[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
economics

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts]
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 3223)
Message
File  []
close
Bitcoin_Large.jpg
322332233223
>> No. 3223 Anonymous
18th February 2013
Monday 7:58 pm
3223 Bitcoins
Have any of you bought Bitcoins or spoken to anybody that has?

The underlying principle of removing the role of the banking industry from transactions (or at least limiting its influence) seems noble but it stinks of a giant scam IMO.
725 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown. Expand all images.
>> No. 9362 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 8:20 pm
9362 spacer
>>9358
You can't dig up the latest iPhone; is that not valuable?
>oh but that has an actual use
Is the Venus de Milo not valuable?
>oh but that's a physical object at least
How much could I sell Boris Johnson's phone number for?
>oh but that's because people are willing to pay
Exactly!

Anyway, cryptocurrencies have been a lot less volatile in recent years. The giant explosions in value have mostly stopped. I am confident that this is because real banks and professional investors have got involved, and they want Bitcoins, altcoins and shitcoins to be something whose price they can control. And if that is the case, then I suspect they will know a few tricks for inflating the price again. You might not want to buy any, but the rest of the economy does not care what you do or do not want. The prices will go up again; the only problem is if it takes 15 years for that to happen.
>> No. 9363 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 8:30 pm
9363 spacer
>>9362
>I am confident that this is because real banks and professional investors have got involved, and they want Bitcoins, altcoins and shitcoins to be something whose price they can control.
In other words, they want to be able to tap into the speculation so they can make some money for themselves at the expense of the speculators.

Nobody serious is really getting into crypto. Even that one firm that made noises about it wasn't actually buying but just offering a service to hold its customers' existing coins, the value of which it leveraged to make money for itself.

It's like how they say the way to get rich off a gold rush is to sell shovels.
>> No. 9364 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 8:45 pm
9364 spacer
>>9362
I can't really discern what you're jabbering about in the first part of your post. The problem with crypto isn't that people don't think it's worth something, the problem is that it has every flaw a traditional currency has and dozens more on top of that. Even the relentless cry of "decentralisation" is rendered moot by your admission that crypto's only becoming stable because the power of the markets is being centralised in the hands of the historically powerful banking organisations. Of course, this was never really true because the power brokers within crypto were already hyper-wealthy before they got involved with funny money. No one really buys or sells anything in crypto, it's only use is speculative shenanigans, organised crime and using an absurd amount of the planet's electricity, I don't understand why I'm supposed to be impressed or excited about any of this.

Seriously, other than the chance to hop on board a get rich quick scheme, what is the point of crypto?
>> No. 9365 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 9:10 pm
9365 spacer
>>9355
>The value of cryptocurrency is no more or less imaginary than the value of gold or art or any number of other assets
This is true as it goes, but the net effect has been to make me more and more like an anarcho-communist with each passing day as I'm forced to conclude that the very concept of 'value' itself must be bollocks.
But since I've a lot of office shirts and not many cool leather jackets with badges on, I'll have to settle for saying this: Why can't an analog to Goodhart's law apply to price/value in the marketplace, with crypto as the messenger?
>> No. 9366 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 9:13 pm
9366 spacer

lb22_cypraea_moneta_cowrie_cu__89543.jpg
936693669366
>>9364

Crypto is bollocks, but so is much of the rest of the economy. There's a lot more capital in the world than productive ways to deploy that capital, so we're awash with speculative bubbles. Most shares have been starkly overvalued for years, London property is just a store of value for foreign criminals and the entire fine art market is a money laundering scheme. Nearly all consumer goods are "overpriced" relative to a purely utilitarian alternative, but sell based on intangibles like brand value. If we all wake up one day and realise that it's all bollocks, then the entire global economy is fucked.
>> No. 9367 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 9:45 pm
9367 spacer
>Seriously, other than the chance to hop on board a get rich quick scheme, what is the point of crypto?

Mainly selling drugs on the internet and collecting ransomware payments as far as I can tell. Other than speculation and get rich quick schemes it doesn't seem like there are any legal real-life use cases where it works better than regular currency.
>> No. 9368 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 9:47 pm
9368 spacer
>>9366
Please don't patronise me. I'm well aware overvaluation and market manipulation are not unique issues to crypto currencies, but these problems are far, far worse within crypto than almost any other sector. Neither is anyone claiming fine art will change the world, or hoarding property in London is a revolutionary frontier in money making. There is also the important fact that overvalued or not, these things still have real value.

Replacing our current system with a crypto based one would only make things even worse, it does nothing to solve any problems with our economy and, as I said earlier, opens a sluice gate of new ones. It is a get rich quick scheme for the already wealthy, a way for libertarians to simply opt out of taxes and a cult of greed that demeans anyone who doesn't "make it".
>> No. 9369 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 10:47 pm
9369 spacer
>>9366
I'm getting strong "if this is a Ponzi, everything is a Ponzi" vibes from you there, lad.
>> No. 9370 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 10:52 pm
9370 spacer
>>9368
>Neither is anyone claiming [...] hoarding property in London is a revolutionary frontier in money making.
To your average man on the Clapham omnibus, perhaps. To people from faraway places with substantial sums in dodgy money, earlier this century it started to be marketed as a way to not only legitimise their fortune but also to grow it with the seemingly never-ending rise in property values.
>> No. 9371 Anonymous
12th May 2022
Thursday 11:01 pm
9371 spacer
>>9368
>There is also the important fact that overvalued or not, these things still have real value.
I have already explained why this is a mong opinion, and your response was feigned incredulity at my "jabbering" and changing the subject completely. You're a fucking simpleton. Let's try a different angle: go ahead and justify why "these things" have value, not based on people's willingness to pay for them, but based on this mysterious innate concept that only you understand.
>> No. 9372 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 12:06 am
9372 spacer
>>9371
>I have already explained why this is a mong opinion
No, you haven't.

>go ahead and justify why "these things" have value, not based on people's willingness to pay for them, but based on this mysterious innate concept that only you understand.
Not him, but here we go:

Metals have innate value because we can use them to make things. Houses have innate value because we can use them as shelter and storage. A telephone has innate value because we can use them to communicate over long distances (network permitting).

These things have uses, and it is that usefulness that drives their value.
>> No. 9373 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 12:12 am
9373 spacer
>>9372
None of those things are innate, they're just functions of what we choose to do with them. If we choose to trade in crypto then it has that value.
>> No. 9374 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 12:14 am
9374 spacer
>>9371
You want me to explain why a bricks and mortar house has more tangible value than an unbacked and unregulated meme currency that only exists to make already wealthy people even richer? Why the finite land and materials, associated labour and expertise required to build the house have value, and an economy of hucksters that can go belly up after a single Tweet, that not even its most obnoxious keyboard warriors can justify, does not? I just have.

And for the record that green text bollocks earlier wasn’t comprehensible. Plus you still haven’t given me a way in which crypto improves upon regular old pound sterling, USD and so on.

>>9370
You’re misunderstanding me. I’m not defending the exploitative mess of a system we currently live with, I’m just pointing out that the crypto-utopia shysters are proposing an even worse one. Another thing we’ve seen since earlier this century is that “move fast and break things” doesn’t inherently lead to better things. Creating an economy where anyone who isn’t a plugged in, well off, programmer is told “have fun staying poor”, where doubt in the fincialisation of everything is met with vicious scorn and currencies wildly inflate and deflate on a monthly basis is a dystopia. It’s the deepest nadir of a 40 year neoliberal experiment that no one in power will admit has failed, a final surrender to the idea that nothing will get better so just hope you get lucky instead. That is not a fate I am ready to accept, even if all I can do at this moment is chew the digital fat about it with you two.
>> No. 9375 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 12:35 am
9375 spacer
>>9372

You're describing the Marxist theory of "use value". There are many problems with this theory.

The usefulness of an object has essentially no correlation to the market price. Gold is much less useful than iron, but it has a higher price due to scarcity and desirability. Aluminium was briefly more valuable than gold, until the development of the Hall-Héroult process vastly reduced the cost of manufacture. Industrial-grade diamonds sell for a few pence per carat; gem-quality diamonds differ from industrial diamonds only in colour and clarity. Water is essential to life, but it is so cheap that we don't even think about the price; the same water that comes out of a tap becomes "worth" a quid if you put it in a plastic bottle. A litre of water that you pour down the sink without a moment's hesitation becomes priceless if you're dying of thirst.

Modern economists rely almost solely on the concept of revealed preference - people express how much they want something by how much they are willing to pay for it. If things do have an objective and intrinsic value that exists independently of context, then that value is impossible to quantify.

Does a dog have the buddha nature? If a tree falls in the forest while no-one is there, does it make a sound? What is the intrinsic value of a commodity? Mu. The only useful and meaningful concept of value is subjective, personal and contextual. Any attempt to tie the value of a commodity to labour, cost or essential utility immediately descends into a mass of contradictions. "A thing is worth whatever people are willing to pay for it" might seem facile, but it has the tremendous advantage of being true.
>> No. 9376 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 1:00 am
9376 spacer
I suppose what you could say is that crypto is a currency backed entirely by faith. All currency ultimately has to be backed by something, in the old days it was gold, nowadays it's oil or government bonds or something else that technically, in technically terms, can technically be said to ground that currency in financial reality (lol, there's an oxymoron, amirite?) and prove that it isn't just "made up".

But crypto is the first time, as far as I'm aware, that a currency expressly is made up, and we're just running with the concept of collective belief to power its value. The thing is, it might just work. Mind you, when I say "work", I don't mean do anything remotely beneficial for the world at large, but that's never been to point of currency has it. I mean purely in the functional sense of facilitating the exchange of goods and services, which it appears to do just fine at provided you can exchange it back into "real" money. The true test would be if it became widely enough accepted not to bother with that last step.
>> No. 9377 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 1:06 am
9377 spacer
>>9376

All modern money is just made up. The technical term is "fiat money". Most major currencies used to be backed by gold, but that turned out to be a bit of a crap idea, caused a massive crisis in the 1970s and led to everyone just giving up on the idea. Your money might say "I promise to pay the bearer on demand", but the Bank of England won't actually give you anything in return for your money. The only thing underpinning the value of a £10 note is the expectation that someone will exchange it for goods and services, and the fact that you need to pay your taxes in pounds sterling.
>> No. 9378 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 2:47 am
9378 spacer
>>9375
>The usefulness of an object has essentially no correlation to the market price.
Sound observation. Sadly, it has nothing to do with the point at hand, so the rest of your essay was something better targeted at your economics teacher.

The point is that ultimately all these other things that crypto people like to compare to are things which have intrinsic value, where crypto has none.

>>9376
>I suppose what you could say is that crypto is a currency backed entirely by faith.
Crypto is a currency backed entirely by bad faith. It is more or less the greater fool theory incarnate, and it appears they may be beginning to run out of fools.
>> No. 9379 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 2:49 am
9379 spacer
>>9378

> things which have intrinsic value

My entire point is that "intrinsic value" is a meaningless concept in economics.
>> No. 9381 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 4:57 am
9381 spacer
>>9375
>"A thing is worth whatever people are willing to pay for it" might seem facile, but it has the tremendous advantage of being true.
It also has the disadvantage that, if you take it seriously and don't apply any subjective, personal, contextual theory of value, you'll see no harm in swapping £1000 in cash for £1000 in Dogecoin. You'll have kneecapped your ability to identify a bigger-idiot scam because you've set up the assumption that nobody's an idiot and "overvaluation" is impossible.

That "common sense" or our lawyer-friends "reasonable person" aren't particularly useful for economic modelling or divining an 'objective' theory of value doesn't mean they should be dismissed in terms of stopping yourself or your friends being taken for a mug. For every person who rejected buying a ton of Bitcoin when it was under $1 there are surely 60 who got rugpulled on some shitcoin. Explaining that their revealed preference was to take the risk of acting like an idiot and throwing their money away is a neat party trick, but not much more.
>> No. 9382 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 5:18 am
9382 spacer
>>9379
Here's one just for the sake of devil's advocacy: intrinsic value is the value an object would have if parachuted into a Robinson Crusoe economy.
Bread has value because Crusoe can eat it. A television has value because it provides entertainment. A telephone has value, but only because Crusoe can play with it, use it for parts, set up a remote listening station, etc. Physical currency has value only for its pleasing appearance, and cryptocurrency is essentially worthless because it's not tangible and there's nobody to exchange it with.

This approach won't tell you price, but it's a tautological sleight of hand to say that an approach to value only has merit if it can be used to derive price. Some of the flaws the Crusoe approach has in deriving price (such as ignoring sign value) might well be considered appealing social commentary rather than glaring flaws.
>> No. 9383 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 9:26 am
9383 spacer
>>9382

Except only the bread has any value to Crusoe because neither telephones nor televisions were invented even in their most rudimentary states until at least a hundred years later so he'd have no idea what to do with them. Never mind his lack of access to power generation or the total absence of radiowaves. Those aren't intrinsic values at all.
>> No. 9384 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 9:41 am
9384 spacer
>>9383
>Except only the bread has any value to Crusoe because neither telephones nor televisions were invented even in their most rudimentary states until at least a hundred years later so he'd have no idea what to do with them. Never mind his lack of access to power generation or the total absence of radiowaves. Those aren't intrinsic values at all.

I think you've missed the point, spectacularly so. I assumed it was actually intentional until the last sentence, which implies you've got the none end of the stick.

Zeno can tell me that space is infinitely divisible and thus crossing it will take an infinite amount of time, and I will walk up to him before he's finished his sentence. You can telephone me that to let me know that bread has no intrinsic value while I'm filling my belly and you are starving.
>> No. 9385 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 9:50 am
9385 spacer
>>9384

You don't understand what intrinsic means.
>> No. 9386 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 10:03 am
9386 spacer
>>9385
>You don't understand what intrinsic means.
Thanks for the swift response. You're just smart enough to read a dictionary, but not smart enough to actually use the language. 'Intrinsic' to what, to whom?

You're (mis)using the word on its own and that's a clear demonstration that you're either a sophist or a fool, not that there's much difference there.

If you don't think food is of intrinsic value to a person (and 'person' is clearly the perspective from which we are assessing intrinsic value here) then I don't understand how you're still alive.
>> No. 9387 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 10:51 am
9387 spacer
>>9383
I'm not sure the point of the thought experiment that is a "Robinson Crusoe economy" is to imagine an economy in which we're literally dealing with the circumstances of the 18th century novel Robinson Crusoe.

But even if we are to indulge the idea that we're literally dealing with Crusoe, a telephone and a television would both have some trivial value - you can smash them up for a laugh, hurl them into the sea to watch the resulting splash, bonk a fish to death with the handset for some reason. If you introduce Crusoe to bitcoin all he'll do is go into a catatonic state for 3 days and then, upon apparent recovery, demand you get him the blueprints from the Manhattan project because God insists there's a terrible future he must prevent.
>> No. 9388 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 10:58 am
9388 spacer
>>9386

Intrinsic to someone with a gluten allergy and no electricity.
>> No. 9389 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 12:02 pm
9389 spacer
A gun has intrinsic value to someone who wants to shoot this arsehole in the face and kill him.
>> No. 9390 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 12:04 pm
9390 spacer
>>9389

And yet no value to someone who has a real rebuttal.
>> No. 9391 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 12:13 pm
9391 spacer
>>9390
I haven't posted itt since yesterday, but it's clear you're just a pedantic knob with no defence whatsoever of the currupting and malign world of crypto. That was the discussion people were attempting to have, instead you chose to derail into a world of minutiae and nitpicking.
>> No. 9392 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 12:40 pm
9392 spacer
>>9391
I'm not trying to defend "the currupting and malign world of crypto". I'm pointing out that "value" is a spook, a social construct, and not intrinsic.
>> No. 9393 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 1:22 pm
9393 spacer
>>9377
>Most major currencies used to be backed by gold, but that turned out to be a bit of a crap idea, caused a massive crisis in the 1970s and led to everyone just giving up on the idea.

Not to sound like a gold guy but you're wholly downplaying the factors that drove the abandonment of the gold standard. Stagflation and the collapse of Bretton-Woods were fundamentally driven by the Vietnam War and the US balance of payments crisis. Like the great powers before it, abandonment of the gold standard was driven by monetary issues that will over the long-term drive a system collapse when the US loses reserve currency status and we can't deliver artificial growth using interest rate shenanigans.

Nixon wasn't some Machiavellian genius - the US was overextended and had lost its competitive edge. Autism ticked because I'm not seething about cryptocurrency.
>> No. 9394 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 1:29 pm
9394 spacer
>>9392
For all your awareness of the social construction of value, you don't seem to be dwelling enough on the social construction of language itself. "Value" is just a sign. It doesn't have some mystical fixed uniquely-true definition. If value was only capable of referring to a social construct, magically joined at the hip to the price mechanism, it would not be as plausible as it is to define "intrinsic value" as "the utility provided by an object to a person who is outside society, on their own."
(And yes, you could define "society" in a way that lets you have a society of one. But I'd then have to define "society" as "piss off, I'm out.")
>> No. 9395 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 1:37 pm
9395 spacer
>>9394

You're right, "value" does not have some mystical fixed uniquely-true definition, like value itself, what it means (or is) emerges from context. And in this context, I am correct. So are you, though I think you've now widened the context.
>magically joined at the hip to the price mechanism
Agreed, but I wasn't talking about the price mechanism. Just "value".
>> No. 9396 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 2:13 pm
9396 spacer
>>9393

The reasons for the abandonment of the gold standard are immensely complex, but there's a good reason why 50 years later nobody has gone back. The collapse of Bretton Woods wasn't a sudden shock caused by exogenous factors, but the inevitable product of the shortcomings of the system. We tried to treat the symptom - fluctuations in exchange rates - without treating the underlying causes of economic instability. If it wasn't for the Nixon Shock, something else would have broken the agreement. Bretton Woods was a very clever but ultimately inadequate attempt to fix the fundamental problems with the gold standard that had already been revealed in the 20s and 30s.

We saw many of the same structural deficiencies in the Eurozone crisis; pegging exchange rates isn't a stabilising mechanism, it just creates the illusion of stability. The levers of control over money supply are just too useful.
>> No. 9398 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 3:36 pm
9398 spacer
Now, don't shout at me because I don't keep up with these things, but wasn't the point of crypto originally that the value cones from the effort it takes to mine them? The labour, if you will. Like that Marx fella was always on about.

What's happened since then is very interesting because it's a classic speculative bubble, exactly the same mechanism as classic comic books or retro videogames. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the same names and faces have skin in the game.

Also when you think about the fact many miners were stealing electricity to power their mining farms, a lot of cryptocurrency floating around out there in cyberspace is technically counterfeit, if you think about it.
>> No. 9399 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 4:44 pm
9399 spacer
>>9398
Most cryptocurrencies are designed to limit their supply, in order to maintain value. If everyone in the world could just click a button on a website to get 50 Bitcoins for nothing, then there would be no point in having 50 Bitcoins because everyone would have ten times as many. So they designed it such that this would not happen. If you're the only person in the world who wants them, you can do this, but the more people want them, the harder they are to get, by design. It's like an artificial scarcity. The labour to get them, sadly, is not very productive labour as I understand it, but they get harder to mine as they increase in value.
>> No. 9400 Anonymous
13th May 2022
Friday 6:36 pm
9400 spacer
>>9396
I might be misremembering, but didn't Keynes suspect Breton Woods was going to implode from the word go?
I know he had his own proposal where we'd have had a gold-related Standard named bancor (a name that's now been nicked for some crypto thing) where countries would've pegged their currencies to an international unit of account and countries that ran excessive trade surpluses would simply lose the money, encouraging them to spend it on imports and so keeping the system in balance. Oh, and you could only trade gold for bancor, not vice-versa. With Breton Woods on the other hand, everyone was pegged to the dollar, so America had both a privileged position and a unique weakness in having to trade international obligations against domestic ones.

That said, gold itself doesn't seem essential to either system. For either Bancor or Breton Woods, it seems more like a fig leaf to cover up that the system's really built on governments trusting one another. With the big policy appeal being less that it constrains monetary policy, and more that it practically requires some degree of capital controls, either explicitly or implicitly with how you wind up managing exchange rates through trade policy. (such as forcing multinationals to build a factory here if they want to sell their products because the alternative would be to hurt the trade figures.) Allowing you to bugger about with fiscal and monetary policy while relatively protected from punishment by international investors. (Not that any government's really wanted to do that since the 1980s.)
>> No. 9411 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 11:52 am
9411 spacer
To cash out bitcoin you have to find a buyer, to buy in you have to find a seller. but ..who's going to buy when the price is high? Who's going to sell when the price is low?
Is that why people call it a scam, becuase you're relying on people to panic and essentially 'not know' to panic sell or oportunity buy? Or is there a steady trade in coins around an average level, of which quantity spikes from time to time?
>> No. 9412 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 11:58 am
9412 spacer
>>9411
Finding a buyer or seller for a few million dollars of Bitcoin is as difficult as a Google search.
>> No. 9413 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 12:06 pm
9413 spacer
>>9411

You might as well be asking who would buy Apple stock when it's high.
>> No. 9414 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 12:09 pm
9414 spacer
>>9412
What about like £500 worth?
>> No. 9415 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 12:09 pm
9415 spacer
>>9413
Bitcoin don't exactly pay divendeds though do they.
>> No. 9416 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 12:11 pm
9416 spacer
>>9415

AMZN then. You get the point.
>> No. 9417 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 12:14 pm
9417 spacer
>>9414
You wouldn't even have to Google. If you own Bitcoin you'd already know.

>>9415
Nice try, but Bitcoin yields are an order of magnitude higher than Apple's dividends.
>> No. 9418 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 12:52 pm
9418 spacer
>>9412
>>9417
I used to play EVE online a fair bit and was reasonably confident in the markets there. I'd really like to know if real world comodity and bitcoin are at all similar to its system of offering buy and sell orders for the customer to accept. It'd make sense to me if you can offer to buy X bitcoin at Y price, for example. But I haven't looked into it because the setup seems a bit technical and my experience is limited to a videogame which makes me doubt its viability.
>> No. 9419 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 1:07 pm
9419 spacer
>>9411
As far as I can tell, there are enough people in the market always that there's always someone willing to take a punt. I have never cashed out shares or cryptocurrency and been told absolutely nobody anywhere is willing to pay. But then, I have used Coinbase or Vanguard who are presumably an extra level of intermediary who make such trades easier and more reliable. If you had the actual Bitcoins on a hard drive in your house, it might be harder, just like how I don't want to invest in gold because I don't want to have several grand's worth of gold sitting in my house, and I have no idea how I would sell it from there.
>> No. 9421 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 1:09 pm
9421 spacer
>>9419
Sending your Bitcoin from your hard drive to Coinbase takes 10-30 minutes.
>> No. 9422 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 1:47 pm
9422 spacer
>>9417

>Nice try, but Bitcoin yields are an order of magnitude higher than Apple's dividends.

That all depends. In a world of uncertainty, where stochastic expected value is a thing, nothing comes for free. Very high yields tend to be highly improbable, which in turn means that low yields and even substantial losses are much more likely. Sure, if you'd bought 1000 quid of Bitcoin in 2009 or 2010, you'd be a multi millionnaire, possibly a billionaire by now, but what were really the odds back then. Cryptocurrencies were a novel idea but which nobody could predict would take off the way it did. It was in the best sense of the word highly unlikely. Especially as basic volatility was near enough already what it was today. And look at the way valuations jigsaw, sometimes from one day to the next. If you got in at the ATH of $67K in November 2021, as I'm sure many people did because retail investors very often buy at the top in droves, then you're sitting on a 55% percent loss at the moment. Sure, it could just as well go up way past $67K again in the next bull run, but it's still a very volatile asset. If you're not prepared to take profound losses, temporary or not, then you shouldn't invest a single penny in cryptocurrencies.

Another thing is that it's IMO no coincidence that cryptos came to such widespread popularity in an environment of historically low interest rates that we had for over a decade. But as interest rates are now set to rise again in most leading economies, there will be other more risk-averse investment opportunities again. Which also means there is no guarantee that cryptocurrencies will replicate the kind of price action we've seen in the last 10 years.
>> No. 9423 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 2:00 pm
9423 spacer
>>9422
You're not understanding the conversation. We're not talking about price (though that is surely a far more salient variable in both instances). He's talking about dividends and I'm talking about yields or interest.
>> No. 9424 Anonymous
15th May 2022
Sunday 6:44 pm
9424 spacer
>>9421
Assuming no congestion and reasonable fees.

Also transacting on Coinbase takes 10-30 minutes, assuming they aren't having "technical difficulties" which are totally genuine and beyond their control and in no way just them preventing customers from benefiting from favourable market conditions.

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password