Bitcoin is the FINAL asset class

>Ripple is superior

and it will dominate web payments

.

Poo in the loo, Pajeet. Reported.

you fucking brainlet
currency needs to be mildly inflationary to match increasing production and GDP

don't market bitcoin as a currency, it's a crypto asset now, you're delusional if you think it's going up from its use as a currency. look at it as an investment (allows you to speculate on crypto) or an asset that protects against inflation, not as a currency. that's the trend now.

>currency needs to be mildly inflationary to match increasing production and GDP
You are the brainlet, m8.
Infinitely divisible currency doesn't have to inflationary. You are a total clueless retard, without even a basic understanding of economy.

3,000,000 for a Bitcoin Unironically not even hard to believe, given that bread will cost 10$

yea just reprice everything from 22 sat to 1 sat every five years.
no, fiat and bitcoin will run alongside each other for many more years, bitcoin will see its long term run up (teeka 350k meme), but the real economy will continue to run in USD

>Pluto having 5 moons
That shit's too small!

listen to this, who's going to pay people in bitcoin? aside from ICOs.
who's going to spend BTC on goods if it keeps going up? it'll be hoarded as a speculative and then real investment, and fiat will be used as it is now.

>defends a useless shitcoin
>"poo in loo"

looks like you are projecting here, pajeet.

Fiat is to be abolished by 2025, brainlets. It's a done deal. Either you will use the kosher bank-approved electronic currency with a negative interest + inflation eating your money faster than your earn it, or you will have to use crypto.

In 10 years crypto will be the only way to story money outside a bank.

Alright humor me, here. One of the major drivers of GDP is consumption (GDP = C + I + G + NX). Inflationary currencies like our current fiat encourages consumption by making fiat less and less useful the longer you hold it or don't invest it. This keeps the economy alive. The economic cycle requires people to spend fiat in exchange for goods made by business, and businesses exchange the labor of the people for fiat wages (which they spend on goods made by businesses and on and on and on).
Now if we switched to deflationary currencies, it would be in an individual's best interest to not spend the currency (why spend a crypto today when that same crypto can buy double the stuff in a week [or whatever timeframe]). Deflationary currencies encourage hoarding instead of spending, and this damages the economic cycle and GDP. Consumption must happen for GDP to rise and consumption must occur for businesses to keep dealing out wages to the people.
Furthermore, how do deflationary cryptos handle inflation? Just because the currency is deflationary doesn't mean that inflation can't happen in the same way some countries have seen deflation in spite of their inflationary fiat. There's no Federal Reserve in crypto that uses open market operations, buying and selling bonds, changing the interest rates, etc. to keep the crypto economy in check. This isn't meant to be combative. These are real economic hurdles to adoption.

Makes no difference what you're using if Bit coin packages keep going up, people would accept it as payment at a discount, kind of like how they offer interest free finance periods on goods. They don't need the money right now so if they think it will be worth more later they would prefer it.

This doesn't matter either, inflation would merely outpace bitcoin growth

I think I said that poorly... Bit coins will be able to buy less shit each year, doesn't matter if they're scarce

>YOU'D BEST START BELIEVING IN BEAR MARKETS
>YOU'RE IN ONE

someone make this already

This. The Keynsian Western civilization model has literally ruined the concept of saving. When financial advisers tell you to "save" for retirement what they really mean is buy stocks and pray you make a good return to beat inflation by the time you hit 65. If money is not worth actually saving, then what worth is money really?

none of these delusional crypto as currency brainlets have a valid response to this

digital cash will be US government minted eGreenback
Bitcoin is on a trend to be an asset. Futures. ETF to be approved. swaps and derivatives on wall street, no just bitmex.

>caring about GDP

You know who clearly doesn't care about GDP? India. I bet you want all of us in the first world to have declining GDP so we can all shit in the streets together, huh pajeet? Take Econ 101 again. Oh wait they don't teach economics in India.

Ok... this is exactly my gripe with GDP, it is taught in Econ101 because it is simple. But it is also incredibly limited.
See: mises.org/library/how-gdp-metrics-distort-our-view-economy

the point is fixed amount of currency chasing an ever increasing amount of goods and services (economic growth). that's why bitcoin won't work as a currency but works as a new class of asset.

>mises.org/library/how-gdp-metrics-distort-our-view-economy
This author is incredibly mistaken. He conflates or confuses economic productivity versus economic output.
>GDP purports to measure economic activity while largely divorcing itself from the quality, profitability, depth, breadth, improvement, advancement, and rationalization of goods and services provided.
It does not measure economic activity at all. It measures economic OUTPUT. One economic could be insanely active but at a great cost for whatever reason (low natural resources, inability to trade, destructive society, whatever), and the great costs make overall output (GDP) low even if they're purportedly active.
>For example, even if a ship — built at great expense — cruised without passengers, fished without success, or ferried without cargo; it nevertheless contributed to GDP. Profitable for investors or stranded in the sand; it added to GDP. Plying the seas or rusting into an orange honeycomb shell; the nation’s GDP grew.
Yeah, and? That's output, end of story. Investors put in money, workers were hired and got paid, and the ship got built which is an output of the economy. Not only that, this is indicative of economic activity as well because it increased the investment part of the GDP formula and workers were working and paid - that's economic activity. The output (and activity) of the economy (GDP) would rise even further if people bought tickets to ride the boat. They have to hire people to operate the boat and serve guests. Economic activity (by way of calculating the output - GDP). Soooo
yeah.... GDP can show economic output and activity. The guy in the article is batshit dumb.

And if doesn't do it for you, I don't really care how economic output is calculated. It can be the Solow-Swan model if you'd prefer. The article writer makes jabs that the traditional formula doesn't account very well for economic activity, but the exogenous variables are all related directly to economic activity (labor, technology that affects labor, and capital) - yet the output is still GDP (in the macro sense). You can call it whatever you want, but economic output is one of the most powerful indicators of economic health, and it most definitely shows economic activity by way of accounting for the creation of goods which required labor at some point.

AMAZING FRESH DANK MEME THANK YOU

>Currency MUST be deflationary to be sustainable. That means limited supply, so as more people aquire it, the value increases.
Nah..
If a currency is deflationary no one wants to spend it. So, naturally, they shift to using worse currency.

Only good post in this board.

I agree that the author uses approximations. But still, the overall point remains. That is, GDP is ok to use as an indicator in certain instances. But if you want to measure the overall benefits for people, there is no indicator that does that, because ultimately, value is subjective. Yes, you measured the output in fiat at the time, but the final question should be: is it good for individuals? USSR as an example used by the author illustrates that concern. Good, the USSR has a good GDP, but subjectively, most people would agree that it sucked to live there.

>Pluto
>5 moons

american education

Nice, just bought 100k

>Once investors realize the hyper-ponzi is coming to an end and growth will stop they will come flooding into bitcoin in one final epic moonshot before cashing out, after that it's lights out.
Are you braindead? Exactly that aleady happened:
Wall Street made btc tradeable via futures and made it easy for them to short it, then it went up to 20k a few days later just to go down, Xleveraged.
Go read a fantasy book thicclet.

Yeah, people to buy shit they don't need. This is a correction.

hes talking about a dollar crisis

money doesnt have to be inflationary it just has to be backed by something thats not blood and oil

>Currency MUST be deflationary to be sustainable
You can have a function economy and stable prices with non deflationary currency as well.
Tally sticks worked fine for centuries in england, and some states in the early days of the USA had their own functioning systems like greenbacks or something similar.
The main problems are money getting lend for non productive means such as houses. And the whole central bank system sucks of course.

>Currency MUST be deflationary
You are literally braindead.