Atlas, thanks for posting my article. It was a pleasant surprise to open this thread and see someone compliment my work.
calling for people to take out loans to buy up an appreciating asset in the same article as talking about financial responsibility, efficiency, and freedom is highly ignorant.
It's not ignorant, it's leveraging. Also, I never talked about "responsibility" or "freedom".
While I share the belief that bitcoin or something very like it will play a major role in the future, I think the road there is going to be a lot rougher.
I imagine we will see a huge boom then a bust, after that those who stick around will build the meaning full economy that will allow bitcoin or its successor to dominate.
I don't care about the busts. I am riding this pig wherever it takes me. If it tanks, I'll have a helluva story to tell. I'm sick of half measures. I'm swinging for the fences and If I strike out, so be it. I won't be some mediocre drone living a life of quiet desperation. I believe in bitcoin and I'm going for broke, knowing the risks.
Hell yeah.
but creighto, at least you'll have your guns, ammo, and silver to disinfect your milk.
just recall that 'if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is'.
those of us who aren't teenagers have seen this kind of thing dozens of times before, each time with claims that the speculation is based on something fundamentally new. i make no predictions about the price of bitcoins, as today's price results solely from what game theorists call a beauty-contest game, but 'confidence' in the most optimistic of results isn't warranted.
perspective isn't hard to acquire here, but it's always elusive. you can find quotations almost exactly the same as the original post in this discussion littered through history. would it help anyone if i found some?
borrowing in support of speculation is, additionally, almost always irrational because of the diminishing marginal utility of wealth. if bitcoins end up worth $1,000, it won't really matter whether you have 3000 or 5000 of them. (as someone with money, that's all too real a truth. like most people who've made money, i continue to seek it out of what, if i were honest, i'd have to admit was a quirky habit, rather than a need or a belief that i can do something better with it than others.) on the other hand, the interest on the $36000 debt you'd incur to buy an additional 2000 bitcoins today, which debt would grow to $240,000 in 20 years at 10% interest, could make the difference between solvency and bankruptcy for you.
going 'whole hog', to borrow an american phrase, is almost never a good investment strategy. diversification is almost always better, particularly when bankruptcy is a real risk. (incidentally, what does an honest libertarian do when facing legal bankruptcy, which is of course basically a protection against legitimate debt offered by a welfare state? does he or she decline the legal protection because it results from 'force'?)
Given no other information, except that something sounds too good to be true, then yeah, it's probably too good to be true. But I (and you) have way more information than just what bitcoin sounds like on the surface. I just spent a solid three weeks studying the technology, the community, and whatever economics I could digest in that period of time. And my conclusions have done nothing but sharpen on the incredible outcome: bitcoin is likely to actually be adopted as a currency by a huge fraction of the world.
I get your point about being reasonable. Any time we arrive at such an incredible conclusion we ought to consider the possibility that we have made a mistake. I have considered that possibility and I am not at present aware of any mistakes I may have made.
Your point about there not being a difference between 5000 and 3000 is simply wrong. It's different by a factor of 5/3. How many billionaires would turn down the opportunity to have 5/3 more money? None.