Hacker News Reader

Comment by datadata | Hacker News Reader

Not sure, it is just a correlation not an iron rule and definitely not the only influence. The shrinking here of m2 is much much smaller than the previous increase was as well.

View on HN

> it is just a correlation

Correlation of what, to what, and what's the R-value? Across what time frame?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation

These words normally have _meaning_ ya know. They're not just things you toss out in a meaningless online discussion.

There are certainly time frames where change in global m2 money supply and change in bitcoin's price over say 12mo would have a positive R value. That isn't the point I am making. If the amount of money available goes up, then one would expect that the price of other things, all else held equal would also go up. It would be quite strange for bitcoin or any other commodity to behave differently consistently and over a long period.

> If the amount of money available goes up, then one would expect that the price of other things, all else held equal would also go up

And if the amount of money available goes down for 18 months... then what?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM2NS

An "inflation hedge" goes up when inflation is up, and down when inflation is down. But in practice, BTC is closer to down when inflation is up, and up when inflation is down.

It isn't a perfect inflation hedge, no one is claiming that. You are cherry picking a single interval where the correlation is negative. If you zoom out, you'll find that the correlation is mostly positive. Past correlation is also not predictive of future results.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com