More utility than crypto, sure. But the days of it having ‘heaps’ are long gone. Certainly its practical uses fall well short of the price/value the world attaches to it, which was the whole point I was making that utility is not necessarily the determining factor in an asset’s worth.
Your undervaluing the aesthetic demand. 90 percent of all women on the planet are probably wearing some right now. And plenty of men as well. Most houses will also have additional items with some gold in it such as furniture and cutlery. In india and many other cultures every wedding comes with a massive transfer of gold.
Fair, it absolutely still has value attached to it for its use in making jewelry and other high-value items, but that in itself does not come close to accounting for the entirety of its value, which goes back to my original point. Practical use is not necessarily commensurate with value.
Not really. While price is absolutely a factor in it not being widely used for industrial purposes, a much more influential reason is simply because there are better metals (or even non-metals) for most of the uses we once had for it. Silver, copper and titanium have considerably more utility as industrial metals than gold does.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Never compared crypto with gold, but people seem to be falling over themselves to read that into what I’ve posted. I literally just used gold as an example of something with few practical uses still being valuable. That’s it. Perhaps I should have used sporting memorabilia, Disney figurines or baseball cards as an example instead
They are better examples but they are very small markets and and again there is some aesthetic appeal to them. People like looking at them. They like having them sitting on the shelf, bringing them out and showing them to others. I dont think the aesthetic appeal is much. But its something.Never compared crypto with gold, but people seem to be falling over themselves to read that into what I’ve posted. I literally just used gold as an example of something with few practical uses still being valuable. That’s it. Perhaps I should have used sporting memorabilia, Disney figurines or baseball cards as an example instead
Fair enough. I think that’s probably the closest we’ll get to any sort of agreement so perhaps we should leave it there
My house was already paid off from regular income and property investment. I bought two new cars last year and threw most of my other crypto profits into shares and taxes
.
There's a massive difference in risk. The past year has taught me that bitcoin is definitely not a hedge against inflation.
But how do you determine it as being undervalued?Fair enough. I think that’s probably the closest we’ll get to any sort of agreement so perhaps we should leave it there
I’m far from a crypto devotee, I just think it’s being undervalued and written off too readily as a viable high-risk investment that will likely increase in value again in the medium term.
You generally need to buy from an exchange, but you don’t have to store there. You can store it in a cold wallet rather than a wallet with an exchange. I think folks with hefty balances were silly not to be doing that prior to what’s happened in the last week or so; they’d be stark raving mad not to now.
fyp
Yes dems are anti crypto cos they believe in government. All lefties should be 100 percent anti crypto. There is no government welfare or public services in a world where the goverment issued currency is replaced by crypto.
