Peter Schiff keeps claiming that for something to be a store of value, it first needs to be valuable.

To be valuable, according to him, that something needs to be useful to someone.

He says gold has value because jewelers want it to make jewelry out of it, etc.

He claims that, even if you don't or can't use gold to make it onto jewelry or use it in any other industrial ways, gold is still valuable because, someone who can will want to buy it from you, in the future.

He then proceeds to say #Bitcoin has no value because it has no use.

Well... Maybe #Bitcoin has no use, for him, because of his financial & monetary privilege, but it sure is of use to those who want to:

- transact online or globally, but are unbanked

- escape with it, fleeing war

- have their purchasing power grow over time, but can't access investment accounts

- store their purchasing power securely, when their local currency is inflated or confiscated by the bank/government

- etc.

So, by his definition of what something needs to do to have value, #Bitcoin actually has value

Not to him, but to hundreds of millions of people in the world, who are not as privileged as he is.