| > Gold has some intrinsic value. If nothing else, it has some industrial uses. The value of gold is not based on its intrinsic industrial uses. It shares this characteristic with bitcoins. > So owning AAPL shares does come with obligations from Apple. Not in the sense OP used. He was very explicit: > One is that they are convertible into something else, another is that the issuer will accept them as final means of payment from his debtors. Apple stock is not convertible on demand into gold or cash, nor is Apple obligated to accept Apple stock in payment of its debts. By OPs definitions, Apple stock is not a financial instrument, and thus has no value. (Note: Of course, as ever, OP has used an incorrect definition, but that's neither here nor there.) But again, according to OP Apple stock is not a financial instrument; it shares this characteristic with bitcoins. > You can pay debts and taxes in euros. No, I actually can't, no more than I can pay them in bitcoins. If I had some Euros I could trade them for my local currency and use that to pay my debts and taxes, but the same is true for bitcoins. We can argue that the market for euros is much more stable and liquid than the market for bitcoins (very true!), but this is a difference of degree, not a difference of kind. The differences between bitcoins and gold, euros, or Apple shares are real and significant, but OP has failed to articulate them. |