You can say whatever you like; it's still never gonna happen. 🤙

No, no one can control the price of #bitcoin.

No one can make more bitcoin and there is no way to know if a Country or a company is going to start buying bitcoin.

There is no way to know when small businesses or groups of people around the world will start buying more bitcoin.

Discourse on Bitcoin's price stability often overlooks its decentralized nature, rendering attempts by large entities to peg its value-whether to gold or a fixed dollar amount-futile. Historical precedents, from Roman coinage to the Medici banking collapse, reveal centralized assets like gold succumb to capture and manipulation, whereas Bitcoin's fixed supply and global, permissionless market ensure it flows to long-term holders, reinforcing its role as an incorruptible store of value.

Any effort to control its price only accelerates its distribution to stronger hands, as its value derives not from centralized dictate but from subjective, free-market dynamics rooted in scarcity and sovereignty.

Bitcoin demonetizes gold. Beyond your claims, including your claims of being educated on bitcoin, you should study bitcoin more. Or keep trying to guess the price or how people will set the price of bitcoin. Good luck.

Assertions that gold's role as a store of value (SoV) predates fiat currency and persists independently of it overlooks the historical mechanisms through which gold's monetary role has consistently intertwined with centralized control and, ultimately, fiat systems.

While gold's inherent properties: scarcity, divisibility, portability, and near-universal desirability have long positioned it as a preferred medium of exchange and SoV, these same attributes render it vulnerable to capture and manipulation, fostering centralization that paves the way for fiat-like systems.

My argument is not that gold lacks value absent fiat but that its practical application as money throughout history reveals a paradox: its strengths enable its adoption, yet its physicality ensures its capture, leading to systems of control that mirror or evolve into fiat arrangements. Historically, gold's role as a SoV has been inseparable from power dynamics.

From the Roman Empire's aureus to

medieval European coinage, gold's concentration in the hands of rulers, conquerors, and elites often through war, tribute, or monopolistic mining enabled its use as a tool of centralized authority.

The spoils of conquest, such as the influx of New World gold into Spain during the 16th century, illustrate this capture.

The resulting supply shock fueled inflation, destabilizing economies across Europe, as documented by historians like Fernand Braudel, who noted price increases of 300-400% in Spain over a century.

Similarly, the California Gold Rush of 1848-1855 disrupted monetary stability, flooding markets with gold and undermining its purchasing power locally.

These examples counter claims that gold's supply growth has consistently been outpaced by productivity.

While human productivity has indeed grown, gold's supply is neither predictable nor stable; technological advancements in mining (e.g., hydraulic mining in the 19th century or modern cyanide leaching) and transportation (e.g., transatlantic trade routes) have repeatedly introduced supply shocks, altering its scarcity and value in localized economies.

The purchasing power of gold depends not only on economic activity outpacing supply growth but also on the absence of manipulation.

Gold's physical nature makes it prone to adulteration (e.g. debasement with base metals, as seen in Roman and Byzantine coinage) and centralized control, whether by mints, banks, or governments.

The emergence of fractional reserve banking in the 17th century, rooted in goldsmiths issuing receipts for gold they held, directly ties gold to fiat-like systems.

These receipts, circulating as currency, often exceeded physical gold reserves, creating a proto-fiat mechanism prone to overissuance and crises, evidenced by the collapse of early banking houses like the Medici.

This historical trajectory demonstrates that gold's use as money facilitates centralized systems of credit and control, which are precursors to modern fiat currencies.

To dismiss concerns about gold's vulnerabilities as "simple forgery", underestimates the systemic implications.

Adulteration, hoarding, and monopolistic control are not mere aberrations but intrinsic to gold's physicality.

Unlike a purely digital or decentralized asset, gold's verifiability requires trust in intermediaries mints, assayers, or banks which invites manipulation.

The transition from gold-backed to fiat currencies in the 20th century, culminating in the abandonment of the gold standard in 1971, was not an anomaly but a culmination of gold's limitations: its centralization enabled governments to shift to fully fiat systems, unmoored from physical constraints yet built on the trust gold once commanded.

The supply shocks, coupled with technological shifts in mining and transport, have repeatedly disrupted gold's stability as an SoV.

These flaws, capture, manipulation, and erratic supply mean that gold's role as money, while enduring, is neither independent of nor immune to the centralized, fiat-like systems it engenders.

Far from being a stable SoV in isolation, gold's history reveals a cyclical pattern of concentration and control, challenging the notion that it stands apart from fiat dynamics.

Also, study Austrian economics, value is always subjective.

Through remembering 12 words, bitcoin offers borderless, nationstate resistant, incorruptible money with no physical encumbrance.

Nothing else on Earth can or ever has been able to provably make that claim.

The ability to send money anywhere on earth instantly with no intermediary and almost no fees, combined with the ability to move massive wealth anywhere in 15 minutes cheaply with no physical encumbrance is valuable.

What would it cost to move gold and how long would it take? Security, crossing boarders, its weight, all add to transport cost.

How about someone leaving a war zone, in a dangerous part of town, a refugee or anyone crossing a border. What's safer, 12 words or carrying gold?

Worth looking into the human rights foundation to see how bitcoin has helped dissidents and people escaping atrocities around the world.

Anybody who wants sovereign savings will value bitcoin, regardless of your thoughts on it.

If you don't believe bitcoin is verifiable and unstoppable, study it and learn.

If you're curious or think the assertions made about bitcoins capabilities could be valuable if true but you're skeptical, find out for yourself to know for sure. Conviction comes from education and seeking truth.