USD is backed by the full productivity of a multi-trillion dollar economy and its people. Yes, it boils down to a promise by a nation to provide value for the notes it issues, which necessarily requires trust, but that's an entirely different thing from Bitcoin, which isn't backed by anything (meaning if the system breaks there's nothing and no-one to say, "here, take this gold/wood/labour/Coke-a-cola instead").

In which venue that was published solely to spread fear, uncertainty and despair? Yes, perhaps I do not understand mathematics or English. So, explain to me, what is the "mathematics" backing Bitcoin?

If fiat was backed and limited to the supply of gold the world would not be in the mess it is now.

BTC 21,000,000 limit is what will give it strength.

Holy fuck, given the intellectual depth of your comments so far, I would live to hear the reasoning behind this gem.

The USD is backed by 50 million pensioners and 30 million under employed people  

Stocks and bonds are "backed" by the dividend/coupon streams they're expected to pay out. Obviously many companies don't pay dividends, choosing instead to invest their profits back into the business at higher ROI than most shareholders could deploy capital, but they're *eventually* expected to produce a cash-stream to shareholders.

But obviously stocks/bonds are not the valid comparison. Non-producing assets like fiat-cash or gold/silver are more apt comparisons to bitcoin. To say that either is "backed" by anything is silly. I see the point about "legal/financial/governmental/military structure" backing dollars, but that's really just a way of defining the infrastructure you're putting your trust in. With bitcoin, that infrastructure is miners, the cryptography, the internet, peer-to-peer protocols, etc. What the upside and downside risks are for each, is totally another issue.

actually i think most if not all the things they say are true.... they are certain risks that one should be aware of when making an investment.

it's a shame they fail to point out any of the positives or maybe dont even understand them.

it is true though that bitcoin can be a risky investment in terms of many other types of investments.  however those of us who understand the tech behind it and the improvements it brings in things like transactions tend to understand the full picture more and we typically see that the potential outweighs the current risks,  these risks should be talked about though and improve upon.

the ceo of circle gave a speech about this recently that instead of trying to ignore these risks or write them off as "anti bitcoin propaganda" we need to realize that a lot of these risks are valid and we need to working on finding solutions and or explaining to people how long term these risks should tend to fade away as the infrastructure and industry grows.


when talking about bitcoins to strangers/friends/family/etc etc  i always try to be honest about any of the risks or concerns they have, and instead of simply saying "oh thats nonsense dont worry!"  i explain WHY i think the potential still outweighs the risks and how/why these risks will be overcome. ive noticed people typically people have a better response to bitcoin when i'm more honest like that instead of just saying 'oh dont worry its just bank propaganda, the government hates bitcoin they dont want you to know' etc etc.

I believe you haven't got a good perspective of the users neither on the state of banking.

I started out as a speculator (I understand that most people start out like this), but I quickly realized how to use bitcoin to make my finances more efficient and a lot cheaper.

As for people happy with (any) fiat? The older generation experienced how all the fiat slowly degrades to shit and they are far from happy. Younger generations are facing the never ending recession and a lot of them live without any perspective for the future.

People who do more than receiving their salary on a bank account also don't seem to be happy at all. I have experience with banking in several countries and in my experience, the main attributes of the old system are inefficiency, inconvenience and high fees and charges.

Bitcoin is the first alternative, with a completely new concept on money. I think it doesn't matter what % are speculators, it cannot affect the utility of the protocol. I don't think they are any ways harmful at this early stage either.

There is nothing cheaper when dealing with a high volatile medium of exchange such as BTC.


Bitcoin do not solve that problem...


...neither this problem.


Finally, some sense. Yes, agreed.

Lot of unfounded statements. Particularly about the US being such a large economy, which it is not. (Economy in the sense of production not virtual numbers). It does have a astronomical debt system backed by the promise of oil for dollars (but even that promise has almost lost it's meaning). Unfortunately even if all the oil that's left on the planet could be extracted for free, that still wouldn't be enough to fill the giant debt hole that has been created.

No fiat-system in history has survived, not a single one, and there is no fiat system that has existed for hundred(s) of years.

Fiat is a ponzi scheme, it isn't even backed by shit. And the latter is what all the insurances of the state and banks will mean, when this currently just over 40 years old petrol-dollar experiment inevitably fails. It managed to postpone the official bankruptcy of America after the Vietnam war and combined with fractional reserve banking has created this guaranteed irrecoverable global trainwreck.

"Billions of people very happy with their respective fiat", are you freaking serious? Billions eh? Perfectly happy as well. Even as a joke that remark wouldn't even be funny. Well at least you make perfectly clear where you are coming from.

Btw I don't believe "money" should be worth anything at all. We just need a practical means of exchange for human effort and bitcoin is pretty damn good when compared to everything that is currently available.