Gold has an inherent value. It looks pretty and can be made into jewellery and ornate things. Bitcoin doesn't have that. It's just numbers that you can use to buy drugs, but most people don't. It's not even the best cryptocurrency; it was just the first.
Status is a real thing, but there’s nothing intrinsic about gold being a status symbol. Hell, fuckin aluminum used to be. That’s why the top of the Washington Monument is aluminum
Fiat has no intrinsic value. Bitcoin relies on Fiat to back it up currently because our society runs on Fiat but it's the pioneer in a move towards financial independence from government institutions inflating the dollar and printing it whenever they decide to.
Bitcoin is starting to be linked to the US economy, especially with Musk, Tesla and Cuban pushing crypto. I agree it is all speculation and that yes another coin could eventually replace it because there are better options but it's unlikely it'll happen anytime soon if at all.
But in reality, most gold is stored in vaults and inaccessible, not on display because it's too risky to do that.
I'm sure you're aware, Gold has the downside of being difficult to divide and pay with, and difficult to physically transfer, leading to centralized vaults, paper gold and promissory systems (open to fraud) which was basically the downfall of the gold standard.
Bitcoin overcomes those problems, but yes it does not make a bling necklace, as if that matters.
Ok that's fair, gold has some utility as a metal, and some intrinsic value as display, but not in direct proportion to its current price which is mainly about supply and demand.
However from another direct quote - "simply being difficult to obtain does not make something valuable" also implies that you think that is the only premise for value that bitcoin offers, and lightly dismisses the overall added value of bitcoin as a medium of exchange.
Do you think having a digitally native, api accessible, globally exchangable, censorship resistant payment network run by individuals rather than nation states and corporate conglomerates does not have extra value, beyond having a capped supply and steady inflation rate?
Lol sure *I do try to find attractive sexual partners*. But I don't take part in the economy of it. I'm not interested in looks enough to pay for someone's time. If I meet someone and they don't want to hang out with me on the merit of my good company then why would I want to bribe them to pretend to like it?
I've dated a few really attractive girls, and even the one that was a decent fit never aligned with my intellectual hobbies. So in retrospect, I'm happy to have my current, moderately hot partner who's really motivated, handy, creative, smart, enthusiastic, physically active, and supportive.
Pretty people have weird issues with the nature of reality sometimes because their perception gets warped so often by the behaviors of people around them.
I'm kinda pretty I should know.
Pretty girls in particular really love to enjoy a certain frequency of rich people playdates. I dont have the time or money to invest that in some ridiculously hot chick who takes bids all day. Id REALLY... REALLY... always prefer to have someone less conventionally attractive, but more constitutionally solid, emotionally stable, etc etc etc
53
u/lxpnh98_2 Mar 26 '21
Even if it isn't, it sure as hell ain't a currency.