Quote from @Dylan Barnard:
Quote from @Eric Carr:
Quote from @Dylan Barnard:
Quote from @Darnell Duncan:
I think it'd be naive to be so dismissive of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology. I understand the idea behind being skeptical about change, or anything that you're unfamiliar with, but it's pretty obvious there's a lot of value there.
At the end of the day, all investments are risks. Whether it's in real estate, stocks, business, cryptocurrency etc. What you decide to do should be based on your own situation and your own sense of risk management, not any one else's.
I think blockchain technology will be well apart of our future.
No one is dismissing the value of the technology, just the value of the coin itself. Like someone mentioned above, PayPal is using Blockchain - I can get behind that idea because they are a company with underlying cash flow and profits. But buying a coin just because you think it will go up in value is reckless in my opinion. There is a fine line between investing and gambling and buying a coin falls on the gambling side IMO.
Everyone is welcome to their opinion
What does PayPal do? It facilitates purchases and monetary transfers. Also does so using bitcoin.
What does bitcoin do? It is an immutable ledger on the most secure network on the planet, is censorship resistant, can't be manipulated or confiscated, hardest form of money ever known. And it facilitates purchases and instant instant money transfers - for free. And gives a person total ownership of their wealth. Seems pretty damn valuable to me.
The Internet is only valuable because of the company's I mentioned? I disagree. The Internet has value because it is valuable. For one, it allows people to send messages, music, pictures, instantly, video chat, and basically for free. Sound familiar?
And if it wasn't Google, Amazon, and the rest, it would be someone else. The Internet has always had inherent value.
However, there were people like Paul Krugman, who thought the Internet was a passing fad. There were lots of people and "analysts" and "investors" who thought Amazon would never survive. I believe most of the world thought that a stranger would never get into someone else's car nor rent someone's house over the Internet.
Do you see a pattern?
If you still don't believe owning a piece of the Internet is more valuable than a company that is built on top of it... Would you rather own a building in times square, or the entire block that everything is built on top of?
We are going to have to agree to disagree here man. You are talking in abstracts, I am talking in investment terms. I may be wrong and miss out on Bitcoin going to $1m, but you are deluding yourself if you don't think that comes with immense risk.
I think crypto enthusiasts need to decide whether they want it to be a currency or a technology. If it's a currency, massive appreciation is a recipe for massive deflation and a shrinking economy where people hoard money and don't invest it and nothing gets done. If it's a technology, then they need to provide some kind of return to the people that buy it. It can't be free for everyone to use like you are suggesting.
The purpose of a debate, for me, is not to hammer everyone into thinking my way.
So I'm definitely not trying to change your mind. Anyone who comes across this can read our thoughts here and make up their own.
I disagree that I'm speaking in abstracts. Buildings have a maintenance cost, yes? Some estimate 10% per year. They also require capital expenditures. They also become physically obsolescent over enough time. So the land underneath those buildings don't have maintenance costs. It doesn't become obsolete and it doesn't depreciate. If 10 buildings on times square fell down one day, that would be a major loss for the owners of those buildings. But if you owned the land underneath, you haven't lost anything.
Let's say in 5 years something better than Google comes along and Google is seen as obsolete. Does that make the Internet less valuable? No.
Yes, technology is deflationary. Inherently so.
Does it cost you 32 cents, or whatever a stamp costs, every time you send an email? I guess we could say to some degree that email has demonetized the USPS. I can name a 100 ways that technology has taken jobs, destroyed entire industries, made products and services cheaper and more abundant, and removed middlemen.
That's what people want. Convenience. And property ownership.
Somewhere around 2 or 3 months ago, someone sent $2Billion worth of bitcoin from one point to another. The total cost was $1.75. And done instantly, from the privacy of their own home, or whatever they wanted to be. They didn't have to drive to a bank branch, wait in line, fill out paperwork or send a fax, or discuss the details of a private transaction with a bank employee, and then wait a week for the money to arrive. imagine how difficult it would be to send 2 billion dollars over a bank wire. What do you think something like that would have cost?
People can decide whatever they want about it. Whether it's a currency or an asset. I look at it as property. And over the last 12 years, the greatest appreciating property that's ever existed. So I wouldn't spend it on PayPal or to buy coffee just as I wouldn't try to slice off a piece of an apartment building to pay for the same. Nor would I refinance to take money out and buy a car.
When did I say it comes without risk? Nor have I ever said it should be free to everyone.
There are many uses for it, including an actual cash return.
