This is a very clever piece. But it is also just a rehash of much of the crypto-cults belief system that lacks wholly or critical parts of an honest and empirical argument. It is meant not to inform but convince.
But, as a very clever piece, it deserves a full response.
Let’s go down this issues in summary and I’ll provide links that will help clarify what really is going on.
“Ponzi Schemes”
No one decries Bitcoin as an elaborate Ponzi scheme or worthless because “it cannot be touched and has no backing.” This is a fake argument because anything that is valued can be so described. Truly breath-taking bit of silliness. It does however have most of the key features of a Ponzi scheme/MLM play: get more believers to come in and add value and validity to something that is implausible. https://jsadove.medium.com/bitcoin-has-another-20-years-to-go-cb227ddc8266?source=your_stories_page-------------------------------------
“Environment”
Environmental concerns are real and well established. It’s weird that this is disavowed since it is even widely acknowledged even among advocates for crypto. However, it is a non-issue since it could be be solved using renewables. Of course, it won’t be wholly since the incentive is clear: mine using cheap energy. Cheap energy is required for greater returns and this will therefore be largely fossil fuels for a long enough time that BTC’s contribution will be rather horrific.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2273672-bitcoin-mining-emissions-in-china-will-hit-130-million-tonnes-by-2024/#ixzz6rxY1cFM4)
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-26/is-bitcoin-mining-worth-the-environmental-cost
“China”
But sticking with the issue of China, let’s review this. Correct: China (as mentioned here) accounts for (actually a little bit more than) 65% of BTC mining. Chinese government has entirely outlawed transacting in any crypto, prohibits operation of any crypto exchange, and prohibits any Chinese citizen from having an account on any exchange with crypto. China also provides north of 95% of the entire technology stack to mine/block validate crypto…from ASICS, to rigs, to mass rig operations. And China is now closest to issuing their own CBDC and is taking away all other abilities to transact digitally (WeChat Pay, AliPay, etc. ): SO MUCH FOR DECENTRLIZATION.
https://www.mondaq.com/china/fin-tech/944330/regulation-of-cryptocurrency-in-china
“Not everyone… will get equally wealthy or lose their shirts”
There is so much wrong with this, there isn’t time or space. But…
This is another fake issue. And laughably. The entire sector is predicated and promoted on HODLing. HODLing is the proposition that all you have to do is never sell and you will be rich.
Somewhere between 2% and 3% of BTC addresses (aka “investors) own 95% of all BTC. This is an astonishing concentration of wealth. As for “Not everyone….” not equally winning or losing, here is the general phenomenon of BTC wealth distribution: https://jsadove.medium.com/the-pure-ethical-case-against-btc-crypto-45da98a4315c
“Negligible Barriers to Entry”
This is a total canard. In the entire developed world this is absurd. No one concerns themselves with the need for “enormous home computing power”. And anyone can access the equities and currency markets as easily as crypto. You don’t even need a hardware wallet.
Now, the ease of access for both of these is largely (as described) available in the developed world. In most of the rest of the world, internet access, cost of access, hardware, technical sophistication, etc. are a huge overcoming. There is a lot of nonsense out there about farmers in Africa or poor Venezuelans getting access and “economic freedom”. Pure nonsense. The infrastructure is lacking, expensive, controlled by elites, etc. And to access BTC, you need a tradeable currency (fiat, right?) to be able to acquire it. It amazes me that folks in the space roll this one out, as if person-to-person commodity exchange exists for BTC.
And the “unbanked” thing is almost a shabby crypto meme. But truly absurd. The unbanked are not in a position to be investing in anything. Try finding a place that will give you your COVID payment in BTC. The “unbanked” nonsense is truly a lie that crosses into the absurd or just plain evil. And proposing that poor people hold a security that has the volatility of crypto should be illegal.
As for “no minimum investment”, clearly the author has never heard of things like Robinhood and the stack of newcomers to the space. And never mind the myriad of currency trading apps and platforms that just require a signup.
“Equal access to digital transactions”
Another bit of complete nonsense. Parisa still needed someone to open an account for her to buy the laptop. There was likely no problem for them to simply open a bank account in USA, EU, pay her there, and provide here with the access credentials. That way, she won’t have to guess whether the price of any good at that moment is going to be too little or too much.
And when you learn that Parisa Ahmadi is an elite, well, her problems are not the same as the overwhelming majority of people in her country. But there is something wrong here. Among the biggest transactors of Crypto are… the Taliban! That is one of the ways they are able to purchase arms, purchase chemicals for manufacturing heroin and selling the heroin using BTC. But refer to my earlier point about elites in corrupt and violent countries being exclusively the ones who benefit from crypto. This is a tiny fig leaf on the giant problem of governance and corruption and social progress. Not money.
“Protection against inflation/deflation…etc.”
This is similar or more stark nonsense than the prior point. As I have pointed out already, those in countries like Venezuela who benefit from crypto are OVERWHELMINGLY the ELITES. And crypto is a godsend for the corrupt elites because they can easily sell the resources (oil, diamonds, minerals, etc.) and get hard currency via crypto without having to be tracked or prevented by organizations that try to prevent this trade.
The number of ordinary and certainly poor people who have access to and can use crypto is vanishingly small. Once again: you need electronic hard currency to acquire crypto. And, even if you’re poor, your ability to acquire the technology, acquire the even a minimal ability to use it is challenging and fraught with issues.
“Striving for Equality”
This is a stunning phrase to bring into proximity of the subject of crypto. And that Jack Dorsey and Rapper Jay-Z are offered as philanthropists to a fund to expand the users of “uptake of Bitcoin” makes me think the author here is either entirely deluded or has a clear understanding that there is only one thing that enhances the value of crypto: more users. And one can be certain that the miniscule amount of charity represented in this case will have little effect on any poor person, but for these personalities promoting it will definitely have an effect on increasing the value of their holdings.
It seems Bitcoin offers vast opportunities to pump up the value of your holdings through Dorsey’s and other high-profile players' simply by promoting it. If done as half-half with Jay-Z, that means Dorsey laid out a giant 0.17% of his wealth and Jay-Z a whopping 0.9% of his. My guess is the pump this adds to Bitcoin will easily give them some multiples of that investment.
Any corrections welcome.
