But it doesn't have any value. Except that some people think it has. In times of truly global trouble, nobody will accept bitcoins as payment for bread.
That is true for gold as well. (Ofc not 'nobody', just 'almost nobody'.)
A golden chain with a gold-plated USB key containing a Bitcoin wallet might have a considerable bling factor though. :)
It seems more likely that people conflict zones would be happy to accept gold (with the assumption it will be valuable in the future/in more stable areas) than bitcoins that require electricity, stable internet and tons of disk space.
The problem with Bitcoin is it's not a physical thing at the end of the day: nobody mints jewellery out of bitcoin.
If your state demands your taxes be paid in FIAT, no matter what you wan't, you'll be paying in FIAT (or fined, or in jail, or depending on the circunstances maybe dead).
When the taxman comes knocking on their door, do you think this person will escape by saying "sorry, I don't have fiat available to pay for the taxes, come back next year!"? No, the taxman will respond by either seizing their assets or forcing the person to liquidate into fiat.
What makes Bitcoin (or crypto) different in that regard?
bitcoin acts more like a commodity than fiat. Bitcoin is backed by the laws of mathematics, rather than laws of nature (which is the case for gold).
Your claim that bitcoin is not fiat because it's backed by the laws of mathematics makes as much sense as claiming that the dollar is not fiat because it's backed by the printing press. This is not what 'backed' means in the context of money.
That is the case for countless things. Is a corporation a real thing or a belief? Where is the physical entity Facebook or the physical entity Apple? Is it the people working for them? Their logo? Their contracts? It's all that and a collective belief in an abstract entity. That's true for fiat or states too, even if that belief can be enforced through e.g. army, that doesn't change the fact that's is a collective belief in something that has no material reality.
Not even close. Gold is a tangible psychical asset, a finite resource on Earth that can not only make valuables you can wear or leave as heirloom but is also a really good heat-reflector and electricity conductor needed in anything from semiconductors and precision electronics to supercars and satellites. Without it, the global electronics industry would suffer terribly.
Interestingly, I went and looked up what the price of gold would actually be if it was solely used for industrial processes, and it's hard to actually figure out: it's speculated on a lot, but world gold demand in 2019 was 4355.7t. Of that, 48.5% was for the jewelery industry, and 7.48% for technology - the rest accounted for by investment. So industrially world demand for gold for productive or decorative uses is about 2439.2 tons (as of 2019), whereas mining production in that year was about 3,300 tons.
So about 45% of world gold demand is essentially from financial speculators. To figure out pricing you'd have to really get into the current mining economics for technological use...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/299609/gold-demand-by-in... https://www.statista.com/statistics/264628/world-mine-produc... https://www.gold.org/about-gold/gold-supply
It only has value as long as people believe it has value.
The caveat of course is that all of the things I listed have SOME more inherent value, but that is NOT the major contributor to their actual trading prices. Gold is not THAT useful. Neither is owning a billionth of a company.
People will only pay for the next Apple product as long as they believe it provides value to them. It's all the same. Perception is king.
if the existing majority shareholders chose to do this, then it will happen, but otherwise, this can't happen. And i don't see a situation where the existing shareholders would willingly choose to do this dilution for no reason.
So issuing more shares would not change the value of existing shares, at least in the short term.
Never mind the fact that the shareholders would have to make this decision, and that Apple has long been doing the exact opposite.
That is not true. There are only 1.5 billion active Apple devices. I myself own 4 of those. Everyone else I know that has an Apple device also has multiple. I'm pretty sure the average Apple customer owns more than 1.5 devices. Thus there can't be over a billion of these people.
That was my point. Any "real" value in most of these things is dwarfed by social delusion value.
Same with AAPL stock. Sure, I can pay ~$130 per share to technically own a fraction of Apple. And what good does that do for me? What's the dividends on AAPL? Will my vote EVER actually influence the company? I could spend $130 on canned beans and rice and likely get far more utility than I'd get from the ACTUAL share of AAPL. On the other hand, I'll probably be able to sell my AAPL share to the next sucker for more than $130. THAT'S the real reason 99.99% of us are invested in the stock market.
And, like it or not, bitcoin DOES have uses. It's still a little bit cheaper to send money via bitcoin than via Western Union, AFAIK. It's easy to pay for something online without giving your personal info to PayPal or the person who you are paying. Are those minor conveniences worth $40k? Hell no. But that's also my point. It's all crap.
In Apple’s case, you’d now have to pay 136 dollars in order to be entitled to 3.7 dollars of their annual earnings, corresponding to a current annual return rate of 2.7%. That’s better than any bank accounts, and it will most likely rise faster than inflation.
This is how the stock market works and how people value mature companies.
Why is BTC worth more than BCH?
One of those illusions is more powerful and sustainable than the other
It was made exclusively by software engineers and miners. Miners get to vote based on their wealth. I don't consider that to be "a democratic process". There is no guarantee of enfranchisement. Some people get far far far more votes than others. It is more like a council of aristocrats.
Government spending in the US is 35% of the whole GDP.
Try to argue with your tax office, that it is an illusion/religion.