Can you answer exactly why people wouldn’t just hold Bitcoin itself?
Because you still insist on the idea that archaic fiat and archaic central banks must exist
-
-
How in the f$ck would that be a monopoly knowing that they aren't the only supplier of the money?
-
so why have central banks at all if all they do is value target Bitcoin? just hold Bitcoin. Why risk their mismanagement in targeting X when you can just hold X?
-
What year do you predict central banks will collapse?
-
I’m on Murad’s side. Why would you not just hold Bitcoin instead of depending on a central bank keeping their currency steady with Bitcoin?
-
If their values are stable with each other, there is no such distinction.
-
With Bitcoin you are 100% you have the value of Bitcoin, with your central bank targeting, you can only be 75% sure. Why take the unnecessary risk when you can own Bitcoin in a self-sovereign, unseizable manner? You’re taking unnecessary counterparty risks in your thesis
-
Murad stop and think. If the markets deem the values the same, how could you hypothetically declare they are not? THINK.
-
it’s more than just PRICE and VALUE. You’re ignoring the technology / capabilities / cryptography / privacy / self-sovereignty entirely.
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.