Quote from: Dorky on April 11, 2017, 03:15:15 PM

Quote from: iamnotback on April 11, 2017, 09:00:26 AM

So first Jorge compares Bitcoin to money which was correct, but complains it is not regulated, yet gold is also not (at least not entirely) regulated and has an ETF. Then he compares Bitcoin to equities which are not money. Duplicitous much. Roll Eyes

That bolded statement gave me an impression that gold is (generally) unregulated.

I have edited the OP as shown above in your quote to make it consistent with the quote of what I had written above it as follows.

Perhaps you missed this part below which was already in the OP when you read it:

Quote from: iamnotback on April 11, 2017, 09:00:26 AM

Bitcoin is superior to gold in that it has an inelastic supply and can move non-physically across borders unregulated which enables it to be more efficient than existing fiat currencies, and more difficult to regulate all possible exchange market markers for Bitcoin compared to gold. The lack of regulation is what makes Bitcoin very efficient, per John Nash's Ideal Money concept.

...

Although gold trades less on entirely unregulated exchanges, that is one of the reasons that gold is inferior to Bitcoin as an investment commodity money.

Quote from: Dorky on April 11, 2017, 03:15:15 PM

As long as a financial security is generally traded in a regulated market whereby any unregulated transaction is done in reference to the price quoted in the regulated market, we can safely say that this financial security is regulated.

Yes I have also argued numerous times to @r0ach in the Martin Armstrong thread of the Economics section (and also I have an entire thread on precious metals), that gold is effectively regulated because the largest market makers who provide the liquidity (thus set the liquid spot price) are all regulated.

Nevertheless one can exchange gold unregulated but at gouging illiquid spreads. I have actually done this a few years ago in the Philippines.

Quote from: Dorky on April 11, 2017, 03:15:15 PM

Of course it does not serve the purpose to also include off-market transactions (like me selling some 10 grams of gold to my friend under a tree) to be considered as unregulated, because if that is the case for argument, then we can also say that bitcoin will never ever be regulated even if it is 99% so.

No argument from me. And gold is becoming more regulated. For now, Bitcoin is only being regulated at the exchanges and only marginally for KYC and AML.

But note that decentralized exchanges already exist for Bitcoin so if ever needed they are ready. It is impossible to make a decentralized exchange for a tangible good.

You may have a correct implied point (which I also did think of before) which is that Gold ETF is allowed by the SEC because gold is effectively regulated (among other factors such as gold having a larger marketcap and historically perceived value that has been indistinguishable from its tangibility in the mind of most n00bs).

Quote from: Dorky on April 11, 2017, 03:17:15 PM

Nevertheless, since the use of bitcoin is not yet clearly specified, we cannot say bitcoin is commodity or currency until it has a very clear + specific + accepted use.

Well your statement is more clever/astute than maybe you realize. We would like to perhaps assume that the properties of Bitcoin would not change if it were a currency, but I think we have shown in recent discussions in other threads, that if Bitcoin scales up to be a currency, then it will lose its immutability and thus no longer been an ideal commodity better than gold.

When gold was a currency, then it lost its ideal attributes and was debased, because the public confidence in money was based on the stamp on the coin, not just the metal content. When the coins were debased, then Gresham's Law took hold because yet while the public confidence in the stamped coins remained, then the money did not collapse until public confidence collapsed.

This is why Bitcoin is intended to be power broker ($billionaires) money, not currency for the masses. This is why Bitcoin will never get SegWit nor any more significant changes to its protocol. So if I am correct on that prediction, then Bitcoin is indeed all that I wrote in the OP and will never be currency for the masses.