The general acceptance of the velocity thesis (as reasoned from the tautological equation of exchange) is getting really silly at this point. Why does an asset changing hands often imply that people don't want it? It turns out that every trade has a seller *and* a buyer.
Doesn't imply no one wants it, just lower monetary demand, hence lower token price from MV=PQ. In your terms, the more often a token is traded, the less tokens needed to satisfy a single urge to possess a token. The urge to possess for 24h has 1/100th effect of possess for 100d.
-
-
So if my wife and I trade tokens for fun with each other all year long, that'll make the price depreciate?
-
The goal of holding X tokens for a year between 2 accounts is cleverly constructed to be the same monetary demand regardless of velocity between those accounts. Not a fair example of general case where people's demand is independent.
-
So what kind of transactions count towards V?
End of conversation
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.