At this stage it's higher risk/reward than what would typically be classified as a savings vehicle. Therefore it's more of an investment than savings, however, it's unique because it's scarce and has such great monetary properties. So if you hold it for a long enough period (5 years) the risk can be reduced so it becomes good for savings.
At this stage it's higher risk/reward than what would typically be classified as a savings vehicle.
Irrelevant. People saving money in volatile fiat currencies e.g. the Turkish Lira are still "saving" money.
Bitcoin is money. So it's saving. In Bitcoin jargon we could use the word "stacking".
But "investing" is objectively wrong. "Investing" means you want something to become more. This isn't what Bitcoin is designed to do. And people using this word are embarrassing themselves by demonstrating that they still think in a fiat mindset or haven't understood what Bitcoin is about.
reply
At what point does it switch to becoming classified as a savings vehicle? It's proven to do quite at that despite its social perception over the years, and at this point denying Bitcoin isn't a mainstream view anymore.
reply
When a bunch of people who put money in over the last couple years have substantially less money now then they did at the time, it's a stretch to think of it as a savings vehicle. Certainly it is for those people.
I've considered getting super concrete with this, e.g., getting the time periods for which this "savings" concept would and would not make sense. Haven't got around to it, though.
reply
I'd say this is a function of societal memory. Think "years since last x% crash". From this we could do a comparison of accepted savings vehicles and come up with a threshold. Anybody wanna do the math? Might be a good bounty subject.
reply