Bitcoin is both a medium of exchange and a store of value, now and in the future.

It's never a choice between hodling or spending sats; bitcoin's growth lies in doing both.

 nostr:npub1ey6qdmvzcgcsr883m9nspzz0mm037l26xtardzcskfsvc6gc7jssm9szvp breaks apart bitcoin’s false dichotomy in his latest post 👇

https://medium.com/breez-technology/bitcoins-false-dichotomy-between-sov-and-moe-18e3f968a643


"A SoV is a MoE in transactional slow motion, and a MoE is a SoV with the trading velocity cranked up."

nostr:nevent1qqsvsrma2rcrl4twm7xauxwv0dnxpxavx8pvc8g77jd06zun579ltcspz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygyhz8g6h2qx5w3gtle7slghtypv9ujswsvxpkwxtypu3d0gv04asypsgqqqqqqsfezxht


Hi would be great if Breez post the articles on Nostr using highlighter.com and then use nostr:npub1pr4du5xl28dy5sh4msz9uddnwxgzupkk4qzjzklv84edc6ruevzqlxmkzp to create a nostr blog using the articles published. Better use Nostr instead of Medium, that is centralized.
Thanks.


Monero is a better medium of exchange and a worse store of value.

Just like USD is a better medium of exchange than gold.

Bitcoin is a medium of exchange but better at being a store of value.

Use both Monero and Bitcoin as you see fit. For those who see the value in cash. Monero is the right choice.


Mises explained that the "store of value" function of money is derived from the "medium of exchange" function. And therefore it's superfluous to talk about a "store of value" function of money as though it were separate from "medium of exchange." I read the first few paragraphs and it sounds like you basically agree with Mises. Except Mises was talking about money and what makes money money.

In the beginning, we wanted Bitcoin to become money. It was a wonderful medium of exchange for a while. Then some things happened that made it more cumbersome as medium of exchange. Some people recognized the problem and started working on solutions. Other people seem to have moved the goalposts by talking about "store of value." You're right to say that in order for Bitcoin to be a "store of value" it needs to be valuable over some time interval, between two exchanges. The question now is: do we still want Bitcoin to become money?


We need to make gold, Bitcoin, and Monero money. People need to be free to choose. No one should be prohibited from using any of these as media of exchange or money.

If any of them is best as a medium of exchange, that means it will be best as a store of value too. In order for the thing to be a medium of exchange, it must be valued at the time of the first exchange, and also be valued at the time of the later exchange, thus a "store of value." So to be a better medium of exchange necessarily means to be a better store of value or a better money.

Value isn't really stored anywhere, valuation takes place in the minds of the valuers, so it's kind of an idiom to talk about "store of value" in the first place. You have no guarantee that the thing you are keeping will be valuable in the future, even if it's money, because its future value depends upon the minds of the individuals later in time.

Is an appreciable asset a store of value that is not a medium of exchange? Sure. But if Bitcoin is not easily exchanged, it has lost its way and value should go to near zero. What other function does it have besides its ease of transfer? It might be kind of like "owning" the name of some distant star: just kind of a fun curiosity or game. But that's not money. That's not a medium of exchange.

The reason we talk about "store of value" is probably due to some flawed econ textbooks of the past saying that money needs this special attribute.

Let's make gold, Bitcoin, and Monero money. If it doesn't work as money, we have work to do.


#Bitcoin is money; it'll be used as such in more ways than one.

nostr:nevent1qqsvsrma2rcrl4twm7xauxwv0dnxpxavx8pvc8g77jd06zun579ltcspzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtczyzt3r5dt4qr28g59lulg05t4jqkz7fg8gxrqm8r9jq7gkh5x867czqcyqqqqqqgeacear


Question is if it will be a medium of exchange also for micro/medium payments or only for institutional settlements.


Anyone else see a guy with a mustache in that image?


Where ?
Dude get some rest, you are seeing things


Are you really a #bitcoinmaximalist if you refuse to use it as a medium of exchange? 😜 Spend and replace!

nostr:nevent1qqsvsrma2rcrl4twm7xauxwv0dnxpxavx8pvc8g77jd06zun579ltcspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7q3qjugar2agq6369p0l86razavs9shj2p6pscxecevs8j94ap37hkqsxpqqqqqqz5ery0k


How do you call false false dichotomy?


It's just that the adoption is delayed. We might 50% SoV adoption while MoE still at 1%. It will come later


Satoshi was the first person to compare bitcoin to gold. What in fucks name are you talking about?


Help me understand.

Anytime someone stacks bitcoin to hodl the other person in that trade is using it as MoE. What am I getting wrong? https://image.nostr.build/20a872bdfea172a5753bdabe442ea9b5259e871366ab5f4435ded269b2d344aa.jpg


Yeah, looks AI generated


Exactly! HODLing and spending go hand in hand in driving Bitcoin's adoption and growth.

nostr:note1eq8h658s8l2kahudmcvuc7mxvzd6cvwzesw3aay6l59e8fut7h3qrsajx8


That's all I can see


I am trying to clear up some confusion but I'm afraid I created more. I have another post in this same thread I wrote on the same day as the one you responded to. I hope that one helps.

If not, I'll try again.

I think if you start with Bitcoin and ask yourself if it's a medium of exchange versus store of value, you're already on the wrong track. I would rather you ask what the replacement money for the dollar is going to be. Ask if Bitcoin can replace the dollar (and Euro, and Yuan, etc.) and if not figure out why not. When I say "money" I mean what Mises meant, namely the most commonly used medium of exchange. I already tried to explain the fallacy of "medium of exchange" versus "store of value." Again, if something is a medium of exchange it must necessarily be a store of value, otherwise the second exchange will be a disappointment.

When I try to use Bitcoin as a medium of exchange (not as a stock) in hopes that someday it can become money, sometimes it is a breeze and sometimes it is full of friction. Bitcoin is far from money at this time. One time when I tried to pay my server bill, I saw that transaction fees were much more than 3% of the amount I wanted to spend, and that on top of the vendor's processor fees. The fees were so high because some numbskulls wanted to save cartoons into the Bitcoin blockchain. Thankfully it was not a coffee, it was a utility bill, so I waited a few days, fees came down, and I paid my bill then. Other times I tried to buy things sellers added a fee much higher than 3% of the thing I was buying. I keep referencing 3% based on approximate credit card fees. Another time I tried to buy something they wanted personal information akin to a job application. Then I have to pay taxes on top of all that, too, as though it were some kind of real estate transaction. Getting back to the point, every now and then I see some comment about transaction fees being higher as good for Bitcoin. High fees being good for bitcoin is an argument against Bitcoin becoming money and I think those mental gymnastics are mistaken. Folks might also add the "store of value" to that argument. These arguments are treating Bitcoin like a stock or real estate holding rather than like a money. I think you should be free to participate in Ponzi schemes if you want, but I would rather Bitcoin become money someday, along with gold or silver, which are also assets that people are treating like stocks that instead should become money.

Does that make sense? I'm frustrated by people moving the goalposts away from Bitcoin as money. I think you should be able to buy a coffee with Bitcoin. If you cannot, for any reason, then something has gone wrong, someone is getting in the way, or technical problems need to be acknowledged and resolved.


Maybe. We could distinguish adoption as a stock to be exchanged later for money versus adoption as a money to be exchanged later for goods or services. Whether my second exchange for goods or services takes place 20 years from now or 20 minutes from now I can use Bitcoin as a medium of exchange. My intent to exchange it for another money versus intent to exchange it for goods and services shapes my perspective. Emphasis on "SoV" is the former and emphasis on "MoE" is the latter. Emphasis on "MoE" necessarily includes "store of value" but the reverse is not always true.


If it is only a medium of exchange for institutional settlements, that would mean it's custodial and a failure as peer-to-peer cash.


Not a failure, sub-optimal, yes. Custodial solutions will survive idealistic radicals as sub-optimal solutions, unfortunately


If peer-to-peer cash (Bitcoin) solves the problem of institutional gatekeepers of money, then when Bitcoin is exclusively a medium of exchange for institutional settlements it has failed.