Bitcoin isn’t volatile, fiat is volatile which is why the fiat price of bitcoin looks volatile. As money shifts from fiat to bitcoin, the fiat denominated volatility will decrease.
And yes, you have to understand that it will be worth more, which forces you to spend wisely instead of being gluttonous.
>Bitcoin isn’t volatile.
This is what cryptards actually believe.
Bitcoin’s price fluctuates a lot. It’s volatile.
I really didn’t.
I have a hard time believing you genuinely think this is true.
"And yes, you have to understand that it will be worth more, which forces you to spend wisely instead of being gluttonous."
Ah yes I love an economy imploding due to runaway deflation.
but the price goes down
And so does everyone's income. Which means saving money is better than spending money, and people have less money. This encourages even more frugal behavior, creating a feedback loop. This results in people losing their incomes entirely as fewer and fewer jobs exist due to reduced demand.
Deflation via efficiency gain has never to my knowledge led to lower wages. People don't stop spending because they expect efficiency gain in the future, because at some point they just need food, their house, want the boat or the gaming system.
"Deflation" via business cycles and bank runs caused by Fiat money printing and contraction are not the same thing.
central banks always print to prevent deflation
no i mean the price of btc in usd goes down, overall trend is up but it fluctuates, only way it becomes stable is with stable adoption and i am not sure how that happens
Here, read a book 🤙 https://www.amazon.com/Price-Tomorrow-Deflation-Abundant-Future/dp/1999257405
I have a million better things to do with my time.
Your arguments are worth nothing if you aren’t able to even consider the other sides’ arguments.
“If you don’t believe me or don’t get it, I don’t have time to try to convince you, sorry.”
You literally cannot present an argument whatsoever. You can't even give a single response without citing someone else's work. Not even citing it, just mentioning it's mere existence.
Your inability to articulate anything in that book on your own demonstrates either your total failure to grasp the reasoning in that book, or that books total failure to present any argument more intellectual than beating you over the head with an idea for hundreds of pages until you accepted it out of attrition.
Damn, I must’ve hit a sensitive cord or something.
Basic premise:
Technology is deflationary and advancing at the most rapid pace ever which means we’re on the precipice of many people losing their jobs because of technological advancements. Instead of fighting that trend with artificial monetary policies propping up employment rates, furthering our indebtedness and widening wealth gaps, we can instead adapt to it and embrace it by getting rid of the current monetary system and using one that works hand in hand with the deflationary trend of technology. Will we all have jobs as we know them today? Nope, but we don’t need them if we have a money that isn’t constantly losing value. Instead, this opens the door to more specialization and “jobs” that we actually want to do, because we don’t need to be grinding at a shitty 9-5 working for every last penny just to keep a roof over our heads.
I don’t believe for a moment you have a realistic grasp of what technology can and cannot replace. You certainly don’t have a good concept of money.
You said something retarded and I explained why you are retarded lmao.
As for a deflationary currency being the solution to technology replacing jobs, that sounds extremely idealistic and unrealistic. Deflationary currencies concentrate wealth at the top even more than inflationary ones do, it's simple reasoning.
If sitting wealth increases in size exponentially, the people with the highest savings to income ratio (aka the people with the greatest income) will end up in possession of the vast majority of the currency in existence.
Generational wealth will grow exponentially for those at the very top, while the elimination of most jobs will mean that it will be harder for those at the bottom to work their way up.
The only way I can see such a system working is if everyone with wealth was willing to give charity and patronage to the masses in exchange for little to nothing of material value. Such a system is completely contrary to everything we can observe about human behavior.
That’s not necessarily true. The super rich do give a lot, sometimes the majority, of their money to charities. Even if they’re Jewish interest charities.
lol
I guess first, it should be clarified that bitcoin is disinflationary, not deflationary. Meaning, the supply does inflate, but every four years that rate is cut in half.
Second, the wealth concentration with these types of currencies throughout history occurred due to central control of those currencies. Those in power hoarded gold, and issued “gold backed” currencies. Since the wealthy controlled the actually money supply, the wealth gap grew.
But even if you look at income inequality from the era when the dollar was backed by gold, compared to when we stopped backing with gold, the gap widened tremendously.
We completely ditched gold backing in 1971.
Next time one of you suggests a scam book instead of giving your own argument I am going to rape a random woman and it will be your fault, gorilla nigger.
Great Depression 2.0 could be interesting.
What if you become poor?
Poverty is a mindset.
Lolwut
Bitcoin has a regular and predictable issuance schedule. The only volatility is how it’s traded against other assets measured by other assets.
Quantity of bitcoin is one thing.
Purchasing power of bitcoin is another. The value of bitcoin in dollars is another.
Volatility, by definition, measures changes in asset prices. In order to determine these asset prices you need to have metrics of relative value.
If you measure bitcoin in bitcoin, you can’t measure volatility.
Lolwut
