Max Keiser Opens Invite to ‘Fight Him’ Over Bitcoin’s Status as ‘Peer to Peer’ Gold, A Writer Accepts Challenge
Max Keiser recently was featured in an article, stating that “Bitcoin is Peer-to-Peer Gold.” Keiser explained that the value is entirely based on “the level of ‘dystopianism,’” adding that the first bank to commit fraud by participating is JPMorgan. After challenging someone to “fight” him on these statements, writer Mike “Mish” Shedlock of Money Maven posted an article, saying, “I accept the challenge.”
Max Keiser: ‘Bitcoin Is Peer-to-Peer Gold… Fight Me’ https://t.co/PPOIpkmiMN#Bitcoin #BTC $BTC #CryptoMarket #CryptoTrading #Blockchain #FinTech #CryptoGold #DigitalAssets #Crypto #Cryptocurrency #CryptoNews #NostrumCoin #NostrumEX #CryptoExchange
— NostrumEX (@NostrumEX) February 1, 2019
With that, Mish opens his argument, comparing Bitcoin to gold in that it is “easily divisible.” Bitcoin only has a limit number of coins that will ever be available to mine, which proponents use to say that Bitcoin is scarce. However, Mish points out that there is nothing implemented that could prevent miners from increasing the number of Bitcoins.
Though proponents have said that this could “never” happen because it would damage the price, but it has already happened in two situations with the hard forks of the asset. During the first fork, Bitcoin holders were given equal amounts of Bitcoin Cash. Then, Bitcoin Cash forked into two new blockchains, maintaining Bitcoin Cash as one and making the other fork into Bitcoin SV. At this point, with these two forks, there is triple the number of Bitcoin-based tokens as originally promised.
Ethereum provides an example for this case as well, considering that it was created with the intention of correcting a scaling flaw existing within Bitcoin. However, it also forked, creating double the amount of the Ethereum coins as what was originally planned.
Even though there are claims that compare mining of cryptocurrency to gold, Mish explains that crypto assets are more like fiat, and that they can be created “out of thin air like nothing.” Presently, the market has over 2,500 cryptocurrencies filling it up, all saying that they have value.
Speaking with William Entriken, the writer described multiple companies and how they serve the market. XRP, for example, make it possible for international banks to making cross-border transfers. However, the XRP token has nothing to do with the actions of the company. Ethereum, Entriken says, allows users to utilize the blockchain to run applications. Though it is assumed that no one can hack it, the whole platform is a “public access computer,” and there is a charge of 2 cents for each transfer, which happens in less than a minute.
The list goes on as Entriken describes:
- Bitcoin Cash (“the same thing as Bitcoin”)
- EOS (“also a global computer”)
- Stellar (“a non-profit” that helps unbanked customers)
- Bitcoin SV (“one more fork on BITCOIN CASH”)
- Tether (which only allows customers to “hope that funds will be available” if they cash out)
- Litecoin (which works “4 times faster” than Bitcoin)
- Cardano (“is nothing”)
- Monero (“promises to be more resistant to forensic analysis of payments than Bitcoin”)
- TRON (“wants to copy Ethereum”)
- IOT (“is nothing”)
- DASH (“a payment system which promises to run instantaneously”)
As the author puts it, there are 90% of these options in which the platforms are creating currency and just hoping that regulators will not catch on to stop anything. However, the only reason that any of them have value is due to being compared to Bitcoin. But if you are like Warren Buffett, you won't touch bitcoin or gold.
The only real scarcity of Bitcoin is based on the “infinite number of lookalikes” that all have traits that are fairly similar to Bitcoin. However, it is unlike gold in that there can be lookalikes with cryptocurrency, though the same is not true of gold. Simply put, “[t]here is gold and there is silver,” and there is no way to use an algorithm to create new versions.
From a legal standpoint, the SEC views Bitcoin as a commodity, which is not true of all of the lookalikes that it influenced. However, a research article from Murray Rothbard states that money is a commodity as well, because its “price” is “determined by the interaction of its total supply,” along with the demand from the public.
Gold has long been revered as a form of money, rather than just a commodity. However, in the absence of gold, history shows that people have been willing to use anything from beaver pelts to cigarettes as currency. That being said, Bitcoin is considered much of the same, and Mish states, “I am willing to accept both Bitcoin and Gold as money,” adding that both of them have buying power.
Concluding, Mish adds that the reason that Keiser’s statement is untrue is because Bitcoin is not even close to gold. He adds that “scarcity is a mirage,” and there is no limit to the number of coins that Bitcoin can hold, especially if previous forks repeat themselves. Bringing up a statement from JP Morgan that linked money and gold, Mish proposes a more accurate statement:
“Bitcoin is not now nor will it ever be peer-to-peer gold because Gold is Gold and Nothing Else.”