Replying to Deleted Account

IMO these are just anticipated road blocks anyone could have thought about years ago.

BRICS even in best case hold as much physical gold as the EU for example. Would you therefore say if the EU inflates and reevaluated their gold, bitcoin would therefore become irrelevant? Quite the opposite.

Just let these numbers sink in:

—-

The overall global payments industry revenue was approximately $3.3 trillion in 2023, reflecting the scale of transaction fees, infrastructure, compliance, and processing costs combined.

Cross-border payment costs are notably high, with average fees ranging from 1% to over 5% of transaction value depending on the corridor and payment type, contributing a large share to total industry expense.

—-

Sure gold won’t lose all its value over night to btc. But the fact that especially BRICS aren’t aligned yet in a single market and currency, and have to rely on neutral gold vaults is the perfect example.

And what is it with the obsession with “you have to spend your btc and others have to accept it”?

In hyper inflation states you want to spend the inflating money as fast as possible and hold on to the appreciating one for later. Doesn’t mean you CAN’T spend it but why would you.

The invention of the internet took more than 40 years to add about 2 trillion to global GDP. That was in 2010. Today it’s about 16 trillion and still just 3.4%

Until 2010 this was basically just Emails on steroids. Look what then happened.

And when you think about a future integrated with AI gold vaults and 2% margins for payment systems won’t be profitable.

nostr:nevent1qqsg6uurjfwsedrnxg7dlsjzdsu09v9zmu53gcnxgyw3nrt6znpzpfspzemhxue69uhkummnw3ezu6rfve5hx6pwdaexw0kcn8c

My post is more about the "mission of BTC" while others like to focus on BTCs tradable value.

However I can argue that if Bitcoin mission fails so will its value over time.

Walk with me for a moment as I flesh out the problem in a timeline.

At the moment in the US public companies and ETFS alone are holding 25% of total supply, another 40% is ownes by American individuals. Thats 65% American not even including Europe. Thats at least 70% of the total bitcoin supply thats legally under the pervue of the US government and Fed, thats one executive order away from freezing coinbase accounts and canceling an easy off ramp to fiat.

How can BTC be close to a global reserve currency when over 7 billion people have no need or want for it. The Western bitcoiners are obsessed that BTC has to win but what im challenging everyone to ask themselves is, how relevant is BTC if 90% of the planet is building a new world without it or need for it?

My guess is that if we were have a World War the US dollar wont mean much and the systems westerners want to implement may not be as appealing as they think they are to governments around the world as they imagine especially if its all locked up under the control of a few entities in the US.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

The Bitcoin white paper doesn’t claim Bitcoin’s mission as becoming a global reserve currency—that’s just a possible outcome. Its core mission is to enable peer-to-peer electronic cash transactions without needing a trusted third party.

About 15% of bitcoin supply is held under American jurisdiction, and your arguments involve many uncertainties.

For an unbanked person in sub-Saharan Africa, the choice will be what is easiest and cheapest for them, which often is bitcoin despite owning fewer sats. They might use digital yuan or USDT temporarily, but if it inflates, they’ll move on.

The Chinese yuan’s M2 money supply is around $46 trillion USD, backed by gold, while Bitcoin is worth about one-twentieth of that. Also, a digital yuan system carries similar counterparty risks linked to government control.

Not saying that your arguments are wrong entirely, but they sound a bit doom and gloom to me.