Comment: Money

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: The explanation (see in situ)


In researching BitCoin, I have come to appreciate, for myself, that truly value is relative to utility and scarcity. If money is a medium of exchange, I am not convinced it is necessary for the medium to have intrinsic value. I believe we have grown up with the mindset that money is wealth. However, I would suggest money is just the medium for exchanging wealth. So when people say they have $100K in their bank account, they think they are wealthy. That is silly. Use the $100K to store it in real wealth (i.e. gold / silver / land).
People say they make money buying and selling gold. However, they are just making money on the transaction. The gold itself has not changed. In the same way, money exists on the speculation / potential side of the equation. The value of BitCoin resides in its utility. IMO it is an error to think it is a store of wealth. If you want to store wealth, use BitCoin to buy gold / silver / land. If you want to transfer wealth, sell you gold / silver / land for BitCoin, and transfer. It seems to me BitCoin has to, and will come into equilibrium. I can't see it going away, and I can't see it going to $0. But as a medium of transfer, why not? Are we to wait for the government to give us a better money? How insane is that? I don't get what we are wanting / waiting for? How do we create what is wanted? Wait for some "Rand Paul" to give us our rights/money, etc?