Bitcoin is not a “tulip”!

Bitcoin is not a tulip and Bitcoin's ecosystem is not tulip mania. Why do I say this? Well, because an especially ignorant and uninformed writer for Bloomberg wrote an article yesterday comparing Bitcoin and saying, "Does it have value? Do we even know? Could it be like the tulip mania?" Okay, ignorant person, this is super easy to find out. Google it. Use chat GPT. Get on YouTube. The data is all there. It's all easy. But in case that person is watching this video, which I know they're not, but in case they are, let's recap how we know Bitcoin is not a tulip and it's not Tulip Mania. First of all, we don't have to speculate whether Bitcoin might be valuable or whether it might lose all of its value. Remember, we're investing here based on first principles. The first principles is that barter does not work in a moderate economy. And so, humans are going to use something as money. What are their options? Fiat currencies, which are called fiat currencies because they're made up by governments, by fiat, by dictate. The government just makes up the currency and says it has value. Or we could use precious metals. Or we could use Bitcoin. Those are really the big options. So, let's call it gold, Bitcoin, and fiat currency. So, let's throw tulips in there since this ignorant writer does not have the brain power to use chat GPT to ask simple questions. In fact, all this person had to do is feed their own article into chat GPT and say, "Does this make any sense?" And it would have told them it makes no sense, but I don't know, maybe they don't know how to use chat GPT. Come on, how ridiculous is this? Okay, so we are going to use something as money in a modern economy. Everybody agrees on that. I've I've never encountered a single person who disagrees that we are going to use money in a modern economy. Okay, so what are we going to use as money? Well, actually everyone pretty much agrees what the attributes of a good money are. A good money is diver divisible, durable, portable, uh authenticatable, uh scarce, and uh fungeible. Sorry, here the dog is distracting me. So, I'll say them again. Divisible, durable, portable, fungeible, authenticatable, and scarce. Those are the six attributes of a good money. You can pull that list straight out of the Fidelity Bitcoin first revisited report. And Fidelity gives you a nice little chart comparing Bitcoin, fiat currencies, and gold. And it says, "Here are the attributes of a good money. Divisible, durable, portable, fungeable, uh, authenticatable, and scarce." Uh, okay. So, how how are we still comparing Bitcoin to tulips in the year 2025? How ignorant do you have to be to make that comparison? So, first of all, let's compare tulips to the criteria. Uh, so tulips or tulip bulbs in this case, people when they say tulips, they typically refer to tulip bulbs and they're referring to the tulip mania, I think, which happened in the 1600s, I think it was. Okay. So, are tulips divisible? Are they still valuable if you cut the bulb in multiple pe pieces and then try to grow a tulip with just a fraction of the bulb? No, they are not divisible. So, a tulip bulb is not divisible. You can't use tulips as money. They're not divisible. Are they durable? Can they hold their value, you know, without deteriorating over years or decades? No. They rot. A tulip bulb goes bad. So, not durable, not divisible. Are they portable? Well, not in large quantities. If you want to move a billion dollars of tulip bulbs, what? That's like a cargo ship. I mean, give me a break. It's not portable. You can't send a tulip bulb over the internet. Okay. What about authenticatable? Can an average person eyeball a tulip bulb and figure out how much value it has and how rare or exotic a tulip it might grow? No. Same problem with gold. It's really hard to tell what is real gold and what is not real gold. So, they're not verifiable. What about fungeible? Fungeible means all of the units are the same, which is why diamonds are bad money because all the diamonds are different. So, you can't really say, "Hey, I'll trade a loaf of bread for a diamond because the question is how big? How pure?" You know, the diamonds have like the four C's or four Ds. I don't know characteristics of clarity and cut and you know carrots how many how big they are all that sort of stuff. So no so tullet bulbs are not funible they're not authenticatable. They're not durable. They're not portable. They're not divisible. How about scarce? Is there anything keeping someone from making more tulip bulbs? No. There's an unlimited amount of tulip bulbs. So if somebody were ignorant enough like this reporter who just mouthed off out of pure ignorance. if they were ignorant enough to put tulip bulbs in the chart in the Bitcoin first revisited report from Fidelity just straight out of one of the largest most reputable financial institutions in the world Fidelity you put bit uh you put tulip bulbs in that chart of what makes a good money tulips fail all of the categories like categorically tulips are horrible money so is it a surprise that the tulip mania of the 1600s crashed when everybody was speculating on tulips tulips and how much more valuable tulips might be than they were yesterday. No, of course that was going to crash because the intrinsic value of a tulip is a flower. It is not a viable money. It is not divisible, portable, durable, fungeible, authenticatable and scarce. Tulips are not that. So why in the year 2025 are ignorant people writing reports comparing Bitcoin to a tulip? For a couple reasons. One, this person's a big fan of gold and they don't want there to be a competitor to gold. So, they have spent zero intellectual energy understanding whether Bitcoin could be a competitor to gold because they've already decided that they like gold and spoke favorably about it in the article. And so, they don't want to use any brain power to figure out if Bitcoin could outco compete gold, which it will because Bitcoin has superior monetary properties. Uh, by comparison, gold does have some good properties. It is relatively scarce, not compared to Bitcoin. You can always dig up more gold out of the ground, but compared to most things, gold is relatively scarce, and it's durable as well. You can't really destroy gold. It doesn't like just go away. You can throw it in the bottom of the ocean where you can't find it anymore, but you know, you're not going to like destroy it in a fire or something like that. Okay, so gold has some attributes that are good, such as it's relatively scarce and it's relatively durable, but it is not divisible. You can't shave off one speck of gold to buy a cup of coffee. There's no way to measure it and divi. So it's it's not sufficiently divisible and it's not sufficiently portable. Large amounts of gold are too heavy to easily transport without you know massive armored cars and things like that. So gold is not divisible. It's not portable and it's not authenticatable. The average person when they stare at a yellow metal cannot tell you what purity of gold is it. Is it 90% 95% 99.9999% or is it fool's gold or is it a bar of tungsten covered by a layer of gold on the outside? Nobody knows, including gold's biggest proponent, Peter Schiff. Uh there was a debate with him and CZ uh this past week or the week before. And CZ brought a a bar of gold from some I don't know I think it was like an Eastern block country that was imprinted 99.999% pure gold and he gave it to Peter Schiff and he asked Peter Schiff is this real gold because it was imprinted and it was certified and it actually had a certificate of authenticity from this country that it was real gold and Peter Schiff was like uh I don't know and CZ's point was of course you don't know because nobody can figure it out without really expensive spectrometer. equipment that cost like $50,000. And it turns out the gold bar was fake. So the whole point that CZ was making was, "Hey, I can hand you a gold bar. It's super heavy. It looks like gold. I even have a gold certificate from a real legit country on planet Earth from their mint saying it's real gold." But guess what? You actually run it through a spectrometer, it's actually fake. It's an actual fake. But nobody can figure that out. So again, gold fails. of the six properties of good money. The reason we don't use gold today is because gold is not divisible. It's not portable. It's not authenticatable and it is again it's somewhat scarce but not very scarce. Now gold is relatively scarce and it is durable. Um let's see what is there was one other attribute of gold. So uh divisible, durable, portable, authenticatable, fungeible. Oh gold is fungeible. one unit of gold. An ounce of pure gold is the same as another ounce of pure gold. So it is fungeible. So it's not that gold doesn't have two or three viable qualities, but it is not divisible. It is not portable and it's not authenticatable. You cannot send gold over the internet. You can't send a tulip bulb over the internet either. So any comparison of Bitcoin to tulips is just stupid, frankly. In fact, it's so stupid that I did an entire debate on this topic which you can go watch at bitcoinbubblemmyth.com. I put up an entire website at bitcoinbubble myth.com. Mytht bitcoinbubble myth.com and you can see the whole debate. Uh you or my side of the debate. I only had licensing rights to you know publish my stuff. Uh but anyway, I put up my side of the debate and I also put up a entire PowerPoint presentation and you can go watch the whole thing and look at how completely stupid it is that people compare Bitcoin to tulips. But again, go download go download the Fidelity report, Bitcoin First Revisited. Go look at the chart that compares fiat currencies, gold and Bitcoin. Go think about whether tulip bulbs meet any of those criteria. They do not. and they go ask yourself, how ignorant do you have to be to be a commentator at Bloomberg to still be comparing uh Bitcoin to tulip bulbs when the criteria of a good money has been out there forever. And ChatGpt would have told this this author that it was an ignorant story. It's an ignorant story. ChatGPT could tell you that. Google could tell you that. Watching a few YouTube videos could tell you that. You can even type in is Bitcoin a bubble? you'll probably find my website bitcoinbubblemth.com which will tell you it's not a bubble and comparing it to tulips is stupid. So here we go again. Literally yesterday Bloomberg some random person mouthing off. This has been the same thing since 2010. Bitcoin was in uh launched in 2009. By 2010 there were negative articles saying it was tulip mania and it was a tulip bubble and it was going to zero and blah blah blah. All those people have been wrong. In fact, there's entire websites dedicated to Bitcoin uh death like uh death proclamations. Anyway, so you can go and something like 500 times various news articles, organizations or individuals have says Bitcoin is dead, time to move on. And they've been saying Bitcoin is dead, time to move on. since Bitcoin was like a dollar. And here 100,000 times more value than 90 cents. Ignorant people at Bloomberg are still saying, you know, it might be a tulip. We just don't know. Seriously, we don't know. We don't know the properties of good money. We've known the properties of a good money for thousands of years. And the the reason the US dollar, we even use the dollar is because it's more divisible, portable, and authenticatable than gold. It's not scarce. It's not durable. It's not um you know, I guess it's fun fungeible. The US dollar is fungeible. One US dollar tends to be like another US dollar unless you're Russia and you own US dollars and then you know your dollars are not worth anything because they get confiscated, which hey, not a fan of Russia, but you know, who decides if you get to hold money, the government or you you know, do you really want a money that the government on a whim can take away from you and say you don't own it anymore? So, we've known the we've known the attributes of a good money for thousands of years, except this random person at Bloomberg is still too ignorant to but to do any research to figure out what are the attributes of a good money. Bitcoin's not going to zero. Bitcoin's going to a million dollars. And you, it doesn't require belief. It doesn't require you to suspend disbelief. It doesn't require you to ponder and wonder whether Bitcoin will be valuable in the future. You can go back to first principles. You can go back and say, "What are the attributes of a good money?" I can find that those out from the Fidelity report entitled Bitcoin First Revisited. You can go read the Bitcoin first revisited report from Fidelity to find out the attributes of a good money, which you can then verify by thousands of sources all over the internet that will tell that will give you that exact same list and will say, "Yes, that is indeed the list of the attributes of a good money." So anybody can look at those attributes and anybody can compare gold, silver, bitcoin, fiat currencies and tulip bulbs and anybody can conclude that bitcoin will win in the end because it has superior monetary properties and therefore is the perfect money for the world. Now is it taking a while for Bitcoin to get adopted? Sure. Try go try to explain somebody some Bitcoin to somebody who's never understood it before. Go find some random person that's only heard of Bitcoin but doesn't know anything about it and try to explain it to them so well that they become a true believer and they understand the attributes of a good money. It is hard. It is hard to do that. And because it is hard to do that, it takes time for Bitcoin to be adopted worldwide because 8 billion people have to understand the attributes of a good money and why Bitcoin is better. And that process of understanding is steadily marching onward. But it takes time. It takes time and there are ups and downs along the road because there's a lot of people who speculate on Bitcoin without really understanding what it is. The people who do understand what it Bitcoin actually is are in a state of constant accumulation and more and more of the world is living on a Bitcoin standard like I am. But that is hard to do. It is difficult. It requires a ton of time and there's no way around the hard work. So, it's going to be a multi-year, multi-deade process of the entire world adopting Bitcoin as their store of value, medium of exchange, and ultimately unit of account. That's a multi-year, multi-deade process. We are early in that process, which is why you can still buy Bitcoin for less than 89,000 or 91,000, $91,000 per coin. Right now, for $91,000 per coin, you can own the best money in the world that will one day be worth in US dollar terms more than a million dollar uh coin. Probably more than multiple million. Some speculate more than $10 million per coin. So, you can pick that up for cheap right now. And apparently the person at Bloomberg is too ignorant to know that. But why can't these people paste their own articles in ChatGpt and say, "Hey, is this ignorant?" Because chat GPT would say, "Yeah, this is ignorant." like you're kind of missing the whole point of Bitcoin. It's not that hard.