exp said:

---

Nothing stops Russia or anyone from doing that other than their own will and power to do it (access to resources required etc)

Good or bad are subjective things I don't care to dissect in this regard. Bitcoin is money for you and for your enemies. That's the nature of truly neutral money.

People that are not miners will adopt Bitcoin in an effort to separate money from state and preserve their own wealth.

---

Just how much wealth would people be able to preserve? The numbers show that at today's price of bitcoin, if all 21 million were available there would be only an average equivalent of just over $1,000 for every person in the United States.

Even if bitcoin somehow reached a price of $1 million (making a satoshi worth a penny) it would work out to an equivalent of roughly $60,000 for each person in the U.S. That's less than today's U.S. readily available money supply. Bad news Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos.

Add in the Russians and the rest of the world and you're talking $1 million bitcoins offering something on the order of $2,600 for each person, including Vlad Putin and Muhammad bin Salmon. Bet they'd hate it.

aTmAg said:

---

Buzzy said:

---

I'm just curious, why do you think bitcoin is a dead end?

---

Because it was designed to be money and it has shown to be completely terrible at that. So much so that even many proponents who used to claim otherwise now agree with me on it. Meanwhile it has no alternate uses. So that now makes it 100% useless.

That's like "investing" in cars that are rusted out to the point that it cannot even be scrapped for materials. The only way you can make money off of them is if you can convince somebody else to pay more for than you did. That is simply a dead end investment. Even if there are people stupid enough to buy these cars, eventually somebody will get stuck holding the bag.

Good investments need to be fundamentally useful to somebody. Bitcoin is not.

---

Thank you for presenting a logical argument.

My only issue is with your final statement: Bitcoin is useful to criminals. I'll argue it will always be useful to criminals because it allows for transfer of value electronically in an accepted format. As long as the ability to convert bitcoin to cash exists (so there is always some value), bitcoin will continue to be useful to criminals.

And the only reason Party A will give cash to Party B in exchange for bitcoin is because Party A thinks Party C will give more cash.

Buzzy said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Buzzy said:

---

I'm just curious, why do you think bitcoin is a dead end?

---

Because it was designed to be money and it has shown to be completely terrible at that. So much so that even many proponents who used to claim otherwise now agree with me on it. Meanwhile it has no alternate uses. So that now makes it 100% useless.

That's like "investing" in cars that are rusted out to the point that it cannot even be scrapped for materials. The only way you can make money off of them is if you can convince somebody else to pay more for than you did. That is simply a dead end investment. Even if there are people stupid enough to buy these cars, eventually somebody will get stuck holding the bag.

Good investments need to be fundamentally useful to somebody. Bitcoin is not.

---

Thank you for presenting a logical argument.

My only issue is with your final statement: Bitcoin is useful to criminals. I'll argue it will always be useful to criminals because it allows for transfer of value electronically in an accepted format. As long as the ability to convert bitcoin to cash exists (so there is always some value), bitcoin will continue to be useful to criminals.

---

Well that is just another knock against it. That provides government an excuse to ban it's use within the country outright.

And before BTC dudes claim that the government can't ban it, they can ban every American retailer from accepting it. And all they have to is have agents try to buy stuff with bitcoin and impose huge fines when any of them accept it.

aTmAg said:

---

Buzzy said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Buzzy said:

---

I'm just curious, why do you think bitcoin is a dead end?

---

Because it was designed to be money and it has shown to be completely terrible at that. So much so that even many proponents who used to claim otherwise now agree with me on it. Meanwhile it has no alternate uses. So that now makes it 100% useless.

That's like "investing" in cars that are rusted out to the point that it cannot even be scrapped for materials. The only way you can make money off of them is if you can convince somebody else to pay more for than you did. That is simply a dead end investment. Even if there are people stupid enough to buy these cars, eventually somebody will get stuck holding the bag.

Good investments need to be fundamentally useful to somebody. Bitcoin is not.

---

Thank you for presenting a logical argument.

My only issue is with your final statement: Bitcoin is useful to criminals. I'll argue it will always be useful to criminals because it allows for transfer of value electronically in an accepted format. As long as the ability to convert bitcoin to cash exists (so there is always some value), bitcoin will continue to be useful to criminals.

---

Well that is just another knock against it. That provides government an excuse to ban it's use within the country outright.

And before BTC dudes claim that the government can't ban it, they can ban every American retailer from accepting it. And all they have to is have agents try to buy stuff with bitcoin and impose huge fines when any of them accept it.

---

Because criminals are really sensitive to what the government bans, right? I don't think criminals are using BTC at American retailers to purchase goods so don't think that will affect anything. As long as a method to convert BTC to cash exists, BTC will exist.

The dollar is still the market share leader when it comes to currency used in scams. Thats partially a function of it being the most widely used currency in the world but I would be very interested to see credible stats supporting the narrative that Bitcoin is primarily used by criminals and scam artists. I don't believe the data exists and the argument is rarely made in good faith.

Regardless of whether it's true or not true, it's not a convincing knock against bitcoin. It's merely a trade off/side effect of it being tough to control and track.

Pepper Brooks said:

---

The dollar is still the market share leader when it comes to currency used in scams. Thats a partially a function of it being the most widely used currency in the world but I would be very interested to see someone provide credible stats supporting the narrative that Bitcoin is primarily used be criminals and scam artists. I don't believe the data exists and the argument is rarely made in good faith.

---

Straw man. No one has said this.

Buzzy said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Buzzy said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Buzzy said:

---

I'm just curious, why do you think bitcoin is a dead end?

---

Because it was designed to be money and it has shown to be completely terrible at that. So much so that even many proponents who used to claim otherwise now agree with me on it. Meanwhile it has no alternate uses. So that now makes it 100% useless.

That's like "investing" in cars that are rusted out to the point that it cannot even be scrapped for materials. The only way you can make money off of them is if you can convince somebody else to pay more for than you did. That is simply a dead end investment. Even if there are people stupid enough to buy these cars, eventually somebody will get stuck holding the bag.

Good investments need to be fundamentally useful to somebody. Bitcoin is not.

---

Thank you for presenting a logical argument.

My only issue is with your final statement: Bitcoin is useful to criminals. I'll argue it will always be useful to criminals because it allows for transfer of value electronically in an accepted format. As long as the ability to convert bitcoin to cash exists (so there is always some value), bitcoin will continue to be useful to criminals.

---

Well that is just another knock against it. That provides government an excuse to ban it's use within the country outright.

And before BTC dudes claim that the government can't ban it, they can ban every American retailer from accepting it. And all they have to is have agents try to buy stuff with bitcoin and impose huge fines when any of them accept it.

---

Because criminals are really sensitive to what the government bans, right? I don't think criminals are using BTC at American retailers to purchase goods so don't think that will affect anything. As long as a method to convert BTC to cash exists, BTC will exist.

---

Except that once BTC is banned, the use of it would dwindle to ONLY criminals, and the government would use it's resources to trace every large transaction and find wallet owners. In short, criminals would be putting targets on their backs that they don't want.

If the US government banned BTC, it would simply flourish in every other nation that accepts it. How do you 'ban' something you don't control?

If the government possessed this magical ability to track all crime and transactions resulting from crime, there would be no crime.

I honestly don't know if you're arguing just to argue at this point or if you honestly are naive enough to believe the government can track all crypto transactions.

I'm not sure who has the power to actually ban bitcoin, but it's a very small number of players.

You can definitely crack down on mining activities as China has done multiple times. This pushes legitimate folks out of the country to safer shores but even then some will take the risk and simply go underground.

I have no idea how a government would ban transacting in BTC. You can pass the law of course but I don't see any mechanism for enforcement at all, nor do I see how it would stand up to argument regarding constitutionality.

There is no central bank to raid. There is no one to hold accountable. It would take massive coordination across the globe and I just don't see how it could happen.

Such a decision would also represent a massive opportunity for any nation(s) willing to embrace BTC.

Buzzy said:

---

If the US government banned BTC, it would simply flourish in every other nation that accepts it. How do you 'ban' something you don't control?

---

If it's not flourishing now, then why would if flourish after one of the largest consumers and producers in the world banned it?

Quote:

---

If the government possessed this magical ability to track all crime and transactions resulting from crime, there would be no crime.

---

Where did I say they would track all crime? Tracking the use of bitcoin after a ban would be a tiny portion of crime, and would be easy compared to other crimes.

Quote:

---

I honestly don't know if you're arguing just to argue at this point or if you honestly are naive enough to believe the government can track all crypto transactions.

---

First of all, after a ban, the use of bitcoin would dwindle to nearly nothing. Secondly, they track WAY more than that right now already. What makes you think it would be hard?

Buzzy said:

---

Pepper Brooks said:

---

The dollar is still the market share leader when it comes to currency used in scams. Thats a partially a function of it being the most widely used currency in the world but I would be very interested to see someone provide credible stats supporting the narrative that Bitcoin is primarily used be criminals and scam artists. I don't believe the data exists and the argument is rarely made in good faith.

---

Straw man. No one has said this.

---

You're right but the discussion you were having was similar to the narrative I referred to. It is very popular among anti-Bitcoin talking heads in govt, on Twitter, Reddit, etc. I was trying to get ahead of where I thought the discussion was trending.

I believe your premise to be flawed. Most long term holders/buyers of Bitcoin are doing so to hedge against government currency manipulation and censorship.

The US govt banning mining, or BTC outright, would legitimize the paranoia of the BTC fanboys and I predict you'd start to see dormant wallets use it more as a medium of exchange. That's in addition to a store of value.

Yes, the hash rate would plummet for a short time but it would eventually recover as mining power moved to more friendly jurisdictions. That's what happened in 2020-21 when China banned it.

Pepper Brooks said:

---

I believe your premise to be flawed. Most long term holders/buyers of Bitcoin are doing so to hedge against government currency manipulation and censorship.

The US govt banning mining, or BTC outright, would legitimize the paranoia of the BTC fanboys and I predict you'd start to see dormant wallets use it more as a medium of exchange. That's in addition to a store of value.

Yes, the hash rate would plummet for a short time but it would eventually recover as mining power moved to more friendly jurisdictions. That's what happened in 2020-21 when China banned it.

---

You don't have to "ban Bitcoin" between people, you just have to ban major companies from accepting it as payment. That's pretty easy to do with all the reporting and IRS stuff companies have to do. It's way easier to audit what companies accept online payment through Bitcoin than it is to try and track Bitcoin.

Pepper Brooks said:

---

I believe your premise to be flawed. Most long term holders/buyers of Bitcoin are doing so to hedge against government currency manipulation and censorship.

---

Again, that is a very poor choice for that. There are many other places to hedge against that which is better than bitcoin.

Quote:

---

The US govt banning mining, or BTC outright, would legitimize the paranoia of the BTC fanboys and I predict you'd start to see dormant wallets use it more as a medium of exchange. That's in addition to a store of value.

---

The only way for it to become a legitimate medium of exchange is for it to be stable. I think the only way that happens is if a major government, like the US or China to adopt it as their own currency. That would make the value shoot way up, and then speculation would be a tiny percentage of that overall value. Most of it's value would be as money, which is a legitimate use for it.

Quote:

---

Yes, the hash rate would plummet for a short time but it would eventually recover as mining power moved to more friendly jurisdictions. That's what happened in 2020-21 when China banned it.

---

I think that if the US bans, it then it would be a part of the entire western world banning it. Then you would have Caribbean islands doing the mining, and that would have the same shady reputation as many Caribbean banks are today.

We will have to agree to disagree on your first comment.

You misunderstand the workings of the protocol, the role of miners, and have little to add to the discussion if you believe your last paragraph to be accurate.

Quote:

---

If it's not flourishing now, then why would if flourish after one of the largest consumers and producers in the world banned it?

---

For the same reason the drug trade isn't flourishing in the US....oh wait.


You seem to be really stuck on this idea that if America makes it illegal that BTC will somehow disappear despite all evidence to the contrary.

Do you know what would happen if the federal government came out tomorrow and declared 'a war on crypto'? The same thing that has happened in the war on poverty, war on crime, and war on drugs.

Pepper Brooks said:

---

We will have to agree to disagree on your first comment.

You misunderstand the workings of the protocol, the role of miners, and have little to add to the discussion if you believe your last paragraph to be accurate.

---

Please... The USG has already confiscated BTC and arrested plenty of people.

Didn't buy bitcoin. I held Etherium for a few years…and wish I hadn't

Digital beanie babies.

Buzzy said:

---

Quote:

---

If it's not flourishing now, then why would if flourish after one of the largest consumers and producers in the world banned it?

---

For the same reason the drug trade isn't flourishing in the US....oh wait.

---

There is natural demand for drugs as people get high on them and they are addictive as hell. What such demand is there to use BTC? None. As it is unable to serve any real purpose. Do you really think that if government banned bottled farts, that there would suddenly be an boom in the bottled fart market? Hell no.

Quote:

---

You seem to be really stuck on this idea that if America makes it illegal that BTC will somehow disappear despite all evidence to the contrary.

---

There is no evidence to the contrary, as your analogies are invalid. There used to be many alternate currencies. They were banned. And guess, what? They are all gone.

Unlike drugs, BTCs only possible utility is to be a currency. To be currency requires widespread and universal usage. Which BTC doesn't even have today when it is legal. If it was banned, and people were fined for using it, then its current pathetic usage rate would shrink even more not grow. That is the death nail for any currency.

Quote:

---

Do you know what would happen if the federal government came out tomorrow and declared 'a war on crypto'? The same thing that has happened in the war on poverty, war on crime, and war on drugs.

---

Again a bogus analogy. It would be the same thing that happened when they banned a crap-ton of currencies at the end of the wildcat banking era. Or subsequent currencies (such as the Liberty dollar). They were resoundingly successful at it. They never had to go in with guns and destroy printing presses, they merely just had to tax them and they all went away. For BTC to be a legit currency it would have to be the #1 alternative in the area. It takes almost nothing to make it #2 or lower. Hell, we don't ban using Euros, Pounds, Yen, etc. in America, yet nobody uses them. Because they don't surpass the widespreadness threshold. It would be trivial to do that to BTC. And unlike drugs and crime, there is literally zero benefit to "customers" for BTC.

We're back to my original point, which is that BTC has a utility for criminals as an accepted storage of value that is transferable.

You seem really really invested in the idea that bitcoin is useless and therefore worthless, which is your prerogative, but you have not refuted my original point.

All you're doing right now is digging your heels in on scenarios where it might become worth less (not worthless) if XYZ happens. The problem with you "if American bans it, bitcoin will collapse' thesis is America does not set the standard for cryptocurrency worldwide.

Your point about euros actually underlines my point, it doesn't matter if American businesses don't accept euros when they're accepted as currency in other countries, especially in a whole other continent. As long as euros are accepted elsewhere, they have a utility in America in that they create a business for currency exchange. As long as the ability to exchange BTC for any other currency exists, they will continue to have a utility in various markets, including criminal ones.

Buzzy said:

---

We're back to my original point, which is that BTC has a utility for criminals as an accepted storage of value that is transferable.

---

A) Again, not if using it becomes illegal in a bunch of countries. Criminals would not want the target on their back.
B) Even if otherwise, that is not enough utility to make it sustainable as a currency. It needs to be widespread across the entire population.

Quote:

---

You seem really really invested in the idea that bitcoin is useless and therefore worthless, which is your prerogative, but you have not refuted my original point.

All you're doing right now is digging your heels in on scenarios where it might become worth less (not worthless) if XYZ happens. The problem with you "if American bans it, bitcoin will collapse' thesis is America does not set the standard for cryptocurrency worldwide.

---

The point is that the US certainly has the largest influence on it's adoption as a currency. The only real chance for BTC to be adopted as a real currency is for the US, China, or all of Europe to adopt it as their official currency. Not doing that would doom it. Banning it would REALLY doom it.

Quote:

---

Your point about euros actually underlines my point, it doesn't matter if American businesses don't accept euros when they're accepted as currency in other countries, especially in a whole other continent. As long as euros are accepted elsewhere, they have a utility in America in that they create a business for currency exchange. As long as the ability to exchange BTC for any other currency exists, they will continue to have a utility in various markets, including criminal ones.

---

You are missing the point. The reason people don't use Euros in America is because it costs money to convert Euros to dollars and vice versa. No service is going to do that for free. To lose 1% every transaction is stupid when you can use dollars and lose 0%. The same is true with BTC. I just looked it up, and the average cost per BTC transaction is 1.56%. Where a gold backed debt card is %0.5%. Under those conditions, who in the hell would use BTC over gold if they are fleeing the dollar? Nobody. (Except maybe the tiny population of criminals who are losing far more than that in laundering fees). Now, add a BTC ban on top of that. That would increase that %1.56 fee even higher, since everybody would basically be paying the laundering fee. If people aren't using BTC as a currency now, then why in the hell would they use it then?

aTmAg said:

---

Pepper Brooks said:

---

We will have to agree to disagree on your first comment.

You misunderstand the workings of the protocol, the role of miners, and have little to add to the discussion if you believe your last paragraph to be accurate.

---

Please... The USG has already confiscated BTC and arrested plenty of people.

---

You must be trolling. I'm done here.

Pepper Brooks said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Pepper Brooks said:

---

We will have to agree to disagree on your first comment.

You misunderstand the workings of the protocol, the role of miners, and have little to add to the discussion if you believe your last paragraph to be accurate.

---

Please... The USG has already confiscated BTC and arrested plenty of people.

---

You must be trolling. I'm done here.

---

I'm not. And goodbye.

I've been following this for a couple of days now. I'm with aTmAg about BTC exposure to an American ban though I think he's wrong about it completely going away if that we're to happen. It will have a role in the criminal underworld as an easier to handle gold or diamonds.

IMO the biggest obstacle BTC faces right here, right now is the end of cheap money. For all of BTC existence investment capital has been historically cheap which is ending and will not return for a long time. When capital is cheap there's a huge surge in speculative investments that might yield outsized returns and that's what BTC has been since day 1. It remains to be seen where it fits in a world where we aren't all willing to borrow to invest which again has defined BTC entire life.

BTC can exist on the periphery forever and the USG won't care. That's where we are today. I've always said the government will not let replace the USD and I stand by that. What everyone here needs to understand is that right now there's not a reason for a ban. The Fed will be content to sit back and see what happens when capital costs 10% instead of 4%.

LOYAL AG said:

---

I've been following this for a couple of days now. I'm with aTmAg about BTC exposure to an American ban though I think he's wrong about it completely going away if that we're to happen. It will have a role in the criminal underworld as an easier to handle gold or diamonds.

IMO the biggest obstacle BTC faces right here, right now is the end of cheap money. For all of BTC existence investment capital has been historically cheap which is ending and will not return for a long time. When capital is cheap there's a huge surge in speculative investments that might yield outsized returns and that's what BTC has been since day 1. It remains to be seen where it fits in a world where we aren't all willing to borrow to invest which again has defined BTC entire life.

BTC can exist on the periphery forever and the USG won't care. That's where we are today. I've always said the government will not let replace the USD and I stand by that. What everyone here needs to understand is that right now there's not a reason for a ban. The Fed will be content to sit back and see what happens when capital costs 10% instead of 4%.

---

I never said it would completely go away. Some people have confederate money, for example. But the dollar will collapse, and people will jump to something that is NOT BTC. And then a whole bunch of people will realize that BTC really is as worthless as we have been claiming, and they will drop it too.

People who used bitcoin already know they're going to pay a fee to convert it to cash, that is irrelevant. You completely ignored the point that all currency exchange comes with fees. Currency exchange is good because it is another business.

As long as there is an agreed upon value to bitcoin, it works as currency in the criminal underworld. If you owe someone $10 million for services rendered, it doesn't matter if the payment is $10 million in cash, $10 million in cases of bourbon, $10 million in guns, or $10 million worth of bitcoin as long as the method of exchange is agreed upon.

Quote:

---

BTC can exist on the periphery forever and the USG won't care. That's where we are today. I've always said the government will not let replace the USD and I stand by that. What everyone here needs to understand is that right now there's not a reason for a ban. The Fed will be content to sit back and see what happens when capital costs 10% instead of 4%.

---

Bingo. BTC's nemesis isn't a ban but a lack of adoption.
Higher interest rates, especially in USD, crowd out lots of investment in cryptos.

Buzzy said:

---

People who used bitcoin already know they're going to pay a fee to convert it to cash, that is irrelevant. You completely ignored the point that all currency exchange comes with fees. Currency exchange is good because it is another business.

---

The exact stated purpose of BTC was to eliminate this scenario. And now both sides have to pay fx fees instead of just one like when using a tradfi.

Buzzy said:

---

People who used bitcoin already know they're going to pay a fee to convert it to cash, that is irrelevant. You completely ignored the point that all currency exchange comes with fees. Currency exchange is good because it is another business.

---

Knowing that sticking my d*ck in a toaster will hurt like hell, doesn't mean I will do it. Normal people don't do things that harm themselves on purpose if there are better alternatives.

And your comment on currency exchange suffers the broken window fallacy. If it were good, then why not charge 50%? Or why not have each individual have their own currency, and then have a gazillion currency exchanges? Business is good right? In reality, while currency exchanges provide a useful service, it would be better if that service was unnecessary in the first place, and those resources could be put to better use.

Quote:

---

As long as there is an agreed upon value to bitcoin, it works as currency in the criminal underworld. If you owe someone $10 million for services rendered, it doesn't matter if the payment is $10 million in cash, $10 million in cases of bourbon, $10 million in guns, or $10 million worth of bitcoin as long as the method of exchange is agreed upon.

---

It matters a hell of a lot if the price of bitcoin is volatile as hell. Why would I make a deal with you in bitcoin if by the time service is rendered and we settle accounts, bitcoin has moved 50% one way or another? Either way, one of us get screwed. So we would have to handshake on dollars, and then do the transfer instantaneously at the end. That is not money. An important part of money is being a long term store of value. Nobody in their right mind would use BTC for that.

Edit: Wow, the mods are quick on this thread.

Quote:

---

Why would I make a deal with you in bitcoin

---

because the price of the volatility is baked in to the price they charge

I've talked to one criminal about this scenario, they're perfectly happy with their current situation. They were an early adopter and their net worth is somewhere around $35 million right now. They cashed some out when bitcoin was over $20k a while back and set aside a few million.

Buzzy said:

---

Quote:

---

Why would I make a deal with you in bitcoin

---

because the price of the volatility is baked in to the price they charge

I've talked to one criminal about this scenario, they're perfectly happy with their current situation. They were an early adopter and their net worth is somewhere around $35 million right now. They cashed some out when bitcoin was over $20k a while back and set aside a few million.

---

The context of my question was under a ban. Not currently.

Right now, many of the BTC people believe with every fiber of their being that BTC will be the new currency of the world. They own it today because they think in 20 years or whatever, that EVERYBODY would be clamoring for it. So what happens when that hope is dashed? A bunch of those people will sell their BTC for whatever they can get for it and the price will go way down. Afterwards, that would make the volatility we see now MUCH worse percentage wise. Nobody would want to bake THAT in. They'd just use cash like they do now with much less risk.

Quote:

---

They cashed some out when bitcoin was over $20k a while back and set aside a few million.

---

Why would a person cash out if the application had long term feasibility and utility? I understand if you view it as an "investment" like buying XOM stock, but that isn't really its purpose, right? And for the record, I'm asking that sincerely.

As with anything, you have people interacting with a thing with different motivations and the conviction of those motivations may change at any given point in time.

If I got in back in 2010 and had the opportunity to keep most of my holdings, but make a few mil right now, I would 100% be tempted to cash some in. I think most people would feel that temptation. My opinion on the things long term viability, importance, or price target is different than my greed/emotions in the moment that I'm making that decision.

Tom Doniphon said:

---

Quote:

---

They cashed some out when bitcoin was over $20k a while back and set aside a few million.

---

Why would a person cash out if the application had long term feasibility and utility? I understand if you view it as an "investment" like buying XOM stock, but that isn't really its purpose, right? And for the record, I'm asking that sincerely.

---

Because they were engaging in illegal activity and knew their ability to continue such activity could disappear at any moment so why not cash in some gains and ensure financial security right now?

AFAIK, they didn't view is as an investment, they were using it as currency. They've kept the remainder as savings because it makes for useful collateral in areas where banks accept it.