I don't buy that argument that Bitcoin is volatile because it has no intrinsic value to be backed upon. Nothing is backed by anything substantive! Fiat is backed by the monopoly power of the state, gold is backed by the social capital given to it. If Bitcoin's lack of physical asset backing was a problem, all currencies would be volatile.
Bitcoins volatility is not new in financial history. Earlier forms of currency like tobacco used in the early American colonies were much more volatile. Bitcoin's instability is just a demonstration of the market. Hype led to speculators buying up the supply, and scares by regulators and panic sellers caused price drops.
There is nothing intrinsic in Bitcoin, besides maybe slow and expensive transactions coming to the fore, that makes it volatile. It is a commodity, and like any commodity, is a slave to market forces - let it be euphoria or panic.
Bitcoins volatility is not new in financial history. Earlier forms of currency like tobacco used in the early American colonies were much more volatile. Bitcoin's instability is just a demonstration of the market. Hype led to speculators buying up the supply, and scares by regulators and panic sellers caused price drops.
There is nothing intrinsic in Bitcoin, besides maybe slow and expensive transactions coming to the fore, that makes it volatile. It is a commodity, and like any commodity, is a slave to market forces - let it be euphoria or panic.
Merited and agree all the way.
He proves he is the one which is detailed in his personal message.
I love the way it was said. It is like everything now is backed by something and only bitcoin is the one who changed it all.
Commodity/currency for me. Since the start that had been the look of bitcoin in my eyes.
It will always depend on the demand. It is the only answer that should be said.