A guy sends me a polite email, and says in a couple paragraphs that 1) he doesn't really see any role for bitcoin in a portfolio, it has no intrinsic value, and it just trades on sentiment and also that 2) it threatens USD hegemony and so politicians are likely going to add friction to it.
So I'm like, well, if there's nothing particularly valuable about it to give it any value or consideration for a portfolio, why does it threaten USD hegemony? Like, it threatens the largest and most globally salable monetary network in the world while having no intrinsic value, no portfolio role, while just being a thing that trades on sentiment?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Replies (4)
"I don't want to wake up, I just want a softer pillow."
Has he tried $HFSP
Answer should be something like:
No intrinsic value
Go back to start and don't earn sats. Try again.
Trades only on sentiment
Yes you're right, that's why it is still so damn cheap. Wait a month untill Blackrock opend the black hole for the Fiat system.
Threatens USD hegemony
Yes, polititions in countries that didn't suffer from the FED policy lastly will do but there are not so much left. So you mean the USA and Europe right?
LOL
Things happen when you listen to the lessons of Buffett and Munger but don't understand them. Bitcoin is technology; it's a platform and a global network. Bitcoin is a product that has value because of its unique characteristics. It is vastly different from gold, even if it embodies some of gold's most compelling features, and it functions as a means of exchange, just as the USD did. This allows for the exchange of earnings assets based on it. When you buy bitcoin, you are purchasing a productive asset, just as past value investors did when they bought USD.
