[baberuth]

Can someone explain the velocity of money argument to me?

The blog post seems to be: 1. If btc are liquid, everyone will want to move btc wealth out to some other store of wealth and btc will fail. 2. If btc are illiquid, then it fails by definition. Currently btc are at this stage.

Here's why I don't get it: 1. If they ARE liquid and its easy to convert btc value to other value, why would everyone want to move value out of btc? seems like people would want to move value IN to btc because of the other benefits (anonymity, instantaneous transaction). Regardless, it doesn't follow that easy value conversion predicates value drain. 2. "Bitcoin seems to be at this stage [of being unable to convert Bitcoin assets into other, non-Bitcoin assets easily now]" -- this seems to be false. There's a highly liquid market for BTC-USD (21k btc have traded so far today). Yes, its not easy to transact 500k, but thats true for most new assets including exchange listed backed equities.

[tgrass]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_exchange

[baberuth]

sorry, I wasn't clear. I wasn't asking WHAT velocity of money is, I was asking someone to explain the author's velocity of money argument. i.e. transfering wealth out of btc accelerates the velocity.

q, m, v, and p remain relatively constant in that transaction unless the liquidity event causes a persistent decrease in the price level (no evidence that the current BTC market could support it, but also c.f. above my comments about immature markets and liquidity).

[tgrass]

My reading of his argument is that bitcoins primary function will be as a medium of exchange, not as a store of value. Thus when any indiviudal has a significant amount of bitcoins, he will convert them to an asset class that does store value.