"#Gold has been a store-of-value for thousands of years" is a mantra repeated ad nauseam by which influencers seek to convince their audience of a similar eternal value for #Bitcoin.
The gullible listener soaks up such great wisdom with an open mouth, and joins the chorus of the many who sing along.
The fallacious belief in such miraculous eternal value of one particular good, gold, is all the more astounding as most plebs know about the many, many other goods which have lost this prized store-of-value function in the past.
In fact, any and all former monetary goods fell back to their plain use value once they demonised:
Silver has the same thousand years of history as gold, but is well on its path to demonetisation nirvana, trading at under a quarter of its former SoV value, falling.
Copper, Bronze, Electrum, Cowries, Wampum, Salt, Cattle, Sheep, Goats, Grain, Cocoa beans,... SoV gone. Utility value remains.
The failure list is endless. Only gold is still a strong fungible SoV good, stored away by central banks and hoarders who grok the fragility of the fiat experiment.
So, dear Bitcoin influencers, tell us the reason:
Why is it that only one good, gold, retains this exalted function in our fiat times? Why should there now be a second good, retaining it too, and for generations?
The one reason which really decides this game they will never tell you while pushing their fable of infinite SoV-NGU riches.
PS: I do actually give it a good chance that Bitcoin is "it", but not for the harebrained reason that gold survived.
Follow my substack "Bitcoin for the Real Economy" to learn how we can still get Bitcoin to monetise and end the fiat disaster.
