Bitcoin as an asset not a currency

I’ll try to keep it short as I’m just a guy listening to Lex Friedman talking to Saifedean Ammous (Author of The Bitcoin Standard) and I’m not an Economist nor do I have a firm grasp on the subject of Economics.

I don’t think, contrary to a lot of belief, that BTC is designed to strictly become a decentralized currency to replace USD. I think its best use case is as an asset, like gold was before it, to back the currencies that already exist. The reason economic disparity is so prevalent is the way the Keynesian Economic model works and how it drives inflation, production, price and wages. When you have fiat currencies backed by nothing, there is nothing to stop the unlimited creation of it to solve financial problems. Fiat should always be be backed by some sort of stable or valuable asset to limit the amount it can be inflated.

Is there anybody that somewhat agrees with this? I think that if BTC was only meant to be pushed to topple the US Dollar as the driver of the World’s economy, it wouldn’t work too well for people that use it as currency, much like the guy who bought Papa John’s pizza with it. It would be much more effective and revolutionary if utilized as an asset that backs currency not a currency itself.

The blockchain can easily be used as the world’s ledger and peer-to-peer verification effectively cuts out greedy and predatory banks.

If I’m wrong, I’m wrong, but I can’t understand why people want this to be the new Liberty Dollar, which didn’t turn out so good.

View Source

13 thoughts on “Bitcoin as an asset not a currency”

  1. >I don’t think, contrary to a lot of belief, that BTC is designed to strictly become a decentralized currency to replace USD. I think its best use case is as an asset,

    These are two very different statements, you can argue BTC is better as an asset than currency, but you can not argue that it’s original design was to be used as a currency.

    Reply
  2. Bitcoin is designed to be “a peer-to-peer electronic cash system. There’s no arguing there because it’s literally on the Bitcoin whitepaper.

    However just like everything in life, things didn’t turn out that way. In fact, almost everyone wants Bitcoin to be an asset so they can profit from it.

    Reply
  3. Something can be an asset and a currency. In fact, any curency is also an asset if it has value and you hold it.

    Reply
  4. I don’t have an issue with backing fiat currencies. The problem with gold was that it was easy to fake balances, re-hypothecate, and manipulate. Hopefully Bitcoin can resist this better than gold.

    Reply
  5. I think Bitcoin is an Asset like Gold, but with greater utility because you could use Bitcoin easier as Gold for a currency. The most civilisations used Gold as a currency, but it is not as easy to verify if the Gold is real as it is to verify that you got the Bitcoin.

    Reply
  6. The store of value aka bitcoin is gold argument is a result of the difficulty of having large numbers of transactions settle on layer 1 and still have layer 1 be secure. You have to study that issue to know why circa 2016 bitcoiners switched to bitcoin=gold.

    Once people realized everything, not even a lot of things, could ever settle on the chain they switched to this new idea.

    Reply

Leave a Comment