Veteran Investor Jim Rogers on Crypto: Bitcoin Unlikely to Become Money, Governm

[sirty143]

Veteran Investor Jim Rogers on Crypto: Bitcoin Unlikely to Become Money, Governments Favor CBDCs

In a new interview, Jim Rogers, who helms Rogers Holdings Inc. and was a co-creator of the Quantum Fund alongside George Soros in the 1970s, shared his observation of “various signs that something is going to go wrong soon”... See more for yourself here.

Your opinion is greatly appreciated.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Your opinion is greatly appreciated.

My view is that, much to my regret, I think Rogers is absolutely right. Without CBDCs, bitcoin no longer had much chance of becoming a currency, given that it is mostly used as an asset to buy and sell depending on the price. If we add CBDCs to that, even less, because ordinary people will prefer something that does not fluctuate so much in price and is backed by their government. Bitcoin will still have its place, yes, but not as a currency.

[Crwth]

If it's really about being the currency, being used every day, it's going to be hard. Not a lot of people are tech-savvy enough to use and get money. I think we need to understand that Bitcoin is an asset like Gold and the ideal scenario is that it can be used every day or stored value.

Additionally, it's our job to make sure that governments have Bitcoin and make it favorable instead of the CBDCs because we all know that's a very different system in monetary things.

They just want things to be controlled. We will see.

[Z-tight]

BTC is surely not a threat to the u.s. dollar or other fiat currencies, but BTC is a currency and it is fungible. Take note that BTC is a permissionless currency, so it does not need the permission of the government before it can be used as a currency. BTC is p2p electronic cash that is censorship resistant and permissionless and bitcoiners are spending BTC everyday.

However, people get it wrong when they believe that BTC is going to replace the u.s. dollar or become the world's reserve currency, that is what isn't going to happen.

[TomPluz]

Your opinion is greatly appreciated.

My view is that, much to my regret, I think Rogers is absolutely right. Without CBDCs, bitcoin no longer had much chance of becoming a currency, given that it is mostly used as an asset to buy and sell depending on the price. If we add CBDCs to that, even less, because ordinary people will prefer something that does not fluctuate so much in price and is backed by their government. Bitcoin will still have its place, yes, but not as a currency.

This depends a lot how a person define money...if in case it refers to something used as a medium of exchange I think Bitcoin will not have any problem with that except for the fact that for now speed of transactions may not be able to compete with let's say Visa or Mastercard. But then again, even with this big challenge or difficulty, Bitcoin keeps on growing all because in the first place people are looking at it as an asset that has the potential for big growth ahead...and this can be compared to physical gold which is not acting really as money because of physical hindrances but people are still investing into it with the mind view of gaining something or possible profits.  Jim Rogers can be right with his assessment of Bitcoin based on the money thing but he is very wrong to say that there can be wrong with it...there is nothing wrong with Bitcoin as an asset that is why it remains to be valuable these days. Remember that OLD PEOPLE even like me can really have a hard time to fully comprehend Bitcoin as they are more focused on traditional assets. Now, the coming in of CBDCs will not be negatively affecting Bitcoin as they are just a form of fiat money...in this scenario it would even be a lot easier for people to be buying cryptos using their digitalized fiat money. Just like Jim Rogers this is just my opinion and I don't have a good crystal ball that can predict the things that will be so I could be wrong or right...let's just go back here when that future has  already arrived. I just noticed that many of the popular critics of Bitcoin are older people...why this is so?

[Charles-Tim]

Jim Rogers is right but he did not have a good definition for what money is. According to what he meant in interview, he is using money for what he supposed to use a currency for. Or he can just use other means to let people understand that people are seeing bitcoin more as an asset, instead of a currency. But an asset, like bitcoin that has intrinsic value are to be called money because they are actually money.

[Kemarit]

I think it's pretty obvious that old and traditional gamblers are not going to accept Bitcoin in whatever shape or form, we should accept that fact. But it doesn't mean that Bitcoin can't grow and that as much as we think that they are great investors, there predictions are going to be accurate. WB even had a lot of mistakes in in stock investments

So take this kind of statement with a grain of salt. And don't blatantly believed for this so called veteran investors.

Bitcoin is not for everyone and I will say that it's good if this traditional and veteran investors will stay away from Bitcoin and crypto in general.

[Captain Corporate]

Unlikely to "become money"? What does he think money is? I mean I do a job, and you pay me in a currency, and then I can use that currency for other stuff, it is an indication that I own that much, isn't that the whole idea of money? I mean the fiat that you have? Either in cash form or in digital form, isn't that basically saying you own that much, its a proof, and then you spend it? Thats all there is to it, nothing really feels different with crypto to be fair. I get that people like to talk down on bitcoin, but there is really nothing that changes, its the same exact thing as the fiat they use every single day.

[joniboini]

Unlikely to "become money"? What does he think money is?

If you read the interview, I believe he's basically saying that money is any medium of exchange that is accepted by the government to pay and trade stuff. He mentioned that BTC is not used as money other than in some countries like El Salvador, which basically means he thinks if a country allows people to widely use BTC as a means of payment (not just trading assets) that is when it becomes money. He has some solid points honestly, especially related to how the government needs to control everything, so anything that threatens that will just get killed or controlled in one way or the other. In the case of Bitcoin, limiting it only to trading vehicles is one of the options according to him.