[bottlepalm]

Read my post, I said successful as a 'store of value' not 'electronic cash'.

Bitcoin is more akin to gold - an inflation resistant store of value. There is a premium for transacting it which means you should convert it into a more inflation prone transactional currency if you want to spend it.

[wpietri]

Well look at those goalposts move. Bitcoin's original purpose was precisely electronic cash: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

But if you'd like to shift focus to why "store of value" is also wrong, I'm glad to. A store of value needs to be more stable than the thing you're moving out of. It also needs to be relatively liquid, and should have low transaction costs. But Bitcoin is very volatile compared with major fiat currencies, and also when compared with gold. Transaction costs are relatively high. The market is thinly traded, and is widely believed to be manipulated. Gold, in contrast, is more liquid, cheaper to trade in, and much better regulated.

So no, Bitcoin doesn't make for a good store of value. People wanting to store value would generally be much better off buying index funds, which are also pretty inflation resistant, and also have a positive return. But if they want to avoid equity exposure, then the gold standard for this is, well, gold. Bitcoin is terrible by comparison.

[bottlepalm]

Again you're mixing up short term cash and long term store of value.

Cash you want stability, fast and low cost transactions - you pay for all those benefits with inflation.

A good long term store of value you will sacrifice a little of all those things for better inflation resistance.

Gold and index funds are also good for long term value storage, but index funds you can't really use as a medium for exchange, and gold is physical so not great for easy and quick transactions.

[wpietri]

You have ignored the central part of this: volatility. Bitcoin is not a good store of value. I don't have time for people who argue so misleadingly, so I'm done here.

[bottlepalm]

Cool, well the price of Bitcoin disagrees with you. Maybe you should think why after 10 years of the same tired arguments, Bitcoin is still going strong. How many years of success will it take for you to change your mind? Serious question.

[wpietri]

Again, it's not a success. And it's hilarious that a cryptowhatever advocate is trying to complain about tired arguments.

[mandevil]

BTC seems to be very interest rate dependent- it goes up when rates go down and down when rates go up. That is pretty much the opposite of an "inflation resistant store of value". It's financial behavior over the last ten years isn't that of a "inflation resistant store of value" its that of a "speculative, very risky investment."

Ideologically, to a certain type of person, it should be inflation resistant. The math says so! But the markets have judged it to not be so. So who are you going to trust? Your ideology or the market?

[bottlepalm]

What are you talking about, over the last 10 years Bitcoin has gone up in value substantially, while the Dollar has lost substantial value.

Interest rates affect all asset classes as obviously people are going to start moving money one way or another when the ROI for the dollar changes.

[fragsworth]

This site is full of people who are in a tech rat race, and the distribution has changed over time. It's now biased largely against crypto, and for reasons that I think are fairly clear:

Most of the users who would have agreed with you already got rich, because they understood the things you understand, and they don't use the site much anymore as a result (they are no longer in the rat race). They've mostly checked out.

So, because the people who remain on this site are those who never bought any, and people like to hear that they were right, the groupthink tends to be unrealistically negative about it.