I love circling back to clickbait articles like these — especially in light of the fact that…

I love circling back to clickbait articles like these — especially in light of the fact that Bitcoin is still around, and quite alive.

The contradictions and lack of operational knowledge permeate this piece. Where else could you have someone proclaim “Nothing is too big to fail” and then later “bubbles are hard to predict” in the same article.

Or better yet, the lack of understanding that births statements like “until goods get valued in Bitcoin it will never be a currency” ignoring of course the standard evolution of money — which starts as a store of wealth then graduates into a unit of account when it becomes widespread.

And then the usual tropes that get pulled out of thin air “mostly speculative” (ignoring massive wash trade volumes exchanges use to boost popularity) “too volatile” (ignoring that year over year volatility is declining signifying maturity in the asset.)

My favorite statement though has to be this one “(Bitcoin’s 21 million fixed supply) is devoid of economic sense”. The author fails to realize (or just ignores) that Bitcoin is divisible to eight decimal places. This provides 2.1 Quadrillion units to work with. More than enough regardless of any price valuation.

This also shows a lack of understanding of deflation, where the USA underwent deflationary periods (before central banks, ironically) and had productive economic growth that rivaled the boom-and-bust periods we have now with “good” inflation.

The final nail in the coffin is comparing things to the US Dollar, which even the author admits isn’t going to hang around forever. Indeed, with every country devaluing to protect exports and their general economy its a race to the bottom.

Not to mention that China and Russia are doing their best to transact in their native currencies without having to use USD at all. De-dollarization is a true force that will have to be reckoned with.

In closing, the author has plenty of enthusiasm, but chooses to ignore some rather glaring holes in his thesis. It makes me wonder who sponsored the post, actually, since its so one-sided.