reply on: Bitcoin Pricing, Adoption, and Usage: Theory and Evidence | Article Review \ stacker news ~BooksAndArticles

pull down to refresh

42 sats \ 4 replies \ @siggy47 16 Oct \ on: Bitcoin Pricing, Adoption, and Usage: Theory and Evidence | Article Review BooksAndArticles

Thank you very much for the fee split, which was very generous, and for the article. I will definitely be including this in the index as an article review, but if more stackers begin writing these bitcoin academic reviews I will start a new category. I didn't absorb everything you wrote on a first pass, but I will get back to it. One thing that did occur to me is that it adds weight to the Parker Lewis article posted this morning that in the long run bitcoin must be a means of exchange, because that is its value case. I think of it as the anti-Saylor argument, though I'm sure I'm oversimplifying it.

80 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker OP 16 Oct

Assuming Saylor's view is that Bitcoin can forever be a SOV - I think it could also be. This article focuses only on one use-case: international payments.

But in a world where governments are constantly devaluing fiat, Bitcoin as a fixed asset could have a forever increasing exchange-rate with fiat.

This particular model doesn't really tell us yes or no to that, because it didn't include that force in the model.

BTW, this discussion highlights the economics discipline: being precise about what economic forces give rise to what conclusions.

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 16 Oct

I see. I think what Saylor seems to be saying is that bitcoin need not be a means of exchange, but can function solely as a store of value asset. Others have argued that its use as money is needed so that its store of value continues. That's not really what this article is about, obviously.

63 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 16 Oct

Not specific to this article, but many of the papers draw conclusions like "Bitcoin cannot be a currency, because it is driven by speculation."

I think that misses the point that people are speculating in it as something that will become a prevailing currency. I don't know if the authors are just being very precise with present vs future tenses (I doubt it), or if they are totally missing the point.

22 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker OP 16 Oct

Yeah, I'm sure I'll run into papers that I disagree a lot with. i was pleasantly surprised that the first paper I chose gave a very fair shake to Bitcoin. I didn't know Athey's views on Bitcoin so I didn't really know what to expect.