I guess I didn't want to open this up into its own particular rabbit hole. It was supposed to be a recent example of ongoing small (but significant) measures that help to embed and enable bitcoin use more and more - all the while.@tecate More seriously, am I right that it is in effect a way round doing what is essentially a US$ contract?
Nation-state attack vectors have been a feature of discussions among bitcoiners from the outset. So what he mentioned is nothing new, as you can see from Antonopolous' discussion of that very thing, back in 2019. I've always said that ETF approval is a bittersweet thing - and adds a whole bunch of new challenges. I don't agree with the outcome that @letitroll suggests though. There's likely to be a battle re. governance - in the same way as a similar battle is unfolding relative to nation-state regulation of bitcoin.I see that you agree that @letitroll has a point about US Gov capture of bitcoin.
Bitcoin doesn't choose who gets to use it. That's why Antonopolous rightly said that despite him not liking ETFs, they were going to happen anyway (because Wall Street isn't going to pass up on the opportunity). So different folks use Bitcoin. And sure, there's a good bunch of them that fully understand it - and get decentralization and there are those who don't. I would say that the vast majority of the ETF bitcoin buyers will fall into that category...of either not understanding it or not giving a toss. But then they're also a whole new market. They're mainly boomers. As we were going into the last bear market, @letitroll declared that it was over! Bitcoin couldn't possibly get any more new folks to support it. He's just discovered that he had that wrong.What I do think is that the vast, vast majority of bitcoin holders don't give a fiddlers about decentralisation, lack of censorship etc. etc They are simply speculating. So what if at some future date the Feds raid the party, they will have made their fortune and got out by then.
Your nation state attack vector argument has some merit (even if the two of us still speculate on different eventual outcomes) - stick with that. The idea that bitcoin has nothing more to offer - sorry dude, you've got that wrong. And while you've identified some risk with an ETF, its a wonderful opportunity for a greater body of folks to understand it better. The vast majority of folks still don't.when all the major tent pole promised positive catalysts are gone (and to be clear I think this is the last BIG one which the authorities know/knew) and has turned out to be disappointing based on price reaction…..like what’s left?
This is such a nothing burger! I'm not even going to address it. There's a guy on your side of the fence (as far as this debate is concerned) in the Duke who is far better placed to counsel you on this. He screamed 'but $20k at us all for a full 18 months solid relative to the previous cycle that you weren't around for. There's a need for folks to step back and zoom out. Then look at see where things stand. It's at $42.5K! Just like the Duke before, you, you've used the ATH (how much time was spent between $50k and ATH?? A couple of weeks? Everyone recognizes that (in hindsight) as the frothy peak of that cycle.Sitting 45% off the 2021! ATH’s in real terms….is confirmatory for those who are skeptical of the new positive catalysts.
A very serious answer for you. You think that bitcoin has even scratched the surface in terms of staking a claim to the wealth that exists in the world? It's not even properly understood by the vast majority of folks. We've discussed the various directions this will go in ad-nauseum. It will simply continue on those paths. The spot ETF green light in the US will have repercussions elsewhere in the world also. It already has. The US isn't the only game in town.Very serious question @tecate whats left in the BTC catalyst roadmap outside of institutionalization which has just occurred and allocations from institutions play out rising over the next 12 months….is it simply the use case expansion into payments….which hilariously is incompatible with BTC ETF-ization
BTC-centric L2 have been closed off by regulators? Ok? So I can't whip out my phone this very minute and send a few satoshis to anyone that cares to accept them? There are many issues to be resolved with L2 solutions - no doubt. It's been an ongoing headache - but they don't seem to be the issues that you're referring to. That said, I can still effect a BTC lightning payment right now if I wish.So if you’re gonna lean into payments as the catalyst….…please explain to me how you get around the friction created above vs. fiat currency….L2 solutions are not an explanation/solution…….L2 lightning payment solutions, secured on BTC, will simply be classed as BTC derivative products with the exact same capital gains/loss problem….underlying layer abstractions in financial markets like L2’s have been closed off by regulators (CDS’s, interest rate swaps, options etc.)
Yeah, I don't think he gets it. We've done this to death so not going to go back over it. Here's a https://x.com/SamanthaLaDuc/status/1745946901218771076?s=20 (Twitter exchange) that covers the same misunderstandings that McWilliams presented with that you may find of interest.@tecate You will be aware that I am not a great DMcW fan and nor is he a fan of me. It was good to see him have to eat humble pie. I myself have been forced onto that pastry but my day will comeBut I do agree with him that bitcoin is a zero sum (some say negative sum because of the cost of "mining") game and therefore has Ponzi features (let's not go down that rabbit hole). But he does come up with some awful nonsense in his latest podcast like some rigmarole that Esparanto is to English what bitcoin is to the US $ - go figure.
Your absolutely right there and that includes the vast majority of current buyers who are hoping that they too will get an easy ride to billionaire status. The denouement will come when the satoshi drops.It's not even properly understood by the vast majority of folks.
BTC-centric L2 have been closed off by regulators? Ok? So I can't whip out my phone this very minute and send a few satoshis to anyone that cares to accept them? There are many issues to be resolved with L2 solutions - no doubt. It's been an ongoing headache - but they don't seem to be the ones that you're referring to. That said, I can still effect a BTC lightning payment right now if I wish
I know well because the mistake that has been made is that the folks you refer to are 100% of the driving force behind bitcoin, and with that, there can't possibly be anything tangible in sight. Sure there's a cohort of speculative interest, but the people you have in mind are not representative of everyone that takes an interest in it.Your absolutely right there and that includes the vast majority of current buyers who are hoping that they too will get an easy ride to billionaire status. The denouement will come when the satoshi drops.
Closed off by regulators….in this way….your welcome to pay for your tayto with an L2 solution if somebody will accept it….or send somebody satoshis vs revoluting euros.
But you never tackled the core problem I gave you to solve for me…..these transactions done as payments on BTC or a L2 derivative of BTC …..are now deemed by the regulators to be capital transactions….triggering a capital gain or a loss upon disposal….or a cost basis upon acquisition
If payments using BTC are the future….its not a future I relish… going to the shops and trying to figure out what your capital gains might be on buying a pint of milk.
If that’s the future then I’d go long tax accountants and go short BTC.
Is that Argentine fascist guy going full BTC?This is how a cultist wets themselves on this "ground breaking" development:
I'll leave it to listeners to decide whether this is a US $ contract or a BTC contract.
I guess that answers the above musing.
Messie et al would just love to deal directly in US $ but that seems to be verbotten. But the new law seems to allow a way around that ban if you arrange that the actual transaction is in btc although the commercial reality is a US $ one. Well yes, let the cultists add it to their list of use cases.
Gee! Could bitcoin be the solution to our homelessness problem?
The cultists are certainly finding that difficult.
It would be great to be a fly on the wall listening to the conversations at a bitcoin cult meeting.
I don't think so but @tecate may correct me. My read is that you are not allowed to transact in any currency other than the peso. But the new law allows you to transact in assets. Well obviously bitcoin is a more convenient "asset" than Argentinian beef though that remains to be approved by the courts. I think the 100$ lease is a test case, it is hardly high finance. This ETF thing seems to endorse bitcoin as an "asset" rather than a currency. I don't think there are any ETFs purely linked to a currency (money market funds are not the same thing). It is a use case but I think @tecate agrees with me that it is not the game changer that the cultist I quoted believes.Is that Argentine fascist guy going full BTC?
I don't think so but @tecate may correct me.
The peso remains legal tender in Argentina - nothing else. Both USD (which you would regard as currency Duke) and BTC were both recognized as being an appropriate form in setting out or settling a contract by the Argentinian government within the one policy change. I'm not getting hung up on what's deemed currency or asset. There's been dialogue ongoing by courts and regulators around the world on that framing - and it will continue for another few years.My read is that you are not allowed to transact in any currency other than the peso. But the new law allows you to transact in assets. Well obviously bitcoin is a more convenient "asset" than Argentinian beef though that remains to be approved by the courts.
All it is is the first example that follows that significant policy change by the Argentinian government.I think the 100$ lease is a test case, it is hardly high finance.
I don't think there are any ETFs purely linked to a currency (money market funds are not the same thing). It is a use case but I think @tecate agrees with me that it is not the game changer that the cultist I quoted believes.
According to the World Gold Council, gold demand rose 29% in the first half of 2005. The increase came mainly from the launch of a gold exchange-traded fund
I believe I've seen some level of discussion of this - but to refresh my memory, can you cite a link or two to where regulators have laid this down?
I don't think the pigeon holing is useful. Have a look at Lyn Alden's list of use cases that I linked to above. To one grouping of people, it may find use in the ETF world, to another in another part of the world, it may take on a different use case entirely. For others still, they may come to appreciate it for one use, only to later find that they may as well use it for remittance purposes, to settle a contract, to buy something online, etc.I do agree that this ETF thing confirms that BTC is not in the currency sphere but in the commodity sphere
I think the list can be condensed to the two - medium of exchange or investment(speculation). She lists many features of its use as a MOE but according to the MSO 95% buy it as a speculation, 4% buy it as an "investment" and 1% buy it as a MOE and these last tend to value its secrecy rather than its other supposed advantages over fiat.I don't think the pigeon holing is useful. Have a look at Lyn Alden's list of use cases that I linked to above. To one grouping of people, it may find use in the ETF world, to another in another part of the world, it may take on a different use case entirely. For others still, they may come to appreciate it for one use, only to later find that they may as well use it for remittance purposes, to settle a contract, to buy something online, etc.
I think you're throwing out use cases without good cause. Remember that a week ago, there were no spot Bitcoin ETF products in the US. While we can look at the pros and cons of that development, it is yet again, a new development for Bitcoin - and one that unleashes it to a whole new market. The point being that this move alone demonstrates that bitcoin and its eventual uses cases and level of use - are still in development and have yet to fully reveal themselves.I think the list can be condensed to the two - medium of exchange or investment(speculation). She lists many features of its use as a MOE but according to the MSO 95% buy it as a speculation, 4% buy it as an "investment" and 1% buy it as a MOE and these last tend to value its secrecy rather than its other supposed advantages over fiat.
Interesting point on the tax treatment. However, does this not just confirm bitcoin as a valid currency?
However, I do agree that this ETF thing confirms that BTC is not in the currency sphere but in the commodity sphere. That is the reality - very, very, very few are holding bitcoin for its medium of exchange utility which is really almost non existent.
Yes, I myself travel a bit to NI but I have agreed with Revenue that I may account for my sterling transactions by summarising them at the end of each day and using the average €/£ exchange rate for the day to determine my capital gains/lossesNo it confirms BTC as a capital good......which is game over for the payments dream...cause every microtransaction into and out of BTC attracts capital gains and losses.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?