Bitcoin is essentially a modern moneygram.
This example is based on bitcoin maintaining price stability which is likely to occur when widely adopted.
example1
Person A pays x for a £100 money gram to which is sent to Person B. Person B trades the money gram to x and receives £100. The money gram is now worthless and disgarded. Person x charged £2.50 for holding and releasing the fiat currency.
example 2
Person a pays x for £100 worth of Bitcoin to which is sent to person b.Person B trades the bitcoin with person x and receives £100. Person x retains the bitcoin and is free to trade again.
The only difference between the two is that in example 2 the transfer method is reused in other transaction. i.e the bitcoin continues to be used and owned by new people. Wheras in example 1 the moneygram is destroyed at the end of the transaction. A new one is printed for a new transaction.
So despite the obvious advantage in speed and it being free...what gives the bitcoin any more value than a single money gram? i.e why would anyone pay £350just to hold what is essentially the right to send a transfer.
Any comments?
You do realize that money is essentially paper (or coin) that represents the right to buy a product or service. But that all forms of fiat money are controlled by the fed or something similar, which is not part of the government (Altough it is above the law and it's protected by the government and influencing the government, even enslaving the government to a degree) and is only there to make profit for the shareholders by inflating the currency, stealing away value from your fiat, while also increasing national debt by the second?
If you realize that, holding bitcoin doesn't seem all that bad now does it?