy considering both their Chicago "law and economics" knowledge. . :-)
I think he was making no sense right now.
If you buy a fridge by Bitcoin today, you may have to pay more to buy the same amount tomorrow. I think this risk is what John means by opportunity cost of spending Bitcoin.
I will forever be indebted to you! You're changed my whole life I'll continue to preach about your name for the whole world to hear you've have save me from from a huge financial debt with you just little investment thanks so Mrs. Laura Frederick
I'm surprised you know her too. I've been making a lot of profits investing with her for a few months now.
You invest with mrs Laura Frederick too? Wow that woman has been a blessing to me and my family.
@Donald Wess You communicate with her on telegam with the user name below
Investwithfrederick 💯
But inflation is higher than 5%.... 👀
SHIT!!!
I didn't realize that they did a Porcfest this year and this was going on there!
I live two hours away!🤦🏼♂️
Screw Bitcoin! It would be better to use Monero. You have a faster time, more decentralized network, more privacy, an active developing team, and lower fees. Bitcoin is a good foundation, but Monero is seriously underrated!
Monero is superb.
Sure, and you would also never know how much monero is in circulation. That makes it worth than FIAT Money.
@@JesseP1409 no debt attached and untraceable makes it worth more than USD for sure
Didnt the main dev cash out into Bitcoin? Monero's anonymity is just based on Bitcoin's CoinJoin too
Bitcoin is no longer a transaction token, it's an asset. It's the only truly decentralized crypto in existence (no one owns it, can roll back transactions or manipulate it's block chain), and deflationary (there will only ever be 21M and nearly 19M are already mined with the remainder taking 120 years to mine because of halving) it's a store of value and is already digital gold. You hold it and borrow against it like the super wealthy do with their stock or hard assets. I like Monero as a privacy coin but Bitcoin is not that.
Does nobody know how money works?? Bitcoin is designed to be the asset "money" is backed by. 🤦
Absolutely. There is however an opening for Bitcoin to become a medium of exchange (currency) by way of the LN once it gets wider adoption. Like a Trojan Horse. Once it has a very large portion of global monetary value captured, it can adopt a payment layer at will. If it has utility at that time, no government will resist what the people want or they will be kicked out of office. If people decide to use it as currency and others take it as currency it will happen. In fact, in areas near both the Canadian and Mexican border, stores already take both those respective currencies as legal tender. Bitcoin is simply a global widely accepted asset that people will decide to exchange for goods as a medium of exchange. But it’s a dumb idea in many respects. Why on earth would anyone use their increasing in value each year by 170% Bitcoin to buy a Tesla that drops in value after driving it off the lot? That’s a really dumb idea.
*QUICK QUESTION:* 🙋♀️🔥
Ya'll really think that the same government that _starts wars_ over the *Petro-dollar* will just give you a currency with no ABSOLUTE control over it??? 🤔
I'm not waiting for their permission.
Unless they shut down the entire internet of the world they can’t stop us from using it. Also, there’s countries now that accept crypto with open arms. So we have different options now. If America tries to ban Bitcoin. Which I don’t think it will, I am moving to El Salvador. Another reason is that crypto was created in America so they would be killing a new technology of their own creation.
@@jaymelonokapu8089 Not to mention, in order for governments, yes plural, governments collectively around the world to prevent its use, they would have to be employing a solution of the Byzantine Generals Problem...which Bitcoin already is.
It seems to me philosophical reasons to use a particular currency will be superseded by what is expedient, easy, relatively stable and familiar. Not until the pain threshold is high enough for most people will they move off home base.
History shows us that that pain threshold is inevitably reached, because human corruption and irresponsibility in money printing knows no bounds.
@@itssteve6018 so far bitcoin is not expedient, easy, stable, and on top of it I have no fear of my money disappearing from things like a broken hard drive or lost password
What I miss in John's story is the properties that make Bitcoin so special.
He says Bitcoin has the most credible non-discretionary monetary policy.
But that's his conclusion, and I agree with it, but it's not a property or an argument:
Here's just a few:
- The founder of Bitcoin is unknown and can therefore not be abducted, tortured or otherwise influenced.
- If an alt-coin gains value that suggests copy-pasting a crypto does work and can be repeated indefinitely. Whereas if Bitcoin has value, that's possibly due to Bitcoin being the first and copying it's success might still be impossible.
- The software development process of Bitcoin is very de-centralized, with a process to implement change that doesn't break the old systems. Whereas Ethereum already released a 2.0 that is incompatible with the old version.
Bitcoins monetary policy credibility isn't in dispute. No one serious disagrees with it, so it's waste of time arguing it for in this format.
@@Tenebrousable It's an issue of comparison with other crypto's. They're much more centralized and vulnerable to attack. Like Ethereum could be attacked by abducting and threatening Vitalik in order to make him change the code in some way. So people might think Bitcoin isn't a good solution because it could be replaced by any of these other crypto's at any time. I don't think that's the case, I'm a Bitcoin maximalist. But I could see why people might be concerned about relying on Bitcoin so much.
Cryptos will never be accepted as money. Gold and silver will though.
@@mikehawk5106 What property of money is Bitcoin missing?
@@mikehawk5106 MoE is nice but not a requirement forever growin market cap. Gold and silver already failed. They were unable to resist getting captured by the government. And that's a 1 way street. 5000 years of trust, for the 99% part of the market? Gone. Newer coming back.
And, in the internet age, metals just don't work well enough. If the internet goes away? Maybe then you'll find use for the metal coin. Bitcoiners aren't that pessimistic. We'll prevent the civ from falling with the digital cash.
In the age of so much tech corruption i would never trust digital money.
In the age of so much tech i would never trust fiat money.
I don't think either did a great job making their point.
I could simply say, "Yet...," to most of Larry's points.
However, John really stumbled on the problem of bitcoin's use as an investment vehicle being a hindrance to its adoption as a currency.
Which, coincidentally, seems to be a great way for fist currency advocates to keep bitcoin from being its replacement.
I hope not. Waiting an average of 10 mins for every transaction, and paying 50% in fees for small transactions, is not good at all. It's fine for large purchases, but not everyday use.
Research the Lightning network. Instant settlement, fees less than a tenth of a penny. One company to research is Jack Maller's Strike.
@@supitschillbro Just did some research on it, and it looks like it could allow Bitcoin to be used for everyday transactions. However, doesn't it fundamentally change how Bitcoin works? Transfers will take place with smart contracts that aren't on the Blockchain, potentially reducing their security.
@@piguy4137 They still settle on the main chain eventually. Think of it like Professor White's free banking system for private currency redeemable for gold except even better: it will be off-chain Bitcoin that is always be redeemable for on-chain Bitcoin. It does not fundamentally change how the base layer works.
@@piguy4137 Yes, using lightning reduces security but it’s a lot more secure than a completely centralized system. People don’t ship gold bars around regularly either. It’s more secure than relying on banks.
That is never a problem until it is and when it is, the USD is going Venezuela
Do you want price stability (and therefore wide adoption as a medium of exchange for coffee, etc) or a forever-increasing bubble? I don't see how you have both at the same time. I think most speculators want a forever-increasing tulip bubble--however unrealistic.
It's funny how John kept arguing how great bitcoin is for saving, and how that's a "use" for the money, while the whole point of the debate was will it ever become a widely used currency for EXCHANGE. He was arguing the polar opposite. No wonder he lost the debate.
If you watch a debate looking for a loser and winner then you lost the debate.
He made it sound like a stock but less reliable and has nothing backing it such as ownership in a profitable company
You are without sense of humour. The establishment of store of value for all people is required before it becomes means of exchange. And he argued how both of those are inevitable as things stand.
When the bitcoin supply is exhausted what's the incentive to validate transactions? Do the validators still get some of the coin? Also, what if a new technology makes it easier to compute the hash so that it's no longer cryptographically hard? Couldn't people then fake the transaction history?
1. They get transaction fees
2. No because everyone would have access to that technology therefore nothing woild change
@@user-ux3de1nh6z neither of your points make any sense,
how do they get transaction fees if its free to transact?
How does everyone having access to the new technology have anything to do with the new technology making bitcoin obsolete 😂
@@Realisticautism Please re-read the original comment. You clearly didn't comprehend its content. He's talking about new technology (software or ASICS) that might make the SHA256 hash algorithm easier to solve and he's worried that that might pose a threat to the integrity of the network. He's not talking about anything replacing bitcoin itself (e.g another Blockchain)
I don't even understand your first point. Bitcoin is not feeless currency. Your assumption is plain wrong.
@@user-ux3de1nh6z 😂😂😂 i love when basic questions expose crypto people and all their mis information they spread, are you a npc?
So the claim bitcoin can not be changed or touched is wrong, man crypto people cant even get their own things right. it is open source and has created forks and disagreement within the network.
The claims it is free by some of the biggest advocates for bitcoin like anthony pompaliano are also wrong according to you, so who should i trust is right?
Also, the bitcoin network has had issues trying to upgrade the network and hash as you explain and they didn't, and hit forks. But you know by me explaining to you that the new technology will make it obsolete because it will, bitcoin is just the first and isn't even the main crypto of use anymore
@@user-ux3de1nh6z notice the only people pushing crypto are x Goldman sach employees and people who are fully invested in bitcoin as well as bots all over the place on every video about crypto or finance trying to con people into buying bitcoin... wonder why that is? 🤷♂️ even scarramucci pushes bitcoin 😂😂😂😂
Everybody thinks Bitcoin is awesome... Until, the power goes out...
Ever heard of backup generators?
Think you are getting money from the bank if the power goes out? And if it stays out my bullets beat your gold coins...
White, Selgin, and Caplan so far flourished in any debate they've appeared on the SoHo forum. Unfortunately, their opposers hardly ever have the necessary economic knowledge to comprehend what they are talking about.
That's especially true for bitcoiners, they are believers of some sort and don't form opinions by thinking most of the time if not all.
True, but that being said, I thought John did a fine job defending his position.
Fungibility, a necessary quality, is what best serves as money. This basically explains that a digital currency, such as dollars, and bitcoin, serve well as money. There is no end to money in this manner. In the past, we tied our money into having intrinsic value itself as a characteristic, i.e. gold, silver. The weakness of that system is that politicians cannot impose their will on you without your consent to fund it. Digital money solves every statists goals. The Fed prints money in endless cycles, meanwhile rehypothecation will one day come due. The real assets in your hands are the only ones that exist. Paper gold and silver is a dream.
People will be kicking themselves in few weeks if they miss the opportunity to buy and invest in bitcoin
As a beginner trader you like to take the opportunity to earn a lot of money... Get a professional broker and start a career in bitcoin trading
BITCOIN: IS THE ONLY TRUE DEMOCRACY EVER EXISTS IN THE WORLD
Crypto is the future, trading crypto has become a lucrative way of making money
Stock are good too
Stocks are good crypto is better
This professors comments regarding inflation are going to age poorly.
Cripto will not work because government will never give up the monopoly of controlling the money supply , added to the fact that one of bitcoins most desirable traits is anonymity, it would make it impossible for the government to tax transactions made in it and yes they will enforce also the monopoly of violence in that case pushing it underground once again. You can't change the monetary system simply by bi passing the fundamental change needed in government itself to become a minimalist expression of it actual self
Good point, but sovereigns do control their own currencies. Bitcoin is not a sovereign currency. If is a global currency owned by ‘the people’. It is built on military built technology itself and is undefeatable. TCPIP and Shaw256. All global governments would have to band together to exact a global ban and as we know, that’s an impossible task. Could the moon fall out of orbit and hit earth? It’s possible, but unlikely. Anyway, governments are themselves adopting Bitcoin slowly as a way to back their currencies by something because they know it is a deflationary currency/asset. That’s a natural progression and the US needs bitcoin for defense of its National security of its economy. A centralized economy can be taken down by enemy hacking, but not if it’s backed by military technology that doesn’t need to shed blood to defend the economy, then that economy is well protected.
@@sandymilne224 good God you bitcoiners are delusional, once your foot is within a sovereign country they set the rules monetary and legal if you choose to test them you're gonna end in jail, it doesn't matter how much smart coding is used for the network to work on , Bitcoin won't defend you against the long arm of the government, in terms of the USA , they need Bitcoin as a kick in the nuts, a non inflationary currency that is not controlled by political powers , do you really see congress chopping their own source of unlimited funding of for the good of the people?
How would one retrieve their bitcoin if there's no electricity? Asking for the future..
It doesn't matter, you won't live very long in a world without electricity
Much easier than with USD. With USD, you need the whole banking sector electrified. With BTC, you need only a solar charger connecting to a satellite.
Neither party has any plans to cut spending, so the interest on the debt alone will exceed taxes soon.
46:08 "Oh, oh, if the, the flow, the flow of gold, yea the stock, the dollar, a billion dollar, oh I'm" … REALLY reassuring, this is thought-through.
John should learn about free bnking before he peraches bitcoin as the only way to achieve "rules without rulers"
We know about free banking. Doesn't change his case. It worked for a while, but because it relied on gold, it failed in the form it had. Those rules were overwritten by the rulers. "give us more credit than you got gold, we're good for it" said the government. And the boom and crash resulted.
@@Tenebrousable Free banking didn't fail. Governments purposefully destroyed them to become the money controllers
Every time I hear about bitcoin people are always trying to justify its value...sounds more like a conversation than a currency.
Perhaps you should talk to other people.
I have a small business, my expenses are about $17K a year, and I pay them all with Bitcoin (and other cryptos).
Bitcoin is valuable to me, because I work with companies over seas, they can't accept PayPal, my PayPal was banned, and card transactions often need to be manually authorized with the bank which is a hassle.
Bitcoin is seamless, without restrictions, that's why it's valuable to me.
Making the price stable by manipulating the supply is stupid. Thinking about it superficially you want price to be stable because it gives you same purchasing power all the time. But that's not how the world works. If 1 btc can buy you a car and then one day the car companies die, then the price of car will go up to 3 btc or something like that, which is fine. You cannot keep purchasing power constant because the world is always changing unpredictably. Now if you say that you just want the price to be constant but not the purchasing power then I have to ask why do you want to be stable? Is it because of the irrational urge of comfort that it gives?
Price will be somewhat stable as the world adopts bitcoin. Don't try to make price of anything constant by manipulating the supply because it's irrational. Why do that?
I doubt it, but i hope it
Bitcoin is crap at small transactions. It's freeking expensive in transactions and I don't think it's a transactional coin. It may be a backing for another currency or if the government simply bought a crap ton of it and used it as a backing for its paper money.
It can handle like 3 transactions per second too. How the fuck is that going to work?
that's a lie. Just use the Bitcoin Lightning Network
I will send you rookies 1 cent in bitcoin via the lightning network
Get up to speed. Learn how the Lightning Netowrk functions.
@@TomGreene I wonder how it'll compete with fiat already doing hundreds of billions of transactions a day?
John Vallis is an Anthony Sullivan doppelganger.
Human greed is so strong in crypto people its crazy.
Bitcoin's vol has been going down though... a billion bought/sold today does not have the same effect on price as it did in 2013.
How does bitcoin, etherum or another cryptocurrency compare to precious metals or precious stones (diamonds, ruby, emeralds, etc)? Why electronic bits (blockchain) over something tangible such as gold or diamonds? How does bitcoin compare to other cryptocurrencies (etherum, dogecoin, etc). Why bitcoin over the other cryptocurrencies? If Russia goes back to the gold standard (backed by gold) will the Russian ruble become the world reserve currency like the U.S. dollar is now?
Bitcoin vs metals/stone/wheat (physical commodities) - The advantages are in cost. Cost to store (secure vaults are costly), cost to verify authenticity (is this gold bar pure? Only way to completely verify is to melt and recast every time, obviously not practical), cost to final settlement (delivery. Moving gold securely cross-country is a major pain). Wheat, or similar commodities also have spoilage to consider.
Bitcoin vs gold standard/paper gold - you reintroduce trust. Trust that the paper is backed 1on1, trust that you can redeem for gold. This trust has been historically been violated, so there is not reason to suspect it would be different this time.
Bitcoin vs other crypto - markets consolidate around the best money. Bitcoin has a few big advantages here: Limited hardcoded supply, pseudonymous founder (who is likely dead), first mover, largest most robust PoW network. While it is possible some other protocol ends up on top, these 4 advantages should not be underrated in favor of fancy marketing terms and features that can easily be built on layer 2 protocols later.
bitcoin isnt a currency, never will be.
Can Ponzi Money Become the World’s Money?
The questions indicate how early we still are.
Good to know, I thought I was late to the table with crypto, always been a gold/silver guy, and got some reassurance from the friend that got me involved, "you may have missed the appetizer course, but you're definitely going to end up with a very full stomach" - I got involved about a month after it bottomed out
Some of them were not even questions.
White is a smart guy. Thanks for inviting him!
No, but crypto will gain more adoption over time. Bitcoin itself has merits, but it will not become the main currency.
BTC xfer fees, xfer times, and ASIC miner dominance are it's largest hindrance to global adoption.
The current average xfer fee is $6.92 which means global adoption increasing traffic would spike the fee. Mostly barring 2nd, 3rd world, or sub $100 preal world usage.
ASIC miners and availability have hyper concentrated who is actually "securing the network" mining blocks. While it is mined globally having sizable chunks of hashrate lost by government crackdown inevitably leads to network insecurity and spiking xfer fees or wait possible days till processed.
@@Cerberus984 yep, exactly.
@@Cerberus984 Lightning network
If governments come for Bitcoin, that will be when many come for government.
I'm pretty big Bitcoin fanatic, and even I agree a lot with Professor White. I think Bitcoin can theoretically become the reserve currency, but it could very easily take more than 20 years. I'd estimate that it'd likely take much longer. Very hard to predict things that far in the future.
It already is a reserve currency for 100 million people. And propably 500million more has it indirectly as a part of their holdings. Trough their pension funds and stocks and holdings those pension funds hold. And that number keeps climbing about 10k people per day. If your standard of reserve currency is for other people to use it as one? What is the standard then? How many people? 1 billion? 2billion? Doesn't matter one fucking bit when that line is crossed. What matters is number will be going up. And it can not be stopped.
I doubt it , i would say bitcoin will be gone , like AOL. Welcome to reality and smell the tulips!
Answer: No. Reason: Bitcoin isn’t a threat to the Government, the FBI easily seizes Bitcoin very often. Look at Monero
Only leaving your gold on your front porch invites it to be taken by a government or by anybody. The same with your bitcoins. Nobody can take it from you unless you leave it there to be taken. Remember, it uses military grade (and designed) technology to exactly stop such confiscation. You can give it to the government under duress, but that’s your choice. They can’t take it from you. It’s impossible. Only you know your password. Leaving your Bitcoin on an exchange is tantamount to leaving your gold on the front porch. Dumb idea.
I see why they ask the people in the Q&A not to ramble on.
The most asked question was "What is your question."
We don’t need to reinvent wheel we already have gold and silver. Had we stuck to constitution and stayed on gold and silver standard we wouldn’t be in mess we are today. No way I would accept crypto over precious metals. They have no intrinsic value and will return to zero after dollar crashes.
Crypto is the future, outside of America that is.
If bitcoin can beat the U.S dollar and all other governments, then i will buy me some bitcoin. If the answer is no then sorry, no dice
What I don't understand is what's keeping governments from buying a bunch of crypto/bitcoin and essentially turning it into a government controlled fiat money?
because if they want they can make their own crypto . it is easy
I think you are misunderstanding what fiat money is. Fiat money has to be irredeemable. Perhaps the old gold standard would provide a good example. The U.S. dollar used to be redeemable for gold (I think it was originally something like $23.60 for an ounce, but that's beside the point). Even if the federal government bought all the gold in the world, it would still be limited in how many dollars it could issue because it needs that much gold in reserve. To be precise, redeemable notes don't need 100% reserves (Despite what Rothbard would tell you), and a lot of banks got along just fine holding less than 5% reserves for redemption. So far, this money, being redeemable, is not fiat.
It is only when the option to redeem is discarded that a money can become fiat. These days, the only thing limiting the creation of new dollars is the prudence of the board of governors of the federal reserve. To answer your question, if the government(s) bought up all the bitcoins, they would still have a fixed amount to use. Governments can't create more bitcoin, there is a hard upper limit. (I don't know enough about other crypto to comment on them).
Holding it doesn't make you controll the network. And they can't even afford to print the money for it. Like, a 100B, pretty ambitious right? Where would the price run up to? Spread that even over a month or 2. There's a 100k coins on the market. The rest are in long term vaults. They don't come out just because of priceswings. When it starts to run up like that? They hold harder. Not softer.
@@dragonfurry69 …and… to complete your argument… Bitcoin is designed to defeat such a commandeering by governments because as any government buying in mass, would increase the price of BTC to the point where there just isn’t enough fiat on the planet to buy all or the majority of Bitcoins. Most are already issued. (18.7m out of 21m) The price of Bitcoin goes up exponentially as demand rises. It’s a brilliant defense system built into Bitcoin from the start.
@@sandymilne224 Going to have to disagree with you. Just because the supply is limited doesn't mean that the price increases exponentially. Price is set by marginal utility. There is no reason, in theory, that the price of a bitcoin could not fall to, say, $1. It depends on what the subjective valuation of the holders of the bitcoins value it at.
Monoculture is dangerous
What monoculture exists between Nigeria and El Salvador I wonder do you think? It's like saying 4G monoculture cell tech is dangerous. There can be only one best money. Everyone searches for it. Implicitly or explicitly.
People don't use gold/Bitcoin for exchange because they're inconvenient. They are inferior to fiat unless you layer a banking system into it, which destroys the "rules without rulers" characteristic that both gold and Bitcoin have. The question that should have been asked is whether Bitcoin would go up or down in value if it could no longer be used for criminal activity and if coins had unique IDs that would make owning then illegal of they were put on a banned list because of their use in criminal activity.
Bitcoin down 50% since this video
Bitcoin is more scarce than time, people can live a longer or shorter life due to innovations in medicine and lifestyle changes.
Depends if you believe in determinism. since we don't know when we are going to die, its possible when we are going to die is set in stone, all innovations and lifestyle choices included.
It doesn't matter what reason you have to buy and hold bitcoin. Maybe you want to invest, hodl, day trade, buy drugs on the silk road, use on gambling sites, or whatever other reason you can think of. So long as you have bitcoin, in time as it grows and more people have it, it will become money on it's own.
Bitcoin is like cigarettes in jail. It can't be used as money if I am the only smoker. But with enough smoking inmates, it will become money on it's own.
Only people who already have bitcoin is promoting it.
Tell them about Satoshi's 1mn bc.
that is because they want others to buy it from them . this is the whole story of crypto , the greater fool
Only people who already have fiat/ gold/seashells (are) promoting it...
John’s rebuttal was too good 👌🏼
@37:00
Was it...? I think he completely misses the point (actually, both of them kind of). He aproaches the problem from the perspective of the consumer. But the main problem is on the goods and services providers. If you were a manager of a clothing store for example, would you accept bitcoin for your goods? And I mean right now. Because if yes, then I think you should be fired right then and there. You have a set cost of operating, and you receive an amount of bitcoin in revenue that tomorrow might be worth double or half. Does that sound like something a responsible person would do? Might as well rout all your payments through a roulette table.
@@JcGross93 a vendor can immediately convert a crypto to a stable coin upon receiving it. take the "break-even" point, convert to stable coin, then add a bit more for profit in Fiat and hold a small percentage as the crypto to speculate that it will eventually increase in the future. this is what everyone is doing, if they know how to hedge. crypto is one of the biggest fastest-growing investments anyone can do. you don't need a crap ton of money to see your money DOUBLE in bubble.
Quick answer is no. There is no reason to be spending a deflationary currency on everyday expenditures.
You spend dollar because it's not deflationary? No. Imagine all you money is in the form of btc, then you will just use it when you need to.
@@mz2065 no I won't because why would I want to get rid of something that's increasing in value almost all the time? That's why BTC is more something to put long-term savings into. It's like gold but on steroids.
@@TheNavalAviator Imagine all your money is in btc.
@@mz2065 That would be great most of the time but I would run the risk of getting a terrible rate for my groceries whenever BTC tanks, that would have my teeth gritting. It's too risky to put one's entire savings _and_ cashflow into such a volatile currency. Instead, I would make BTC a part of my retirement portfolio. That's the best use. But not my entire retirement portfolio because there might be a solar storm in my lifetime that obliterates our digital infrastructure and my BTCs.
@@TheNavalAviator no. the imaginary situation is to help you understand why you will still spend a deflationary currency.
Awesome thanks
The answer is no
A fool and his money are soon parted. There is no doubt that the value of USD is falling rapidly because of foolish politicians. However, investing in vapor is even more foolish. Like the game of musical chairs, when the music stops, someone looses. When invisible currency vanishes, billions will be lost. If you really want a currency that has been stable for thousands of years, invest in physical gold and silver.
How is that 10 yr return on your gold assets treating you? 🤣🤣🤣
Why does he say nearly 22 trillion then highlight a number that is clearly 21,755,737? It's missing some zeros. Three to be exact. Where does the 1000X come from? @0:00
Most graphs of US debt are shown in thousands or in millions. It will be a small note at the bottom of the graph telling you how much to multiply by.
The problem I have with Bitcoin, and other cryptocurrencies, is that they discount the importance of physical backing.
Fiat Currency did away with physical backing and place the value of the currency in the trust of the issuer of the currency that its valuable.
That, in turn, has been abused by constantly adding to the supply of currency.
I do question if cryptocurrencies will be a valuable enough currency without physical backing. They just have a guarantee that they cannot be increased in supply infinitely. I'm not certain that's good enough if fiat currency fails.
Physical backing isn’t needed for Bitcoin because it can’t be printed. The dollar or any other currency needed a peg to gold (physical backing) to stop wanton money printing. Fortunately people who say that Bitcoin isn’t backed by anything so it’s going to zero, just don’t fathom that it’s backed by the value of the fiat that went into it at any given purchase price. Backed by absolutely nothing is a feature, not a liability. Additionally, fiat currencies are sovereign currencies. Bitcoin is a global currency backed by all other fiat currencies, so if the USD failed, one would still be able to cash out of Bitcoin into a different sovereign fiat currency. If the USD fails, does gold fail? No. Why would Bitcoin then fail? It is digital gold in some sense.
@@sandymilne224 First of all, you kind of have it backwards. Paper (and fiat) came AFTER gold as a currency. Gold suffers from portability issues. Currency addressed that. So, paper currency wasn't tied to gold as a protection.
Second, currency is supposed to be a store of value. With no backing, Bitcoin is still got the same problem that Fiat has: you have to trust someone that it has value. In Fiat, you have to trust the government that issues it that the currency has value. With Bitcoin, you have to trust that everyone will believe it has value.
This is why, I think if Fiat currency fails, Bitcoin as a currency doesn't solve the issue of a trustworthy currency. There's still a lot of faith without verification.
Plus, we haven't even addressed when the power goes out ...
@@justinpaul3110 : No doubt gold came before currency. Not the point. Fiat became fiat when it was de indexed from gold. That’s when it lost its anchor to gold. Every fiat currency dies because an empire prints too much and makes it worthless. So there is nothing behind US fiat except a printing press and the worthless word of the US government. To be sure, it’s the cleanest dirty shirt in the hamper and it is by design the global currency, but you’d do well to remember it’s just the people and countries of the world that ‘agree’ to that. It’s not backed by anything either. Bitcoin is backed by the value of the Proof of Work energy used to either mine it or to buy it from someone that already mined it. It’s the mining that gives it value. I ask you… What value does religion have? By your standard for Bitcoin religion has no value. It’s value is immense because people believe it has value. It’s funded by believers that tithe every Sunday. The Catholic church is the wealthiest organization on the planet. What you don’t get about Bitcoin is that the value is in the network. Google, Facebook are all networks that bring value to the world populations. Once they get so big, they have immense power. Bitcoin is the most secure monetary network of the century. What’s currently being architected to ride on top of it will blow your mind.
Back in 1990 the Internet was a place for criminals and company brochures. You couldn’t do anything with it. Look where it is today, because people took a permissionless protocol and built real utility around it. We are now heading into Web 3.0 with Internet money. That’s Bitcoin. All others are centralized in specific countries and are “fiat” versions of Bitcoin. Remember, the value of the network is the true value of Bitcoin. As more adoption by companies, insurance companies, pension funds place their excess cash into it because it’s value it going up at 170% per year for a decade (and that’s when nobody has heard of it) the utility of holding value in Internet money will become apparent to you and everyone. It’s adoption is twice that of the adoption of the Internet, so don’t leave it too long to buy some. They aren’t making any more of it. One final thought… the days of trusting that Bitcoin has value is long over with. Everyone knows that now.
@@sandymilne224 I don't use religion as a store of value. I do expect that from currency.
Bitcoin's ability to store value is, again, based on trust. You say that people trust it because people are adopting it but that's not exactly the whole story. People are buying it for investment purposes. Therefore, they want a return on it.
Therein lies another problem as a store of value: the rage of cryptocurrency as an investment works against it's adoption as a currency. A currency was always preferable to bartering because the value was relatively consistent. However, people investing in it will send it's value all over the place. That works against it's use as a currency.
Frankly, that's all governments would need to do to fuck with any crypto: create boom and bust cycles.
Lastly, don't mistake me as a fan of Fiat. I'm not. I'm simply pointing out that currency with some backing (other than someone's word it is valuable) is going to be superior to any currency whose backing is some variation on : trust me. Crypto solves the problem of inflating but doesn't really solve the value store.
@@justinpaul3110 : Duly noted, but I still maintain that Bitcoin is a good store of value - until it isn’t. Just the way Google is. At the very least, Bitcoin is storing the value of the energy used to create it. It’s fine from 20 cents-ish to 47,000. There aren’t many people that would agree with you.
In a room full of libertarians, a lot of the end result was bound to be wistful thinking. I want to believe, too. But I'm having a hard time. I can see Bitcoin as a solid storage of value, at least for as long as there is a darknet. But there are simply more modern coins such as IOTA that are way more convenient, efficient and scalable to serve as everyday currency. The problem of deflation wasn't even raised here, or if it was, I missed it. Ultimately, Bitcoin is never going to replace fiat money. Fiat money may be replaced. But it is not going to be Bitcoin.
I don't understand why they keep using this moderator, he's always extremely biased in favor of Bitcoin. To the extent that he got upset in the Schiff vs Voorhees debate.
They "use" the moderator because he invented the Soho Forum. During the Schiff debate he chided Peter for claiming that the price of gold was closely linked to industrial uses, which is clearly a bad take. I was there and was amazed Schiff would say that.
@@matt_harder That explains it, I still think it's a mistake however. Watch that debate again and you'll see that's far from the only time he intervened in an emotional manner, at one point he almost becomes a third party in the debate.
Perhaps you should think a bit more. This is his debate. Everyone knows his bias, he knows his bias, and corrects for it as much as he can bother, and people still show up. Because it's fine enough.
@@identifiesas65.wheresmyche95 Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. He's more trustworthy mod than anyone else you can find. How do we know? They don't create these debates.
I guess they use him because the forum debate is about a single detractor debating against the majority that like Bitcoin. That tables could have been turned by a different forum.
Get a new moderator. Please!
No.
I believe David Friedman asked tow questions
Larry talks about an infinite timeline at one point, and John wants to zoom out more?
Perspective is not unidimensional.
Larrys argument at that point was "not likely". That all fiat currencies collapse at the same moment. That's not what's required. It's absolutely certain that all of them will collapse. One after another. All of them. USD might be the last standing. And as they fall, each citizen has a choice to adopt USD or BTC. And their country is likely in a USD siege during this time. Like is Venezuela currently. White loses that argument in all conceivable ways.
Not gonna happen. There is no stability to crypto, and it relies on internet connections.
Bitcoin is not gonna be globally adopted. It's not suitable.
If you have bandwidth for text messages, of the 1999 year kind, you can tx btc. That's about 6 billion people. As already shown, volatility goes down, as price goes up. The academic is completly retarded on that point. The trend is clearly in evidence. Bitcoin is globally adopted at about 10k people per day pace right now. We already at 100million people, globally. It is suitable. The evidence is clear.
What is not suitable, is any of the fiat toilet paper blood monies. Nor any of the junkcoin scams of the day. The evidence is very clear and completly conclusive.
I’m confident given sufficient time (decades? centuries?) crypto will become the primary way we store and transact value. The question is when and what coin will that be?
Considering it’s flaws and it’s position as one of the first I have my doubts Bitcoin will remain the favorite before we reach that point.
What flaws
Bitcoin is optimized for decentralization, security, and hardness. Ethereum can be shutdown by AWS or Infura because ordinary people can't run their own nodes; EOS has such a bloated blockchain that there are only a few archival nodes holding the network together. All these utility token shitcoins have this problem of being centralized. Additionally, many of these shitcoins have non-credible monetary policy and less network security. There is one altcoin with merit that does not have the bloat, and it is one of the few proof-of-work altcoins that I currently like: Beam. Beam has very clever and cool zero knowledge cryptographic technology that allows me to run a full node on my phone, and they are actively developing new ways to use these maths to carry out confidential yet verifiable DeFi.
That is not the question. When "we're there" is completly irrelevant. All that matters is that we're about 100million ppl in, and growing about 10k people per day. The speed will change moving forward but will not turn negative. We're going in that direction and the movement can not be stopped. If an official body (what does that even mean?) says it has now happened 32 or 33 years from now is a completly dumb question to even ponder about.
@@Tenebrousable If you really want to argue about this: "when" is important. As you said adoption speed will change moving forward. If that speed slows to crawl it means it will take longer for our institutions and lives to change for the better. I'd rather that change happen sooner rather than later. If adoption speed continues to accelerate our lives better more quickly and those invested will gain in net worth more so than if the speed of adoption was slow. In economics money now is worth more than money later. I'd prefer near universal adoption in this century not the next.
What an act. Please excuse me if I have to cough. Sure. When you're opening line is a lie what are you?
Excessive hand gesturing. It's just distracting when the motion doesn't communicate anything. (What did he just call me in ASL?!)
Fake internet money I`ll pass.
Lol it's so funny that we live in a world where a random virtual collectible is valued at $600 billion. The way bitcoin believers hypnotize others into thinking that's reasonable or even underpriced, by carefully stacking persuasive fallacies upon other fallacies is glorious and one of the most impressive things I've ever witnessed. People's ability to rationalize nonsene truly knows no bounds
The internet was once expected to be no more useful than a fax machine. One thing history makes clear: people don't learn from history, especially as it relates to technology.
What fallacies are you referring to specifically?
@@dupersuper1000
I don't know almost everything "crypto is undervalued" advocates say sounds like a fallacy built upon a fallacy to me. I feel like I could literally write a book about the logical fallacies of frenzied speculators by focusing exclusively on the crypto space. I have a hard time accepting bitcoin's market is >$0, let alone $600 billion. I'm not an expert on hypnotizing people into buying a cryptocurrency either but I'll try to give you my very best tips.
**
-> Convince the listener that your virtual collectible is a "currency" and should therefore exclusively be compared to the USD, which is conveniently one of the weakest assets imaginable. Pretend other financial assets don't exist or are not valid comparisons. Trap your debate partner into defending the USD, a thing no one suggests as an investment ever, by attacking first.
**
-> Talk about the computer science of your virtual collectible and vaguely imply that 'more complexity & dependencies' equals 'improved', as every engineer/designer will of course tell you. In fact, pretend that we're barely able to trade anything at all under the current system and we desperately need a high-tech alternative to relieve us from crippling problems like these heavy gold bars we're carrying around and wallets exploding/overflowing with 100$ bills. Assert that dependency on electricity/computing power and ultimately the internet is not a drawback because we can't imagine a world without it and therefore it can never happen.
**
-> Assert that your virtual collectible has 'total scarcity' even as comical quantities of other virtual collectibles sprout up everywhere around you, because only the virtual collectible with your preferred branding is of course viable. There's an infinite supply of CrapCoins, but an absolute scarcity of our chosen legit 'the one' coin
**
-> Pretend that, when you wake up in a world that ditched fiat currencies to use our invented virtual collectible instead, and everything has somehow gone swimmingly, and competitors are defeated and left in the dust, no one will ever be tempted to or able to switch again. No one can ever improve our tech and make a better currency, it's now over forever despite the massive opportunity for financial gain by pulling off the same trick
**
-> Regularly remind people that virtual collectibles 'go up' and that they are missing out on free money. This allows their own rationalizing to kick into high gear and fill in the blanks with nonsense of their own. You don't really need to persuade them, they'll do the work for you. We can ignore the incessant scams & losses from other virtual collectibles and historical speculation frenzies because we already established that they don't count and this time it's totally different for realz.
**
-> Deflect any boomer criticism by attacking the old man's lacking understanding of the computer science behind virtual collectibles. In fact, assert that criticism with anything less than perfect understanding is by definition stupid and invalid, just like criticizing communism without multiple readings of all Marx' writings is of course stupid and invalid
**
-> Brand your collectible as 'progressive', 'the future' and perhaps a way to save the planet. Imply that owning your virtual collectible makes you morally and intellectually superior to those other people who just don't get it. Maximally exploit your audience's tendency to tribalism by turning your collectible into a kind of community, a team of like-minded people that you can belong to. Focus most of your energy persuading the influenciable young & people with a history of gambling problems to build a base, the rest will follow
**
-> Know your audience & further link your collectible to their existing biases, values and ideologies. e.g. when speaking to libertarians, pitch your collectible as symbol of freedom and a way to wrestle control away from governments. In another room you might pitch it as a system for the working man, despised by overpaid big banking CEO's.
**
-> When convenient, convince people that 'number of users' is a fundamental that drives price of your collectible because supply/demand. Pretend that none of this user growth could possibly be priced in or over-priced in already and that the current price is perfectly and rationally linked to the current number of users by expert TikTok analysts. Since the number of users is guaranteed to go up as we already established, this must linearly drive up the price of your collectible as it goes as well!
**
-> Assert that literally nobody using your currency as a currency is proof of how viable it is as a currency. This is of course because confidence is so high that people are waiting for it to appreciate before starting. How can anyone claim this is a bad thing??
**
-> Make dramatically hyperbolic predictions of future value & use obviously broken logic to trigger people into falsifying your claims. These reactions create social media buzz and are good marketing for your collectible. In fact, name your collectible something obviously scammy & ridiculous like 'TulipCoin" or "KawaiiCoin" (do those exist yet?), that should get the controversy ball rolling.
**
Pretend that doubling up your market cap from $1 trilion to $2 trillion is just as easy as $500 billion to $1 trilion. In fact, imply that for your virtual collectible it's actually easier because of accelerating network effects! Also imply that previous growth guarantees future growth
**
And voila! Accepting these simple premises, you've now created a $5 trillion (or higher? to the moon!!) asset in the most awesomely entertaining way. Start today!
@@KyleDunnIt You think people have a general tendency to undersell and undervalue technology and innovation? I live in a different universe from yours
@@SolarPlayer there's plenty of selling happening, no argument there. The historical precedent says more about a failure to understand technology and to appreciate the implications.
Imagine what economies would look like if people put that trillions from bitcoin and cryptos into their actual economies and feeding their populations not trying to trick another fool to invest into cryptos
NO. Coins, cash, GOLD, coins, cash, BIT COIN, cash & coins! At church give my tenth in bit coins. Money shouldn't or should be the "root" of all evil. Can court prosecutors steal bit coin bonds?
im sorry but theres just no question here, david friedman definitely won this debate
In a word, no. There are two paths to power for any government: currency, and guns.
They will never surrender either.
Read Sovereign Individual. Bitcoin re-architects the logic of violence
@@TheEconomicExpert Violence trumps logic. That's why there's this experience called warfare.
Yeah everyone let’s make Bitcoin the only currency! That way the government can literally control economic growth…
Huh?
Unlikely I believe. The problem with bit coin is that it's hard to quantify a fraction so small. It is already so small and most people don't even use bit coin. Unless you can get around that problem I don't think bitcoin will ever become a dominant currency.
Huh? lol
The smallest fractional unit (currently) is the satoshi. If you price everting in satoshis, then you don’t have this problem. It might take time to retrain your brain to think in different unit coefficients, but that’s what immigrants do every day.
Simple answer is no it can’t and people must not allow it to
Once money is digitalized governments the world over will seek to track it and play with its value much as they already try to do
They literally wouldn't be able to. That's the entire point.
The difference is that they can counterfeit new fiat, not new bitcoins. There will ever be only 21 millions, that cannot be changed, and it is not small thing.
They can’t create new coins, sure. But they absolutely can track every transaction.
@@JayVal90 No they can't
@@pincopallino7771 The whole point of crypto is that it’s a public ledger. That means every transaction is public, including amount, source and destination wallet addresses. Which means the current balance of each wallet is fully public. Sure you may not know exactly who owns what wallet, but it’s quite possible to figure out, and then trace all of someone’s transaction history.
And I haven’t even started with how governments are going to apply this. A government can release a stablecoin with rules around proving identity upon getting a wallet. Now they know who is executing every transaction.
Similarly to gold, no.
Right. It's currently not manipulated by the big banks....lol.
Economist vs Hype Man
An ad hominem with an embedded appeal to authority; the antithesis of reason.
@@KyleDunnIt Literal Economist vs. Podcaster.
@@benjdelphi "appeal to authority" (even without ad hominem) isn't an assessment of the merits of either person's position.
@@KyleDunnIt An appeal has to have a thesis. The fact that you have derived a thesis based on your own preconceptions is all on you.
Ok grandpa! Why would you come to a debate not prepared?
🌋
10:42
.
12:12
33:03
Trillions of dollars worth of gold owned by the world. 8 billion ~
Billions of dollars worth of bitcoin owned by 200mm people ~
All crypto is nwo
"Reason" tv lmao what a joke.
You should change your name to the "Sigma male channel".
What does that even mean?
Should be illegal in the United States.
You should be illegal in the United States
Bitcoin can. BTC can't.