pull down to refresh
202 sats \ 5 replies \ @DeltaClimbs 6 Jun freebie \ on: How much bitcoin owned by ETFs is too much? bitcoin
There is no "too much"
Ironically, though you think you are pro freedom, you are implicitly suggesting people's freedom to trade is wrong.
You are making a category error. ETF is not bitcoin. Think about it as a totally different thing, like real estate. Is 100x real estate to bitcoin too much in the world? It is a nonsense question. 5 years ago it was 1000x. So all the bitcoin is always owned, it is just a question of who it is owned by.
It is not "wrong" per se that people choose to not own bitcoin and own a different thing called ETF.
You think: oh, but the world will be shitty because XYZ -- wrong, friend, the world is shitty today, it's all fiat. Eventually, it will be all bitcoin. Reframe your thinking: if it's lots of ETF and it's the bitcoin standard and still shitty, it wasn't actually full hyperbitcoinization -- keep waiting.
Better to ask how much is too much for an individual. I would say 20% is very high, and can be much lower with higher net worth. Going from US to Canada I have been questioned about how much money I have and having nearly empty bank accounts and brokerage is not a good look, which is why now I own a bit of MSTR. Also was helpful to show landlords I'm not broke. If you drive a Porsche though you wouldn't have this issue and could easily GetOnZero.
Good points. Perhaps I should have phrased the question this way:
How much bitcoin owned by a single entity could cause problems for Bitcoin?
(I didn't put it like that because it is not as snappy and I wanted to put it in the context of the etfs)
Keeping in mind that bitcoin exists in the freest market there is (anyone can buy it who finds a seller), my question is do you think there is an existential threat to bitcoin if one entity were to hold 10 million btc?
reply
Nope. Bitcoin is not a democracy.
Might cause problems for the world, but generally, the more inequality there is in bitcoin, the better, because long term superwhales inevitably must hodl.
https://heaviside.substack.com/p/210-years-of-darkness-on-bitcoin
reply
Economic nodes play a big role in bitcoin. A node that has the private keys to 10 million btc can say that it will run a particular hard fork and can produce 10 million btc worth of sell pressure on the legacy chain. While I understand that bitcoin is not a democracy, this sort of sell pressure does have an influence on how these things play out.
reply
Think about it this way; if there was a single entity that held 10 million btc and they supported a fork that most bitcoiners didn't, a miner would have to think very carefully about which fork they mined on. Miners have real costs (energy). Faced with an entity that could depress the price of the legacy fork to such a great degree, it is unlikely any miner could weather that economic storm. Many would mine the new fork.
reply
But back to my point, even in the worst case, this is just another shitcoin. Even if it is dominant for 1000 years, eventually it would collapse.
reply