A Fundamental Case For 17k Bitcoin and 18k Gold
Why is it that so many avant-garde Bitcoin Techies are so opposed to gold and Old School Gold Bugs so opposed to bitcoin?
My view is that such judgments are usually tainted by self-interest leading to political implications and consequences. The classic example is from two analysts who I deeply respect, Michael Saylor and Peter Schiff.
CoinDesk: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Crypto News and Price Data
Appearing Tuesday at CoinDesk's Bitcoin for Advisors virtual conference, Saylor shed new light on one of this year's…
Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff trashed the cryptocurrency, blasted the US government, and warned of a…
Peter Schiff dismissed bitcoin as useless and said the crypto boom will end in tears. The Euro Pacific Capital…
These are two sound money advocates, yet it seems an almost impossible task for otherwise sensible bitcoin analysts to see gold as viable competition for bitcoin or for gold advocates to see bitcoin as viable competition for gold.
Bitcoin Techies tend to see gold from the Keynesian view as “a barbaric relic” while Gold Bugs seem to be unable to grasp the concept of the value imputed to bitcoin.
But is the debate an either-or proposition? I don’t think so. An even cursory look at scholarly material available does not allow for it.
Saifedean Ammous, the author of The Bitcoin Standard, argues that a return to the gold standard is an effective attack on bitcoin.
“With the increased volatility and the availability of a reliable and relatively stable hard money international monetary standard, the incentive for using Bitcoin drops significantly. In a world in which governments’ restrictions and inflationary tendencies are disciplined by the gold standard, it might just be the case that gold’s first-mover advantage and relative purchasing power stability would constitute an insurmountable hurdle for Bitcoin to overcome., by depriving Bitcoin of the fast growth in users and thus preventing it from reaching a large enough size with any semblance of stability in price.” (page 250)
This view is also supported by perhaps the greatest monetary theoretician of this age, F. A. Hayek.