Think about it, only 2 1 10,000 bitcoins have been issued. If you become the legal tender in the world, every time you own a piece, you will never eat, drink or work, which is equivalent to having one tenth of the world wealth of 2 1 10,000 pieces.
Do you think it's reasonable?
Bitcoin itself is a deflationary currency and does not conform to the normal social and economic order. People who own bitcoin will no longer invest and consume. Because the money in their hands will only get more and more valuable. Then the circulation rate decreased, the society was depressed, and the economy and prices collapsed together.
I remember this question was answered on something. I'll say it again.
Money itself has no value, it is just a piece of paper. His value comes from the government platform and how many people agree with his price.
The same is true of Bitcoin, and its value is the fanaticism of that small circle of Bitcoin believers. Last year, Bitcoin went crazy. In addition to insiders, most of them are leeks cut by speculators by multiple institutions.
Although Bitcoin is decentralized, it still relies on centralized trading institutions to conduct transactions.
The government cannot and will not give up legal tender to support the credit of Bitcoin. This kind of behavior is not only stupid, but also inconsistent with human development.
To put it bluntly, the real application market of Bitcoin is still black market, dark net and X coin. Moreover, there are few application scenarios like real currency strength in the world.
I think if you want to understand the currency circle, try a little speculation. If you really regard it as a belief in the world financial order, then give up this idea quickly.
I don't know if the blockchain will really subvert the world currency in the future, but it will definitely not be Bitcoin.
As for digital currency, such as Bitcoin, you can see the future of digital currency 10 years ago. That's a prophet. If you look at the future of digital currency five years ago, it may also be subverted.
Now let's look at digital currency. Here's the situation. BTC is around $5,400, and its brother BCH's price of $273 actually rose by 13% yesterday. The price of ETH is 163, and the price of XRP is 0.3, but it is a lot.
After experiencing the high price of $20,000 at the end of 1965, after 438+2007, digital currency such as Bitcoin went into a bear market, with the lowest price falling to more than $3,000, that is, it lost 85% of its value. This also makes an investment veteran like Masayoshi Son of Japan's Softbank turn the tables. According to him, he lost $65.438+200 million bitcoin. Enough for me to eat for several lifetimes.
Do you dare to vote today? Today, I don't know whether digital currency will succeed tomorrow. Getting involved before something is done is risk, and high risk leads to high return. The same high risk will lead to big losses. Some Bitcoin believers swear that Bitcoin will reach $250,000 each, and the other feels that it is not enough, 1 10,000. If the price cannot be reached, it will be broadcast live. It was McAfee, slow coffee, American madman who started as an antivirus software. Now he faces extradition from the United States for murder. They said that no one would buy insurance for their words anyway. After listening to these words, they put in money, lose money, and there will be no insurance payment.
For example, what if everything is just in case, and this thing is done? A thousand things, that is, there are 9999. How many can bear such a risk? If you buy wealth management, the new asset management regulations will no longer protect the capital, and many people can't stand it. If we invest in bitcoin, 9999 may be a loss, so it seems fair to earn 9999 times, or several times or dozens of times.
Just now, there was a survey in the United States: 1 1% of the American population owns the main cryptocurrency Bitcoin (BTC). According to a new survey published by Spencer bogart of Blockchain Capital, a venture capital company, 1 1% of the American population has purchased BTC.
In 20 17, 77% of the total population had heard of bitcoin, but in April of 20 19, this number increased to 89%. /kloc-90% of people aged 0/8-34 know bitcoin. Of course, among the people who own bitcoin, it is also the largest in this age group, with 20%, while the general population holds bitcoin only 1 1%.
This is a more realistic portrayal of the bitcoin market.
The author has no intention to encourage others to invest in digital currency because there may be potential risks here. Anything new is the same, so be careful. What if it looks good and it doesn't? Money is fine.
To tell the truth, I have never understood Bitcoin, and I don't want to know it, because Bitcoin violates the basic common sense of money that I was educated! Although bitcoin fell from a few dollars I first heard to a maximum of 20 thousand dollars. However, people who say that Bitcoin has come true, or that Bitcoin has become the currency in circulation in the future, or that it has been recognized by the monetary authorities of various countries and has the right to legal circulation are people who really don't understand the basic common sense of monetary science at all.
The so-called bitcoin, although I don't understand it very well, is an algorithm based on blockchain technology. On the basis of the algorithm, generating bitcoin according to the algorithm was once popular all over the world, but it was never recognized by Buffett and others. Its existence value. To sum up briefly, today's price of Bitcoin is essentially speculation, especially the speculation of China capital. Moreover, due to the logic of speculation, the holders do not participate in trading and circulation, resulting in a huge gap between the circulation quantity and speculative demand, which continues to rise and speculate. Once this logic fails, the avalanche can be expected!
Why is Bitcoin destined to become a global payment currency? This should start with the basic common sense of money. In fact, money is a kind of compulsory issuance of credit and government power, that is, there is no corresponding obligation and responsibility to exchange gold, and it is a compulsory circulation paper money issued with the implicit guarantee of government compulsion and central bank credit. By contrast, if in the gold standard era, the credit of money is bound to gold, that is, it is the legal obligation and responsibility of the central bank to exchange how much money for how much gold. The responsibility of paying at sight. Later, because the gold payment mechanism in the United States did not have enough gold as a guarantee, after the United States forcibly reached a global agreement to replace the gold standard with the Bretton Woods system, the dollar no longer had the responsibility and obligation to forcibly exchange gold and decouple it from gold. This is the fundamental and historical reason why the gold reserves of various countries are mainly kept in the United States, because gold needs to be converted into dollars!
In other words, even gold is the natural enemy of central banks and monetary authorities all over the world, which means it is the natural enemy of currencies of all countries. Assuming that gold really has the right to circulate according to its actual value, currencies of all countries will be worthless, because money belongs to credit, and its equivalence and purchasing power belong to credit guarantee and the compulsory circulation of state power, rather than the gold guarantee that the actual reserves are equivalent to circulating money. If gold has the right to pay, no one will believe that money is just a piece of paper.
In other words, I want to laugh when I see a lot of big coffees saying that they want to buy gold to preserve value and fight inflation. If the central bank gives gold a real price, then buying gold is definitely the most valuable. However, gold is the natural enemy of the central bank, which makes it easy for the currency issued under the credit of the central bank to appear gold that cannot be exchanged for the promised gold content.
Then, gold is still difficult to circulate around the world (the only exception is the bankruptcy of central banks, or a world war, and the world no longer trusts any currency, including the US dollar), let alone Bitcoin? From the perspective of gold, it is easy to understand that Bitcoin is bound to be resisted by central banks of various countries, not to resist its existence, but to allow it to exist in a certain scope and degree, such as limited scale and limited speculation, but it is completely impossible to replace the existence of currencies of various countries, or to obtain circulation rights from another perspective. For an inaccurate example, if gold is not the natural enemy of the central bank, then according to the currency of any country, take the US dollar as an example. According to the purchasing power of gold and US dollars in the same period established by the Bretton Woods system, the current price of gold should be at least1-20,000 US dollars per ounce (it may be inaccurate, and it should even reach 200,000 US dollars, compared with the purchasing power of gold in the same period established by the Bretton Woods system), but the fact is that the price is 65,448.
Judging from the development of Bitcoin in China, whether it is mining or speculation, the Central Bank of China has always been very wary of Bitcoin. It is not only the natural enemy of the central bank I discussed above, but also an illegal tool for cross-border and money laundering.
Therefore, the topic said that Bitcoin is impossible to realize, no matter how it is realized.
Although owning a bitcoin is valuable according to the current price or book, it is incredible to buy a cup of coffee with the old bitcoin according to the current transaction price of bitcoin, but from the perspective of monetary common sense, the risk of its future law is enormous. The greater the development risk, the less developed it is, and the more it is out of the early warning vision of the central bank.
Finally, all investors and speculators are advised to stay away from Bitcoin. Suppose that one day, the central bank orders the ban on bitcoin, and it will be worthless immediately, because gold and bitcoin are the natural enemies of the central bank under the condition of paper money!
Investing in bitcoin, you can't see anyone laughing or crying.
Around 20 1 1, as the best time to invest in bitcoin, many people can't grasp this slogan. At present, more than17 million bitcoins circulating around the world have fallen into silent accounts, and nearly 5 million bitcoins will never come out. As can be seen from this data, many people have bitcoin from the beginning. Around 20 10, there are 1 bitcoin sold in 5 yuan on Taobao. 99% of investors can't imagine that in the next few years, Bitcoin can be so valuable, even reaching a height of 20,000 US dollars.
Therefore, in any investment market, the prophet eats meat and the soup drinkers blindly follow suit. Whether it is the latest mining or investing in bitcoin, there are always the least people in this industry under the miracle of getting rich overnight. The vast majority of people are just an ordinary investment, winning or losing is normal, and there is no need to look at the next outlet with envy.
Very reasonable. From the perspective of wealth distribution, risk income and contribution.
Is the distribution of wealth reasonable?
There is a concept in the question that needs to be clarified. People who hold a lot of bitcoin refer to:
1) A lot (bitcoin holders)
2) People who hold (bitcoin) in large quantities.
Let's discuss proposition one first. This group does not exist, and it is impossible to become extremely rich. Look at the picture below.
The data in this paper are all from btc blockchain browser (19.1.11), and all bitcoin addresses add up to more than 20 million, which means there are only a few users. As a global investment product, the number of people is really too small. We see that only about 2% of people have more than 1BTC, so I won't say that Bitcoin will rise to the moon one day, even if it rises to one or two million dollars. Can these people who don't have 1BTC become rich? I'm afraid I can't afford a two-bedroom apartment in Beijing. So there is no fact that a large number of people (people who hold bitcoin) have become extremely rich.
And those who can spend tens of thousands of spare money to invest in virtual currency are generally the new middle class in the city. Small investments may improve their lives, but it is reasonable that they cannot achieve class transition.
Look at proposition 2. What about people who hold a lot of bitcoin? Have these people become extremely rich and reasonable? Reasonable. Because we have to look at the risk-return ratio.
Is the risk-return ratio reasonable?
The unreasonable logic of becoming a super-rich is that the risk is low and the income is high. It is too easy for these people to make money. But in fact, the big bitcoin companies or bookmakers you know bear the corresponding risks, as shown in the figure below.
The address of the first money was 18, and 10 only gradually participated in the transaction. This is the stage when the price of coins plummeted and the market called for Bitcoin to return to zero. At the beginning of 17,130,000 bitcoins were opened one after another, and not many were sold in Niuda. This is a bitcoin banker who entered the market after preparing for huge losses. This risk far exceeds the risk capital that most rich people can afford.
We choose the numbers from one to ten as a reference. Of the top ten addresses, 1 1 only accepted one, and the tenth place with frequent transactions recently entered the market at the end of 18, that is, when everyone was crying and the major groups were quiet.
See the gap between leek and banker? These people are already rich. If bitcoin comes true, they should be rich. Unfortunately, none of these stories belong to you, so you have to imagine a group of early miners, a group of lucky ordinary people, to complete their daydreams.
Because early miners can easily dig up a lot of bitcoin, as long as they get it now, they can easily get wealth that doesn't match their knowledge and ability, so some people come to the conclusion that this is unreasonable and unfair.
What did early miners do?
Most of the early miners were geeks or smart people who knew finance, philosophy, cryptography, economics and sociology. These people already qualified for it in the early participation process, and if they can get it today, they deserve it. But the fact is that the early miners may have quit long ago. Imagine that one day, the inexplicable things you dug up from your computer suddenly cost $65,438 +0. Do you sell them? No, well, it's worth 100 dollars. Do you want to sell it? When you look at it, you find 10000 in your computer. People who don't sell at this time will feel like fools.
Everyone is laughing at the story of 10000 bitcoin for pizza. In fact, the programmer had no regrets when he was interviewed later, because 10000 bitcoins were worthless at that time. Since your knowledge and ability can't control these future changes, why regret it? The believers who can get today are real heroes. They have made great contributions to the promotion of Bitcoin, the reduction of circulation and the stability of the currency, and also made great contributions in the early days when the Bitcoin system was not safe and stable enough. Their knowledge level, learning ability, judgment and endurance are far superior to others, and this wealth is well deserved. Facts have proved that such people are really rare. So there is nothing unreasonable.
There are always some people who can't see the risks behind the super rich. Do you think 65438+ 10,000 bitcoins are too much? Not too much. As your counterparties, people are everywhere. Bankers must play against each other when they enter the market, and they can't leave each other out, especially in a bear market. These big families have to go through at least 1-2 rounds of cattle to get in and out freely, and now they are walking on thin ice under great risks.
Many people in the circle are waiting for the regular army to enter. Why don't regular troops advance? It's very risky. Entering the market means buying 10 million people, and there are a lot of people playing games with you. You can print as many as you want. Why go to a market full of competitors who don't know who they are? Risks and benefits don't match.
Zhao Changpeng sold his house at the bottom, but two years later, he had the world's first digital currency Stock Exchange.
Post it. My brother sold his house in Soho for 480,000 yuan, but lost his wealth and freedom a year later.
The beginning of the story is similar, but the ending is lamentable. In my opinion, it is unreasonable for 480,000 buddies to become extremely rich.
There is nothing to say about being rich, but there is no consciousness to do something for what you love and believe.
So in the final analysis, I can only invest with spare money, because most people are afraid.
If you dare to bear this psychological pressure, I don't think there is anything unreasonable. Maybe this social experiment will fail tomorrow, won't it? Are you scared?
Suddenly I saw someone taking demolition as an example. To tell the truth, demolition is the more unreasonable one.
Isn't it?
Existence is reasonable, and what is unreasonable is just sour grapes!
Is it reasonable for people who bought a house ten years ago to collect rent?
Is it reasonable to sit in a prime location and realize the skyrocketing wealth immediately after the demolition?
Is the starting point of a family with good health conditions high and reasonable?
Is it reasonable that the first batch of Internet people have made a fortune in the early ten years?
In the early days of reform and opening up, the first batch of people who went into business in the sea were already famous. Is it reasonable?
Beneath the seemingly unreasonable appearance, there is courage, courage, wisdom and luck that you can't see. This is the transformation between intangible wealth and tangible wealth.
The realization of bitcoin mentioned by the landlord should mean that more and more people use bitcoin, which has been recognized by all countries and become digital gold.
Bitcoin has gone through 10 years since its birth. From the initial encryption circle to the general public, more and more people use Bitcoin, and the number of people who know Bitcoin has been expanding. So far, according to statista, the number of users of Bitcoin wallets has been increasing. By the fourth quarter of 20 18, the number of users of bitcoin wallets had reached 3 19 10000. There is still a long way to go before the population of 6 billion, but the number of users has been growing and is on the way to reality.
So far, no country has defined Bitcoin as illegal, and blockchain is also illegal.
It is reasonable for people who hold a large number of bitcoins to become extremely rich. Why is it reasonable? There is an opportunity cost that can be firmly implemented, far exceeding what others have seen. When the results are harvested, why make trouble without reason? Some people can't see this opportunity, some people can't do it when they see it, but they can do it when they see it. It is too difficult to enjoy great wealth. Of course, there is also a great risk, that is, the possibility of returning to zero. Look at the chart of Bitcoin:
The price of bitcoin fluctuates greatly. How many people can hold on? When you can hold it and make Bitcoin come true, how much wealth rises and falls in this process, and how many people can bear 90% of the assets shrinking without throwing them away?
Bitcoin has never become legal tender, nor can it become legal tender, but bitcoin is a product of blockchain and a digital asset protected by law.
Bitcoin has never been legal tender, but it can be circulated in the exchange and can be converted into legal tender, such as the relatively large domestic fire coin, OKCOIN. So as long as you have bitcoin, you can change it into French currency, or you can buy bitcoin with French currency.
In the United States, the two major futures exchanges have taken Bitcoin as the target, and they will also apply for ETFs in the stock exchange in the future.
Many people have greatly appreciated their assets through mining and speculation, but as a financial product, the risk is still great, so we should learn to control the risk.
Bitcoin is defined as digital currency, or virtual currency, which is essentially an asset. Since it is an asset, whether it is the 28 th Law or Matthew Effect, a few people occupy most of the resources. This is the same as the concepts of assets and real estate in our daily life, except that Bitcoin belongs to virtual currency. Even if the quantity is limited, it is difficult to achieve the effect of other currencies at this stage.
Besides, money itself has no value, it is just a piece of paper. Its value comes from the government platform and how many people agree with its price. The same is true of Bitcoin, and its value is the fanaticism of that small circle of Bitcoin believers. Last year, Bitcoin soared. Except for insiders, institutions are basically cutting speculators' leeks. Although Bitcoin has the advantages of scarcity, easy division, constant quantity, convenient circulation, unforgeability, transparency, security and decentralization, it is not recognized in China. So generally speaking, it is difficult for the general public to agree that Bitcoin is a virtual currency. If you believe it, it is worth it; If you don't believe it, it's not worth it However, if one day the world is really completely digitized, it is not impossible for Bitcoin to become mainstream.
Bitcoin can't come true, even if people who own Bitcoin dream that it is true. This is determined by the characteristics of bitcoin and the attributes of modern legal tender.
Bitcoin uses blockchain technology, which is decentralized and not controlled by a center. This technology is very advanced, but when used in currency, it becomes its achilles heel. Let's look at the legal tender of modern sovereign countries, whether it is US dollar, RMB, Japanese yen, British pound, French franc or ruble. There is a complete set of scientific methods for the quantity, method and time of distribution, neither more nor less. Too much issuance will lead to inflation, and too little issuance will lead to insufficient economic development momentum, which must be completely controlled by sovereign States. It is impossible for any sovereign country or political party to give up the control of money, because the role of money in modern society is not just as simple as buying, it can achieve political goals that other means can't. The dollar is now the hard currency of the world. This was decided by the United States with the victory of World War II and its strong scientific, technological, economic and military strength. Many countries want to replace the dollar, but they all sigh because they are unable to do so. Historically, this situation can only be changed through war. Bitcoin wants to replace the currencies of sovereign countries around the world with a blockchain technology. Do you think it's possible?
Without affecting the financial system and national security of a sovereign country, it is very graceful to give it some living space and let a group of people entertain themselves. Do you still want to imagine people all over the world using it?
China's government has no face at all, so it just blew it, because besides laundering money, transferring assets and providing convenience for terrorists, Bitcoin is also suspected of disrupting the national financial order.
In short, modern legal tender cannot be separated from national sovereignty. Without the endorsement of national sovereignty, any currency is a game of self-entertainment.
If Bitcoin comes true, that day must be a communist society, with no country, no class, no exploitation and distribution according to needs. But at that time, there will be no money, and it is useless to keep bitcoin.
Many people use bitcoin to make money, but there is nothing to be proud of, because they make money at the expense of countless people. Do you think this is reasonable?