|
|
|
|
|
|
by wpietri
1067 days ago
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
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.