Nostr Web Client

Bitcoin is $0.02. you started with 100 btc, spent 50 Bitcoin and immediately replaced your 50 btc right away with a cash purchase. You're out one DOLLAR. The US Dollar you spent to replace the 50 Bitcoin.

But you still have 100 btc!

If you presume that IF you HADN'T bought the $1 pizza then you WOULD HAVE spent that US Dollar on MORE bitcoin, then sure - in that world you would have had 150 btc. but if you instead just BOUGHT ZERO PIZZA and did nothing else, you'd still have 100 Bitcoin. Not 150!

Where am I wrong here?

SLCW 1y ago

First, just to make this known, I'm not arguing that I'm out $400k because I bought the pizza.

I'm arguing that had I not bought the pizza, the coins I retained by not spending them at that time would have made my current stack value $400k more than what it is. Because the only two things I have actually purchased with Bitcoin in my whole life are that pizza, and some gold bullion. Otherwise, I still have all the bitcoin I've purchased from 2011 thru the present.

That means my current stack today would have been worth +4 BTC had I not purchased the pizza. Whether I bought more to replace the 4 BTC is irrelevant.

The bottom line is that my stack is currently 4 BTC less than what it would have been had I not bought the pizza, and that translates to $400k less in value at current prices. That is the totality of my claim, and perspective.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

vinney...axkl 1y ago

You can't just say "whether or not I replaced the Bitcoin is irrelevant" - that is *specifically* the topic we're talking about...Namely, IF spend and replace would have kept your stack unchanged.

And the answer is very clearly "yes, it would have been unchanged" as you can see in my directly above illustration.

The only way that would not hold is if you were, back then, planning on buying Bitcoin INSTEAD of pizza (as opposed to **in addition to** - which is the definition of spend and replace) with those same dollars that went to the pizza (the timing of the dollars is highly relevant, of couse).

SLCW 1y ago

And this is exactly where it's about a difference in perspective. I my view, whether or not you replace what you spent, the value of your current holdings will always be minus whatever you have spent.

But in your perspective, if you replace what you spent, you're in the same position that you would have been had you not spent it.

Its two equally valid ways to look at the situation, and the difference in perspective isn't a basis for an oppositional argument, because both can be seen to be factually correct.

We don't need continue arguing about it because what we are arguing is a matter subjective perspective.