Wealth is not discovered. It is created. So, there must be a connection between the makers and the made...between producers and their products...and between the income and the capital accounts.
One benefit of Bitcoin et al/crypto (in general) is that it soaks up $trillion$ of faux-money creation that emits from the Fed, yet places no significant claim on tangible goods & services in the real economy. That is, crypto is a parking lot for junk money; a place for excess dollars to hang out and cause little practical harm.
Not only does it cause "little practical harm", it also has/is allowing "investors" to add to their pile of Ghost Money. A fake asset, valued for nothing more than magical/digital "Demand" and bought/sold using faux money.
Could there be anything more fitting to our world in 2025? The only thing "real" are the people getting wealthy off of it by turning Crypto gains into Hard Assets - and like it or not Mr. Bonner, they DO exist....
...what I have noticed particularly amongst the younger folks is the realization they cannot "work" to riches, they must invest.
They cannot afford a house as an investment, so they turn to other vehicles.
Mr. Bonner asks "where did this wealth come from?"
...my guess it's the wealth that used to be down payments for housing, savings accounts, monies diverted from other anticipated expenditures like college, and inheritances.
Now desperately inserted into the market or crypto's because there really is no other choice.
I know this will sound simplistic, but I see wealth as having come from wage earners retirement savings and simply looking for a safe harbor to grow. The real estate market is maxed out as is the stock market. So, Gold becomes a go-to and soon probably Silver and Platinum.
Artwork and other tangible assets used to have a place here, but seem to have lost its shine recently - as grandmas antiques, china and silver table settings for the now, more mobile, young is seen as an anchor in search of a home as a ship... The intangible and opaque world of Crypto is still somewhat suspect as are many overseas market funds.
So where to now? We do live in interesting times. Perhaps a complete economic restart (i.e. meltdown) is the only answer? Is it possible that when "the chickens come home to roost", this will be the new source of survival as we passively resolve ourselves to a cyclic renewal?
Or do we hope for a new season of prosperity by actively re-shoring the nation's most critical manufacturing sectors - energy, pharma and a new AI intellectual property development as our "seed corn" and our best hope for a renewed and better future?
If so, let's lean into it together or hear from those critics with a better plan - sooner rather than later.
Nah. They'd rather Bitch, try to suck us into their Lifestyle of Constant Fear and Feed their ignorant Hatred of Donald Trump. Helping, Contributing and Producing are NOT part of their program. Envy, Violence, Arrogance and Corruption are the only items on their menu.
Lots of questions and little in terms of substantial answers. Obivously the young and more accustomed to the internet believe cryptos will become the new currency. At this point I'm still in the Missouri camp. Speculation running rampant has in the past shown up as a collapse of most forms of risk. I'm almost as old as Bill but suspect the future won't be all that different from the past or at least will rhyme.
There is at least one very tangible aspect of the Bitcoin phenomenon - the gigawatts of electricity being squandered to "mine" the Bitcoins....excuse me, if I believe this is an absolute waste of resources.
I will agree that the limitation on the number of Bitcoins that could be produced was the critical genius behind the Bitcoin phenomenon. But at the end of the day the miner of precious metals extracts something tangible that has an exchange value because it can be used as part of a product that has a use other than solely as a medium of exchange. At the end of the day the miner of Bitcoin has only two things: an electronic marker which has no intrinsic use other than as an exchange medium - and a bill for electricity used. Hey, and as long as there is the "greater fool" out there willing to pay for that electronic marker at the inflated market price...
The only reason you have value of any commodity is that someone is willing to pay for it. Holding it in your hands does not make it valuable. The fact that someone else also wants to hold it makes it valuable. The finite supply of BTC makes it different from all other “commodities”. Even gold has an elastic supply. Higher prices create better economics for previously marginal reserves. Not so for BTC.
Both gold and crypto are arbitrary assets. The only reason they have the Value that they have is because people are willing to pay that sum of money. They
intrinsically, produce no wealth.When the shit hits the fan and I walk down the street with a bitcoin and try and buy an apple with my twenty three thousand dollar bitcoin? Perhaps I use a piece of sandpaper to scratch off a couple dollars worth of gold to buy a pharmaceutical for my dying child.? Maybe, like the old Dutchmasters, I could trade the equivalent of a million dollar tulip bulb.
When The tulip bulb market crashed At least they could have a nice tulip,if needed,did they could eat it.
No prediction.
Here. But money and value have always been a conundrum.
OK - so ANGRY ICEBERGS is ready to ditch the Dollar (et.al.) in favor of Bitcoin. And BILL looks forward to bartering Bitcoin for food (in a post apocalyptic world?). Interesting…
You do realize that you are responding to a posted statement of mine that was said more in jest than in earnest...but I still believe that it contains a kernel of truth...I find the idea that BTC can compete with gold as being a reliable long term repository of value is ludicrous for at least the following reasons: First, BTC is sitting at $120k far outpacing both the rate of inflation and the rise in the price of gold over the same period. Excuse me if I suspect this is a speculative price frenzy which may or may not be duplicated in the future. Second, do you think you will be able to access your electronic wallet if the cell phone towers go down in some sort of societal collapse. After all, that is one function of holding gold - to provide liquidity when all other instruments are failing.
You know so little about Bitcoin I hesitate to respond. Bitcoin miners mainly use stranded energy; they can’t afford to pay for energy that would go elsewhere. Get your facts straight before commenting.
Bitcoin is a high-tech Ponzi scheme. That is my firmly held belief - but I would honestly like to entertain arguments to the contrary, for anyone who would like to share their reasoning with me.
OK, let me give this a shot...I spent a lot of time researching/reading about BTC, and just watching it with suspicion (I am after all a conservative, retired professional accountant) before I took the plunge and started buying (at around $16k per coin).
I believe BTC is very similar to gold in many respects, including its inflation protective and wealth preservation properties. It is superior to gold in two ways: it is almost infinitely more transportable almost anywhere in the world than gold, and, given that it is tracked in "Satoshis" (sats), which equals one-one hundred millionth of a coin, it is massively more divisible than gold (unless you carry a scale around with you). Also, transacting in cryptos is laughably cheaper and easier than other methods...often just a few sats even for transactions of millions or billions of dollars, all without having to deal with annoying bank intermediaries.
As I have watched developments (suspiciously) I have gained more comfort due to the growing acceptance and adoption of BTC around the world (including the USA (which is now setting up a crypto sovereign fund). It's not readily apparent to those of us in first-world countries, but in less-developed places, BTC is widely used. In these places, it can be almost impossible to open a bank account and currency transactions can be quite difficult. However, cell phones are often widely used, making crypto transactions dead easy and very common.
BTC was introduced in 2008-09, and I believe that in the 16 years it's been around it has been well-tested and withstood almost all attempts to break it (MTGox attack came close, but it survived).
Would I be shocked if somehow the bottom fell out, or someone figured a way to steal all the BTC in the world? Not at all. For that reason, I keep a limited percentage of my portfolio (but certainly more than the 1% recommended by BPR), and when I exceed that percentage, I sell some to maintain a fixed share. AT this point, I have enough gains, that even if my remaining BTC becomes worthless, I am ahead of the game.
Lots more I could say, but I think this is long enough.
"BTC is a recognized ... global exchange ..." So? Sort of like a casino gaming table where consenting adults can congregate to ... well, gamble.
Excuse me, for being blunt about it - but to insinuate that Bitcoin can take its place among the fiat currencies of the world is laughable. The extreme volatility of Bitcoin blows that argument.
... yes indeed El Salvador experiment met with value fluctuational issue that hindered widespread adoption, otherwise it would've likely worked.
Consensus is BTC volatility will lessen, we'll see.
What would you do if the king dollar were no longer "king"?
Wanna bet you'd find yourself contemplating alternative monies...
I agree with you BTC currently is more of a betting medium than an investment or viable currency, however BTC is a recognized global player, it's gonna be around for sometime.... and likely folks will find all sorts of machinations for it... so get used to it.
While your favorite version of Money might have been recorded by the Stones, it was penned by Janie Bradford and Barry Gordy and recorded by Barrett Strong in 1959 on Tamla Records, the predecessor to Gordy’s Motown.
Bill what you don’t understand and I’ve been a subscriber of yours for multiple decades and you continue down this path despite what bitcoin has done over the past 15 years. Bitcoin has the largest strongest secure computer system in the world. Independent people come together not knowing at all who they are on the largest independent most secure computer and security system in the world There are multiple billion dollar companies out there mining And using Energy to actually mine and produce the bitcoin. There is enormous amount of infrastructure computers, data centres and energy used to produce each of the blocks that are required to produce the finite bitcoin. It’s one of the largest independent financial systems in the world and the beauty of it is all the things that you indicate is being negative. That there are no owners, no employees, no people to run it and guide it and direct it. That’s the beauty of this because in the legacy system, they are all the things that have created all the corruption that you write about every day. On one hand you put all of that legacy system down and write about it pretty much every day is being the worst Thing in the history of the world, and it’s gone on like this for centuries, but yet when there is a system out there that does the exact opposite and it has been thriving and the greatest asset of the timeframe that it has been in existence, you put this down. Mate you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Interesting thought, Weston. Some say 1/2 of the bitcoins "allowed" are not currently in the system. If so, where might they be? And, where is Nakamoto? There are those that think Nakamoto in Japanese means CIA and wasn't created out of thin air for the good of mankind. So where did it come from (remember folks be a skeptic if not a cynic) and where will it go? Everybody is looking for a fast (and easy) buck. The World has never worked that way over any length of time. Could BTC be the new "tulip bulb"? Is BTC as clean and unhackable as rumors suggest? The Ol' Man wonders and Time will tell........
Today Mr. Bonner leads off with a quote from the song "Money (That's What I Want)", citing the Rolling Stones' version. While there have likely been a jillion covers of this tune, first released in 1959 by Barrett Strong on Barry Gordy's Tamla label, the best in my opinion, and best by far, is that of the Kingsmen on their "Louie, Louie" live album, "The Kingsmen in Person" (Wand Records, 1963). The Kingsmen were one of the best garage/club bands of the era, and their performance of "Money" proves it. It starts hot, and it's nothing but hardcore rocking out the rest of the way. The crowd response is epic. Best always. PM
Mick's obviously in a class by himself. Even the Beatles recorded this, and John Lennon gives his expected gritty performance. It was a perfect anthem for the times, I guess. Thanks for the reply. Best always. PM
I am not convinced by Mr. Bonner's argument about bitcoin today.
I look at "wealth" as the product of expenditure of energy. Gold meets this criterion and once produced to the level of a gold coin or bar acts much like bitcoin- it is valued for its very existence but does not enter again into a productive role. Similarly, bitcoin is an output of energy expenditure by the miners.
So I have $100,000 deposited to my checking account from my dead sister's estate.
What do I see?
With any luck, a ledger entry on my bank statement or a display showing my account balance greatly enhanced. My Sprott gold fund looks much the same (well, not that great, but...)
My empty bitcoin cold wallet is sitting on my desk hoping that I win a lottery and can fill it up.
If I had $100,000 in bitcoin I could convert and spend it. If I was a member of the Freedom Convoy and had $100,000 in my bank account Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland would have seized it and I could not convert or spend it.
I also have an old gold filling in an envelope sitting on my desk and I can assure you that it would be considerably more difficult to convert and spend that than any bitcoin I had available. Just the other day I saw an ATM which was willing to convert bitcoin.
Yeah well I opt for silver and gold and a little platinum in coins and small bars (silver). I have started to give silver coins and bullets to my sons and grandchildren. 2 oz silver bullets are pretty cool but they cost about $81 each. Figuring on transfer my love of coin collecting and precious metals to them. I’m not going to ever sell them unless SHTF and then at my age I really don’t care.
I fully support the utility of cryptocurrency—after all, it’s not fiat. But let’s be honest: we still depend on centralized exchanges to use it, and those are increasingly under regulatory control. The powerful aren’t going to let crypto flourish unrestrained. Why would they? It would erode their ability to monitor, tax, and manipulate the flow of value. When collapse becomes imminent, they’ll pull out quietly, leaving retail investors holding the digital bag.
The truth is simple: when things fall apart, survival depends on what’s real. Those who’ve prepared will retreat to their bolt holes—equipped with clean water, sanitation, food stores, land for cultivation, fishing rights, and the kinds of “tools” forged from steel and lead. And they’ll trade with actual hard currency—precious metals you can hold, not digital entries on a disconnected ledger.
Because if the grid fails—whether from war, solar flares, cyberattacks, or economic collapse—Bitcoin becomes worthless code. Its value only exists if you convert it into something tangible before the lights go out.
The upcoming 2028 halving underscores Bitcoin’s fatal flaw. When the block reward drops from 3.125 to 1.5625 BTC, miner revenue will be slashed in half. But their costs—hardware, electricity, logistics—won’t budge. At today’s energy prices, some miners will lose over $150,000 per block. The network becomes economically unsustainable. The smart money knows this. It’ll exit early, and when it does, the selloff will cascade. As security degrades, so does trust—and Bitcoin’s price with it.
Mining’s final stretch isn’t some golden opportunity. It’s a capital trap. A small-scale 10-miner operation now demands six figures in up-front investment—before a single rig is powered on. And for what? That same $150,000 could secure real, productive assets: off-grid solar, fertile land, clean water access, food systems, livestock. Things that actually work—regardless of whether the dollar, the internet, or the power grid still do.
Of course, if Bitcoin reaches $212,000 by 2028, then mining might remain worthwhile - if the cost of producing a single BTC remains the same (electricity, rent, regulation, etc). And if BTC hits $424,000 by 2032, the party continues. Big numbers—if only the entire market doesn't implode by then.
The disconnect couldn’t be clearer. Markets chase abstract, ghostly wealth built on faith in systems already rotting at the core. Meanwhile, practical assets and hands-on skills quietly retain their value—regardless of what version of money happens to be trending this year.
"Because if the grid fails—whether from war, solar flares, cyberattacks, or economic collapse—Bitcoin becomes worthless code."
I've said this here before, Lucas, but if the grid goes down, bitcoin will still be there when the grid comes back.
If the grid goes down and stays down, we'll all be living in the stone age, the vast majority of humanity will be dead in 6 months, and bitcoin will be worth the same as gold and silver, which is to say---zilch.
Well, if we're in the stone age, gold and silver will still have some value—for jewelry, electronics, or trade—as opposed to a hard drive full of encrypted code that no one can access or verify.
But grid failure was just one scenario where Bitcoin goes to zero. There are more immediate threats:
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗤𝘂𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗺 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺: When quantum computers crack Bitcoin's encryption—and it's a matter of when, not if—they can alter the blockchain at will, creating endless forks and destroying trust. The entire system becomes compromised overnight.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗘𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝗗𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝗦𝗽𝗶𝗿𝗮𝗹: Miners simply can't make money anymore. This 15-year-old technology has gone from costing a penny per Bitcoin in 2009 to $106,000 today—leaving razor-thin margins even at current prices. The 2028 halving cuts miner revenue in half while costs stay fixed. Bitcoin would need to hit $212,000 just for miners to break even. People will start exiting in droves well before then, creating a cascade collapse as network security degrades.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗨𝗻𝘀𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗵: Bitcoin needs 100% price appreciation every halving cycle just to maintain current (already marginal) profitability. That exponential requirement eventually hits the wall of available capital and new buyers.
These aren't distant theoretical problems—they're baked into Bitcoin's design. The mining economics alone guarantee a timeline for system failure, regardless of grid stability or adoption rates.
We'll see how it plays out, but the math is unforgiving.
“Well, if we're in the stone age, gold and silver will still have some value—for jewelry, electronics, or trade”
😂 In what universe can you have “electronics” without electricity???
Your idea of stone age living is obviously different than mine, my friend.
Back in my younger years, I used to do 30 day survival trips on the high desert. That’s 30 days with NOTHING but the clothes on your back, a pocketknife, and a small wool blanket. And I can tell you that two weeks in, you wouldn’t trade a kangaroo rat for all the gold in Fort Knox (assuming there is any).
No one with more than two functioning brain cells would trade anything for jewelry in a true survival situation, which we would all be in very quickly once the grid went down (again, assuming it was going to stay down). A bar of gold would be no more useful than a rock.
As for the bitcoin boogey-men you listed, they are not any more (or less) serious than past BTC boogey-men that have already been slain. A great many bright people are currently working on the very issues you brought up, and there is no reason to believe they won’t solve them just as they've solved problems in the past.
And remember, there is one hell of a lot of money being made in BTC right now, and entities like Blackrock have every incentive to make sure it stays that way.
Yeah, they didn't have electricity in Egypt circa 3000 BC either. But they still knew the value of gold. Trade.
Your desert survival experience was you and maybe a few others—no need for trade. But come across a village with resources, and suddenly your kangaroo rat becomes as useful as toenail clippings. "What else you got, brother?" Trade emerges wherever there are multiple parties with different needs.
Math isn't a boogeyman—it's reality staring us in the face. Unless inflation somehow makes electricity cheaper, or someone invents Ayn Rand's magical motor with no visible power source, Bitcoin needs to hit $212k just for miners to break even after 2028. That's not solving past problems; that's hitting an exponential wall.
The fundamental difference: Bitcoin isn't forever like gold. It requires constant inputs to survive:
Continuous electrical power (massive amounts)
Functioning internet infrastructure
Profitable miners willing to secure the network
Regulatory tolerance in countries with cheap electricity
Remove any of those pillars and the system collapses. Gold sits in a vault for millennia doing nothing and retains value. Bitcoin goes to zero the moment miners shut down.
You mention Blackrock's incentives, but they're rational actors too. When the 2028 economics become clear—revenue halved, costs unchanged—they'll exit before retail investors catch on. That's exactly what institutional money does: gets in early, gets out before the obvious problems hit.
This isn't about technical innovation solving future problems. The halving schedule is hardcoded and immutable. The physics of electricity costs aren't changing. Even if quantum computing gets solved, the economic death spiral is already programmed in.
Not a Ponzi scheme, but I'd rather not be the last one holding when there isn't a miner left who can profit from keeping the lights on.
You wrote: “Yeah, they didn't have electricity in Egypt circa 3000 BC either. But they still knew the value of gold. Trade.”
C’mon Lucas, Egypt circa 3000 BC isn’t comparable to today in any way whatsoever. Those people knew how to live without electricity---we don’t.
I used the desert survival story merely to point out that when you’re hungry nothing else matters. And I’m not talking about “Golly, I missed lunch” hungry. I’m talking about a week or more without food---when you get hungry enough to eat stuff that would normally give you the dry heaves just looking at it.
And without electricity, you’re gonna get hungry. Hoo boy, will you get hungry! You’ll get so hungry you’d gladly trade every ounce of gold you have for that kangaroo rat.
For most people in the developed world, no electricity would be a death sentence. That’s not even debatable.
A few days in and you’re dealing with:
--No communications.
--No potable water
--No transportation
--No law enforcement
--No effective government
--Empty stores (Even if you can reach a store, everything worth taking has already been looted). You live on what food you had in the house, and after that….
Once people realize that no one is coming to the rescue they begin to panic. In large cities you have total chaos. No food, no clean water, no hospitals, no heat (if it’s winter) and no A/C (if it’s summer).
Perhaps if you live among the Amish you can find that “village with resources” you mentioned, but if not, you’re almost certainly out of luck.
In a world such as this, if you actually think gold will be worth anything, I don’t know what to tell you.
As for the BTC debate, we’ll just have to disagree. I’ve been involved with bitcoin for a long time and I don’t believe the “death spiral” you wrote about is the mathematical certainty that you suggest. Barring a world with no electricity, I believe BTC will one day serve as a world-wide medium of exchange. In other words, it will be recognized as real money.
Great discussion, gents. I would only add that if the grid goes down and stays down, there will be plenty of EVERYTHING. Picture about 1.5 billion humans living off what was sustaining 8 billion. Prolly wouldn't need money at all....
The world you're describing is "Walking Dead" territory—global collapse. Even then, people still trade. Precious metals become bullets, food, fuel. You're right that lead would be more valuable than gold initially. But trade always evolves back to portable stores of value, just as it has for 10,000 years. Why? Because you can't haul livestock around looking for someone who wants exactly what you have.
One gold coin retains purchasing power: 100 bullets here, body armor there, fuel somewhere else. Precious metals work because they're durable, divisible, and universally recognized as valuable—even in Fallout, they trade in standardized tokens (bottle caps).
But here's what you're missing about Bitcoin: You say you "believe" it won't hit a death spiral, but belief doesn't override mathematics. The halving schedule is hardcoded. Mining costs are measurable. The $212k break-even price for 2028 isn't speculation—it's arithmetic.
You've been involved with Bitcoin "for a long time," but that actually makes you more vulnerable, not less. Early adopters have the most to lose when reality hits. When institutions start exiting before 2028 (as they will, being rational actors), retail believers will be left holding the bag.
The difference between us: I'm looking at the math and preparing accordingly. You're counting on belief and hoping institutional money stays loyal to retail investors when the economics turn ugly.
Hope you time it well—because unlike gold's 10,000-year track record, Bitcoin's math gives you maybe 3 years to get it right.
One more thing about your "worldwide medium of exchange" prediction: when Bitcoin crashes hardest, that's exactly when exchanges become unreliable.
Every major Bitcoin crash follows the same pattern:
Millions try to sell simultaneously
Coinbase, Binance, and others crash from traffic overload
"Error 503" messages and frozen apps when you most need access
Order books evaporate—no buyers at reasonable prices
"Scheduled maintenance" announcements during peak panic
Historical reality: 2017 crash, 2020 COVID drop, 2022 Luna collapse—exchanges went down precisely when people needed to exit. You end up trapped watching your portfolio crater while the "exit door" is conveniently broken.
Even converting to stablecoins doesn't help if the exchange is down or your funds are "temporarily locked." And stablecoins themselves lose their peg during chaos—USDT has done this multiple times.
Here's the cruel irony again: Bitcoin was supposed to eliminate dependence on traditional financial institutions, but now you're completely dependent on centralized exchanges that fail exactly when you need them most.
The key point: During mass selling, exchanges can't magically create buyers. If 100,000 people want to sell and only 1,000 want to buy, sellers get crushed on price. Exchanges just facilitate trades—they don't use their own money to buy your Bitcoin at current prices. Price can go from $100k to $40k in an hour.
But remember those miners? They're only making money right now if Bitcoin stays above $106k. Anything lower and they're losing money on every block. They can only bleed cash for so long before they shut down. When miners exit, network security degrades, making Bitcoin even less trustworthy—and the death spiral accelerates.
So your "worldwide medium of exchange" requires not just global electrical grids and internet infrastructure, but also that private companies maintain perfect uptime during the worst market conditions. That's a lot of single points of failure for "revolutionary" money.
Physical assets don't have servers that crash when you need them most.
Lucas, your “immediate threats” are so sophomoric. I will respond to the first only. Global wealth is approx $900 Trillion, all on centralized networks. BTC is approx $2 Trillion, on a decentralized network. Not only would someone with a quantum computer want to steal $900T as opposed to $2T, the centralized nature of the $900T makes it much easier to hack.
5. More selling pressure → death spiral accelerates
This isn't about quantum computers attacking Bitcoin versus traditional finance. It's about Bitcoin being the 𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗸 in a leveraged system - the asset everyone dumps first when they need actual cash.
Your $2T market cap becomes $500B overnight, and miners can't afford to keep the lights on.
But sure, keep focusing on theoretical quantum threats while ignoring the leverage bomb ticking right now.
Easily achieve that and much more. Easy to put the math up just like everybody has done since its inception saying exactly the same stories that you’re telling now. That’s okay because the people who got in early and the people who are getting in even now we all do very very well come four years from now come 40 years from now. We now have the biggest institutions in the world such as Blackrock with their ETF. That’s the most profitable ETF they’ve ever had in all of their existence. To have not had bitcoin in your portfolio at a much greater rate than one percent has been the biggest failure of any investor in the history of investing. The bottom line is the people investing in bitcoin and the companies investing in bitcoin are the winners, have been the winners and the people that put it down and continue to put it down at the losers. There’s no argument with that. You can make all the arguments you like that you have above but you’re a loser when it comes to investing if you have not had bitcoin in your portfolio year on year since it’s inception. It’s out done every other asset class and there’s no denying it or arguing it. Continue with the stories as everybody has and continue to be losing simple as that.
Yes, Bitcoin went up with each halving—when mining was profitable and the economics worked. But we've hit a plateau where the math breaks down.
For Bitcoin to survive the 2028 halving, one of these must happen in the next 3 years:
- Mining technology becomes 100% more efficient
- Electricity costs drop 50% globally
- Bitcoin price doubles to $212k
Unless you're designing the next-gen chips or sitting on unlimited free energy, none of those are realistic timelines.
I held Bitcoin before—got out when I did the math.
The "winners vs. losers" argument ignores basic risk management. Past performance doesn't guarantee future results, especially when the underlying economics are programmed to fail.
Here's the bigger problem: Bitcoin isn't just correlated with traditional markets anymore—it's *dependent* on them. When retail investors leveraged on credit cards get margin called, when institutions rebalance portfolios during market stress, Bitcoin gets sold first. It's the most liquid "risk asset" they hold.
And here's the cruel irony: Bitcoin was supposed to be revolutionary digital money, but it can only process 3-7 transactions per second globally. Visa handles 65,000 per second. When panic selling hits, people get trapped watching their portfolios crash while their sell orders sit in a network bottleneck that's slower than mailing a check.
ETFs didn't decouple Bitcoin from market crashes—they amplified the correlation. BlackRock's ETF makes it easier for institutions to dump Bitcoin quickly during selloffs, not harder.
You're betting the house on exponential price growth continuing forever. I'm just not willing to be collateral damage when the exponential curve hits the exponential wall.
Bitcoin - what is the Asset?? It has no intrinsic value hence its only value can be as a currency. But, as a currency it’s then unadulterated inflation because it will compete with government currencies. And, why would any government allow another currency to compete with it? Unlike gold it’s man made and like all things man made it’s just fiat - digital rather than of paper. Gold is money, everything else is credit … or just a game!!
Bill-there you go again spewing B.S. the fact that bitcoin cannot be controlled by government makes it a very viable type of money. Actually our dollar doesn’t create anything, over the years since 1971 it has become less and less valuable. Only time will tell where our financial system ends up. I am hoping that whatever it is, the dollar, bitcoin, sea shells it can be tagged to gold.
One of my favorite songs is 'Baker Street' by Gerry Rafferty. Every time I hear it now - on Spotify, on the radio, or somewhere totally unexpected (like a restaurant or bar) - it instantly transports me back to my young adult days. With a smile.
rKf and Lucas, Your posts are so in touch with mine. While working and studying I lived in an apartment a short walk from Baker Street and Gerry Rafferty still brings back deep memories of emotion. On my advice I was separated from my wife and baby daughters who had temporarily returned to South Africa to allow me to study and for them to escape the 1979 Winter of Discontent. Mark Knopfler remains my favourite genius musician
One benefit of Bitcoin et al/crypto (in general) is that it soaks up $trillion$ of faux-money creation that emits from the Fed, yet places no significant claim on tangible goods & services in the real economy. That is, crypto is a parking lot for junk money; a place for excess dollars to hang out and cause little practical harm.
^^^THIS^^^^
Not only does it cause "little practical harm", it also has/is allowing "investors" to add to their pile of Ghost Money. A fake asset, valued for nothing more than magical/digital "Demand" and bought/sold using faux money.
Could there be anything more fitting to our world in 2025? The only thing "real" are the people getting wealthy off of it by turning Crypto gains into Hard Assets - and like it or not Mr. Bonner, they DO exist....
...what I have noticed particularly amongst the younger folks is the realization they cannot "work" to riches, they must invest.
They cannot afford a house as an investment, so they turn to other vehicles.
Mr. Bonner asks "where did this wealth come from?"
...my guess it's the wealth that used to be down payments for housing, savings accounts, monies diverted from other anticipated expenditures like college, and inheritances.
Now desperately inserted into the market or crypto's because there really is no other choice.
I know this will sound simplistic, but I see wealth as having come from wage earners retirement savings and simply looking for a safe harbor to grow. The real estate market is maxed out as is the stock market. So, Gold becomes a go-to and soon probably Silver and Platinum.
Artwork and other tangible assets used to have a place here, but seem to have lost its shine recently - as grandmas antiques, china and silver table settings for the now, more mobile, young is seen as an anchor in search of a home as a ship... The intangible and opaque world of Crypto is still somewhat suspect as are many overseas market funds.
So where to now? We do live in interesting times. Perhaps a complete economic restart (i.e. meltdown) is the only answer? Is it possible that when "the chickens come home to roost", this will be the new source of survival as we passively resolve ourselves to a cyclic renewal?
Or do we hope for a new season of prosperity by actively re-shoring the nation's most critical manufacturing sectors - energy, pharma and a new AI intellectual property development as our "seed corn" and our best hope for a renewed and better future?
If so, let's lean into it together or hear from those critics with a better plan - sooner rather than later.
"𝘐𝘧 𝘴𝘰, 𝘭𝘦𝘵'𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘳 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯 - 𝘴𝘰𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘳 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳."
Nah. They'd rather Bitch, try to suck us into their Lifestyle of Constant Fear and Feed their ignorant Hatred of Donald Trump. Helping, Contributing and Producing are NOT part of their program. Envy, Violence, Arrogance and Corruption are the only items on their menu.
Lines are being drawn, folks...
I'm gonna use your strategy, Bill. Just comment on how bad any new idea is, like tariffs.
Lots of questions and little in terms of substantial answers. Obivously the young and more accustomed to the internet believe cryptos will become the new currency. At this point I'm still in the Missouri camp. Speculation running rampant has in the past shown up as a collapse of most forms of risk. I'm almost as old as Bill but suspect the future won't be all that different from the past or at least will rhyme.
There is at least one very tangible aspect of the Bitcoin phenomenon - the gigawatts of electricity being squandered to "mine" the Bitcoins....excuse me, if I believe this is an absolute waste of resources.
...well yes and no.
One could postulate the expense of mining gold far exceeds its intrinsic value as a resource element.
-
The expenditure of energy is precisely what identifies value to BTC.
BTC does not exist without it.
One cannot manufacture gold as one cannot manufacture BTC.
They're both "mined".
I will agree that the limitation on the number of Bitcoins that could be produced was the critical genius behind the Bitcoin phenomenon. But at the end of the day the miner of precious metals extracts something tangible that has an exchange value because it can be used as part of a product that has a use other than solely as a medium of exchange. At the end of the day the miner of Bitcoin has only two things: an electronic marker which has no intrinsic use other than as an exchange medium - and a bill for electricity used. Hey, and as long as there is the "greater fool" out there willing to pay for that electronic marker at the inflated market price...
The only reason you have value of any commodity is that someone is willing to pay for it. Holding it in your hands does not make it valuable. The fact that someone else also wants to hold it makes it valuable. The finite supply of BTC makes it different from all other “commodities”. Even gold has an elastic supply. Higher prices create better economics for previously marginal reserves. Not so for BTC.
... seems folks on this comment section assume I am a BTC advocate.
I just think for the next decade or so BTC will be a viable play.
I have done well with it...
Cash is king for me.... for now...
Should the king dollar crash or disappear, many on this site criticizing BTC might very well find themselves BTC advocates.
Both gold and crypto are arbitrary assets. The only reason they have the Value that they have is because people are willing to pay that sum of money. They
intrinsically, produce no wealth.When the shit hits the fan and I walk down the street with a bitcoin and try and buy an apple with my twenty three thousand dollar bitcoin? Perhaps I use a piece of sandpaper to scratch off a couple dollars worth of gold to buy a pharmaceutical for my dying child.? Maybe, like the old Dutchmasters, I could trade the equivalent of a million dollar tulip bulb.
When The tulip bulb market crashed At least they could have a nice tulip,if needed,did they could eat it.
No prediction.
Here. But money and value have always been a conundrum.
Yeah Bill, But gold looks and feels great!
OK - so ANGRY ICEBERGS is ready to ditch the Dollar (et.al.) in favor of Bitcoin. And BILL looks forward to bartering Bitcoin for food (in a post apocalyptic world?). Interesting…
.... I never said BTC is an alternative to cash.
Nor do I use BTC, I have some invested, just like gold I don't use that for exchange either.
Do you?
I merely explained it has all the potentials that can be made to store fiat value as does gold.
Cash is still king and untraceable exchanges will always be sought.
You do realize that you are responding to a posted statement of mine that was said more in jest than in earnest...but I still believe that it contains a kernel of truth...I find the idea that BTC can compete with gold as being a reliable long term repository of value is ludicrous for at least the following reasons: First, BTC is sitting at $120k far outpacing both the rate of inflation and the rise in the price of gold over the same period. Excuse me if I suspect this is a speculative price frenzy which may or may not be duplicated in the future. Second, do you think you will be able to access your electronic wallet if the cell phone towers go down in some sort of societal collapse. After all, that is one function of holding gold - to provide liquidity when all other instruments are failing.
... I don't see BTC as an alternative to gold.
At this time BTC is merely another gambling option.
Sorry you missed out...
-
Concerned about societal collapse?
If things go that awry, BTC would be one of your least concerns...
BTC will still be there, your access won't.
You would require batteries for most anything you need...
(including access to BTC).
How long do you anticipate Armageddon to last?
If you are staying up at night worrying about it, buy junk silver coins (pre-1964).
I believe they would be the new accepted currency for a while...
“Stranded energy” … how does that work?
You know so little about Bitcoin I hesitate to respond. Bitcoin miners mainly use stranded energy; they can’t afford to pay for energy that would go elsewhere. Get your facts straight before commenting.
Agree totally waste of energy
Bitcoin is a high-tech Ponzi scheme. That is my firmly held belief - but I would honestly like to entertain arguments to the contrary, for anyone who would like to share their reasoning with me.
OK, let me give this a shot...I spent a lot of time researching/reading about BTC, and just watching it with suspicion (I am after all a conservative, retired professional accountant) before I took the plunge and started buying (at around $16k per coin).
I believe BTC is very similar to gold in many respects, including its inflation protective and wealth preservation properties. It is superior to gold in two ways: it is almost infinitely more transportable almost anywhere in the world than gold, and, given that it is tracked in "Satoshis" (sats), which equals one-one hundred millionth of a coin, it is massively more divisible than gold (unless you carry a scale around with you). Also, transacting in cryptos is laughably cheaper and easier than other methods...often just a few sats even for transactions of millions or billions of dollars, all without having to deal with annoying bank intermediaries.
As I have watched developments (suspiciously) I have gained more comfort due to the growing acceptance and adoption of BTC around the world (including the USA (which is now setting up a crypto sovereign fund). It's not readily apparent to those of us in first-world countries, but in less-developed places, BTC is widely used. In these places, it can be almost impossible to open a bank account and currency transactions can be quite difficult. However, cell phones are often widely used, making crypto transactions dead easy and very common.
BTC was introduced in 2008-09, and I believe that in the 16 years it's been around it has been well-tested and withstood almost all attempts to break it (MTGox attack came close, but it survived).
Would I be shocked if somehow the bottom fell out, or someone figured a way to steal all the BTC in the world? Not at all. For that reason, I keep a limited percentage of my portfolio (but certainly more than the 1% recommended by BPR), and when I exceed that percentage, I sell some to maintain a fixed share. AT this point, I have enough gains, that even if my remaining BTC becomes worthless, I am ahead of the game.
Lots more I could say, but I think this is long enough.
Well done. Let them deny. And grow poorer every day. Everyone has to pay the price they deserve.
Ponzi scheme 100%
...BTC is a recognized decentralized global exchange fiat medium.
That makes it more utilitarian and secure than any other fiat.
The dollar is king only because post WWII by default (and Bretten Woods) it became the dominate global fiat medium.
-
They are both fiat, they are both merely digits.
-
Do you really think the banks "print" money for each other?
The actual printing that does occur is only to maintain circulation.
"BTC is a recognized ... global exchange ..." So? Sort of like a casino gaming table where consenting adults can congregate to ... well, gamble.
Excuse me, for being blunt about it - but to insinuate that Bitcoin can take its place among the fiat currencies of the world is laughable. The extreme volatility of Bitcoin blows that argument.
... yes indeed El Salvador experiment met with value fluctuational issue that hindered widespread adoption, otherwise it would've likely worked.
Consensus is BTC volatility will lessen, we'll see.
What would you do if the king dollar were no longer "king"?
Wanna bet you'd find yourself contemplating alternative monies...
I agree with you BTC currently is more of a betting medium than an investment or viable currency, however BTC is a recognized global player, it's gonna be around for sometime.... and likely folks will find all sorts of machinations for it... so get used to it.
Cool story. Now do non-Dividend Equities.....
Yeh Larry, you’re probably correct….but fiat currency is a Ponzi scheme as well….
While your favorite version of Money might have been recorded by the Stones, it was penned by Janie Bradford and Barry Gordy and recorded by Barrett Strong in 1959 on Tamla Records, the predecessor to Gordy’s Motown.
And here I thought that it was Pink Floyd.
My research revealed that there are several very different songs of the same title. Pink’s is undoubtedly the biggest seller.
Bill what you don’t understand and I’ve been a subscriber of yours for multiple decades and you continue down this path despite what bitcoin has done over the past 15 years. Bitcoin has the largest strongest secure computer system in the world. Independent people come together not knowing at all who they are on the largest independent most secure computer and security system in the world There are multiple billion dollar companies out there mining And using Energy to actually mine and produce the bitcoin. There is enormous amount of infrastructure computers, data centres and energy used to produce each of the blocks that are required to produce the finite bitcoin. It’s one of the largest independent financial systems in the world and the beauty of it is all the things that you indicate is being negative. That there are no owners, no employees, no people to run it and guide it and direct it. That’s the beauty of this because in the legacy system, they are all the things that have created all the corruption that you write about every day. On one hand you put all of that legacy system down and write about it pretty much every day is being the worst Thing in the history of the world, and it’s gone on like this for centuries, but yet when there is a system out there that does the exact opposite and it has been thriving and the greatest asset of the timeframe that it has been in existence, you put this down. Mate you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Bingo!
It will go by-by when buyers realize they hold a $123,000 item worth far less than a tulip bulb.
Interesting thought, Weston. Some say 1/2 of the bitcoins "allowed" are not currently in the system. If so, where might they be? And, where is Nakamoto? There are those that think Nakamoto in Japanese means CIA and wasn't created out of thin air for the good of mankind. So where did it come from (remember folks be a skeptic if not a cynic) and where will it go? Everybody is looking for a fast (and easy) buck. The World has never worked that way over any length of time. Could BTC be the new "tulip bulb"? Is BTC as clean and unhackable as rumors suggest? The Ol' Man wonders and Time will tell........
Today Mr. Bonner leads off with a quote from the song "Money (That's What I Want)", citing the Rolling Stones' version. While there have likely been a jillion covers of this tune, first released in 1959 by Barrett Strong on Barry Gordy's Tamla label, the best in my opinion, and best by far, is that of the Kingsmen on their "Louie, Louie" live album, "The Kingsmen in Person" (Wand Records, 1963). The Kingsmen were one of the best garage/club bands of the era, and their performance of "Money" proves it. It starts hot, and it's nothing but hardcore rocking out the rest of the way. The crowd response is epic. Best always. PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABenLIHTJGU&list=RDABenLIHTJGU&start_radio=1
I like that version Paul, the guitar is great but you can't beat Micks vocals!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f8pclcJJDdg&pp=ygUUbW9uZXkgcm9sbGluZyBzdG9uZXPSBwkJxwkBhyohjO8%3D
Mick's obviously in a class by himself. Even the Beatles recorded this, and John Lennon gives his expected gritty performance. It was a perfect anthem for the times, I guess. Thanks for the reply. Best always. PM
I'm beginning to regret that my name is bill. Every time I read this everybody's bitching at me. 😆
Most of us hate it when you show up in our mailbox, too.....
You are lucky the real Bill doesn't post here haha.
or does he?
I am not convinced by Mr. Bonner's argument about bitcoin today.
I look at "wealth" as the product of expenditure of energy. Gold meets this criterion and once produced to the level of a gold coin or bar acts much like bitcoin- it is valued for its very existence but does not enter again into a productive role. Similarly, bitcoin is an output of energy expenditure by the miners.
Show me what a bitcoin looks like. I can show you gold.
So I have $100,000 deposited to my checking account from my dead sister's estate.
What do I see?
With any luck, a ledger entry on my bank statement or a display showing my account balance greatly enhanced. My Sprott gold fund looks much the same (well, not that great, but...)
My empty bitcoin cold wallet is sitting on my desk hoping that I win a lottery and can fill it up.
If I had $100,000 in bitcoin I could convert and spend it. If I was a member of the Freedom Convoy and had $100,000 in my bank account Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland would have seized it and I could not convert or spend it.
I also have an old gold filling in an envelope sitting on my desk and I can assure you that it would be considerably more difficult to convert and spend that than any bitcoin I had available. Just the other day I saw an ATM which was willing to convert bitcoin.
Yeah well I opt for silver and gold and a little platinum in coins and small bars (silver). I have started to give silver coins and bullets to my sons and grandchildren. 2 oz silver bullets are pretty cool but they cost about $81 each. Figuring on transfer my love of coin collecting and precious metals to them. I’m not going to ever sell them unless SHTF and then at my age I really don’t care.
Coors has a "silver bullet" for far less than $81!
Do you have werewolves or vampires in your vicinity?
And, yes. We have had a pretty good passage over the past few decades. I am far more concerned for the offspring and grandchildren.
I also agree about the convoy but if they had gold stashed they could go and use that to get cash. Knowing my luck I would lose the cold wallet. 😳
I fully support the utility of cryptocurrency—after all, it’s not fiat. But let’s be honest: we still depend on centralized exchanges to use it, and those are increasingly under regulatory control. The powerful aren’t going to let crypto flourish unrestrained. Why would they? It would erode their ability to monitor, tax, and manipulate the flow of value. When collapse becomes imminent, they’ll pull out quietly, leaving retail investors holding the digital bag.
The truth is simple: when things fall apart, survival depends on what’s real. Those who’ve prepared will retreat to their bolt holes—equipped with clean water, sanitation, food stores, land for cultivation, fishing rights, and the kinds of “tools” forged from steel and lead. And they’ll trade with actual hard currency—precious metals you can hold, not digital entries on a disconnected ledger.
Because if the grid fails—whether from war, solar flares, cyberattacks, or economic collapse—Bitcoin becomes worthless code. Its value only exists if you convert it into something tangible before the lights go out.
The upcoming 2028 halving underscores Bitcoin’s fatal flaw. When the block reward drops from 3.125 to 1.5625 BTC, miner revenue will be slashed in half. But their costs—hardware, electricity, logistics—won’t budge. At today’s energy prices, some miners will lose over $150,000 per block. The network becomes economically unsustainable. The smart money knows this. It’ll exit early, and when it does, the selloff will cascade. As security degrades, so does trust—and Bitcoin’s price with it.
Mining’s final stretch isn’t some golden opportunity. It’s a capital trap. A small-scale 10-miner operation now demands six figures in up-front investment—before a single rig is powered on. And for what? That same $150,000 could secure real, productive assets: off-grid solar, fertile land, clean water access, food systems, livestock. Things that actually work—regardless of whether the dollar, the internet, or the power grid still do.
Of course, if Bitcoin reaches $212,000 by 2028, then mining might remain worthwhile - if the cost of producing a single BTC remains the same (electricity, rent, regulation, etc). And if BTC hits $424,000 by 2032, the party continues. Big numbers—if only the entire market doesn't implode by then.
The disconnect couldn’t be clearer. Markets chase abstract, ghostly wealth built on faith in systems already rotting at the core. Meanwhile, practical assets and hands-on skills quietly retain their value—regardless of what version of money happens to be trending this year.
"Because if the grid fails—whether from war, solar flares, cyberattacks, or economic collapse—Bitcoin becomes worthless code."
I've said this here before, Lucas, but if the grid goes down, bitcoin will still be there when the grid comes back.
If the grid goes down and stays down, we'll all be living in the stone age, the vast majority of humanity will be dead in 6 months, and bitcoin will be worth the same as gold and silver, which is to say---zilch.
Well, if we're in the stone age, gold and silver will still have some value—for jewelry, electronics, or trade—as opposed to a hard drive full of encrypted code that no one can access or verify.
But grid failure was just one scenario where Bitcoin goes to zero. There are more immediate threats:
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗤𝘂𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗺 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺: When quantum computers crack Bitcoin's encryption—and it's a matter of when, not if—they can alter the blockchain at will, creating endless forks and destroying trust. The entire system becomes compromised overnight.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗘𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗰 𝗗𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝗦𝗽𝗶𝗿𝗮𝗹: Miners simply can't make money anymore. This 15-year-old technology has gone from costing a penny per Bitcoin in 2009 to $106,000 today—leaving razor-thin margins even at current prices. The 2028 halving cuts miner revenue in half while costs stay fixed. Bitcoin would need to hit $212,000 just for miners to break even. People will start exiting in droves well before then, creating a cascade collapse as network security degrades.
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗨𝗻𝘀𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗵: Bitcoin needs 100% price appreciation every halving cycle just to maintain current (already marginal) profitability. That exponential requirement eventually hits the wall of available capital and new buyers.
These aren't distant theoretical problems—they're baked into Bitcoin's design. The mining economics alone guarantee a timeline for system failure, regardless of grid stability or adoption rates.
We'll see how it plays out, but the math is unforgiving.
“Well, if we're in the stone age, gold and silver will still have some value—for jewelry, electronics, or trade”
😂 In what universe can you have “electronics” without electricity???
Your idea of stone age living is obviously different than mine, my friend.
Back in my younger years, I used to do 30 day survival trips on the high desert. That’s 30 days with NOTHING but the clothes on your back, a pocketknife, and a small wool blanket. And I can tell you that two weeks in, you wouldn’t trade a kangaroo rat for all the gold in Fort Knox (assuming there is any).
No one with more than two functioning brain cells would trade anything for jewelry in a true survival situation, which we would all be in very quickly once the grid went down (again, assuming it was going to stay down). A bar of gold would be no more useful than a rock.
As for the bitcoin boogey-men you listed, they are not any more (or less) serious than past BTC boogey-men that have already been slain. A great many bright people are currently working on the very issues you brought up, and there is no reason to believe they won’t solve them just as they've solved problems in the past.
And remember, there is one hell of a lot of money being made in BTC right now, and entities like Blackrock have every incentive to make sure it stays that way.
Yeah, they didn't have electricity in Egypt circa 3000 BC either. But they still knew the value of gold. Trade.
Your desert survival experience was you and maybe a few others—no need for trade. But come across a village with resources, and suddenly your kangaroo rat becomes as useful as toenail clippings. "What else you got, brother?" Trade emerges wherever there are multiple parties with different needs.
Math isn't a boogeyman—it's reality staring us in the face. Unless inflation somehow makes electricity cheaper, or someone invents Ayn Rand's magical motor with no visible power source, Bitcoin needs to hit $212k just for miners to break even after 2028. That's not solving past problems; that's hitting an exponential wall.
The fundamental difference: Bitcoin isn't forever like gold. It requires constant inputs to survive:
Continuous electrical power (massive amounts)
Functioning internet infrastructure
Profitable miners willing to secure the network
Regulatory tolerance in countries with cheap electricity
Remove any of those pillars and the system collapses. Gold sits in a vault for millennia doing nothing and retains value. Bitcoin goes to zero the moment miners shut down.
You mention Blackrock's incentives, but they're rational actors too. When the 2028 economics become clear—revenue halved, costs unchanged—they'll exit before retail investors catch on. That's exactly what institutional money does: gets in early, gets out before the obvious problems hit.
This isn't about technical innovation solving future problems. The halving schedule is hardcoded and immutable. The physics of electricity costs aren't changing. Even if quantum computing gets solved, the economic death spiral is already programmed in.
Not a Ponzi scheme, but I'd rather not be the last one holding when there isn't a miner left who can profit from keeping the lights on.
You wrote: “Yeah, they didn't have electricity in Egypt circa 3000 BC either. But they still knew the value of gold. Trade.”
C’mon Lucas, Egypt circa 3000 BC isn’t comparable to today in any way whatsoever. Those people knew how to live without electricity---we don’t.
I used the desert survival story merely to point out that when you’re hungry nothing else matters. And I’m not talking about “Golly, I missed lunch” hungry. I’m talking about a week or more without food---when you get hungry enough to eat stuff that would normally give you the dry heaves just looking at it.
And without electricity, you’re gonna get hungry. Hoo boy, will you get hungry! You’ll get so hungry you’d gladly trade every ounce of gold you have for that kangaroo rat.
For most people in the developed world, no electricity would be a death sentence. That’s not even debatable.
A few days in and you’re dealing with:
--No communications.
--No potable water
--No transportation
--No law enforcement
--No effective government
--Empty stores (Even if you can reach a store, everything worth taking has already been looted). You live on what food you had in the house, and after that….
Once people realize that no one is coming to the rescue they begin to panic. In large cities you have total chaos. No food, no clean water, no hospitals, no heat (if it’s winter) and no A/C (if it’s summer).
Perhaps if you live among the Amish you can find that “village with resources” you mentioned, but if not, you’re almost certainly out of luck.
In a world such as this, if you actually think gold will be worth anything, I don’t know what to tell you.
As for the BTC debate, we’ll just have to disagree. I’ve been involved with bitcoin for a long time and I don’t believe the “death spiral” you wrote about is the mathematical certainty that you suggest. Barring a world with no electricity, I believe BTC will one day serve as a world-wide medium of exchange. In other words, it will be recognized as real money.
Great discussion, gents. I would only add that if the grid goes down and stays down, there will be plenty of EVERYTHING. Picture about 1.5 billion humans living off what was sustaining 8 billion. Prolly wouldn't need money at all....
The world you're describing is "Walking Dead" territory—global collapse. Even then, people still trade. Precious metals become bullets, food, fuel. You're right that lead would be more valuable than gold initially. But trade always evolves back to portable stores of value, just as it has for 10,000 years. Why? Because you can't haul livestock around looking for someone who wants exactly what you have.
One gold coin retains purchasing power: 100 bullets here, body armor there, fuel somewhere else. Precious metals work because they're durable, divisible, and universally recognized as valuable—even in Fallout, they trade in standardized tokens (bottle caps).
But here's what you're missing about Bitcoin: You say you "believe" it won't hit a death spiral, but belief doesn't override mathematics. The halving schedule is hardcoded. Mining costs are measurable. The $212k break-even price for 2028 isn't speculation—it's arithmetic.
You've been involved with Bitcoin "for a long time," but that actually makes you more vulnerable, not less. Early adopters have the most to lose when reality hits. When institutions start exiting before 2028 (as they will, being rational actors), retail believers will be left holding the bag.
The difference between us: I'm looking at the math and preparing accordingly. You're counting on belief and hoping institutional money stays loyal to retail investors when the economics turn ugly.
Hope you time it well—because unlike gold's 10,000-year track record, Bitcoin's math gives you maybe 3 years to get it right.
One more thing about your "worldwide medium of exchange" prediction: when Bitcoin crashes hardest, that's exactly when exchanges become unreliable.
Every major Bitcoin crash follows the same pattern:
Millions try to sell simultaneously
Coinbase, Binance, and others crash from traffic overload
"Error 503" messages and frozen apps when you most need access
Order books evaporate—no buyers at reasonable prices
"Scheduled maintenance" announcements during peak panic
Historical reality: 2017 crash, 2020 COVID drop, 2022 Luna collapse—exchanges went down precisely when people needed to exit. You end up trapped watching your portfolio crater while the "exit door" is conveniently broken.
Even converting to stablecoins doesn't help if the exchange is down or your funds are "temporarily locked." And stablecoins themselves lose their peg during chaos—USDT has done this multiple times.
Here's the cruel irony again: Bitcoin was supposed to eliminate dependence on traditional financial institutions, but now you're completely dependent on centralized exchanges that fail exactly when you need them most.
The key point: During mass selling, exchanges can't magically create buyers. If 100,000 people want to sell and only 1,000 want to buy, sellers get crushed on price. Exchanges just facilitate trades—they don't use their own money to buy your Bitcoin at current prices. Price can go from $100k to $40k in an hour.
But remember those miners? They're only making money right now if Bitcoin stays above $106k. Anything lower and they're losing money on every block. They can only bleed cash for so long before they shut down. When miners exit, network security degrades, making Bitcoin even less trustworthy—and the death spiral accelerates.
So your "worldwide medium of exchange" requires not just global electrical grids and internet infrastructure, but also that private companies maintain perfect uptime during the worst market conditions. That's a lot of single points of failure for "revolutionary" money.
Physical assets don't have servers that crash when you need them most.
Lucas, your “immediate threats” are so sophomoric. I will respond to the first only. Global wealth is approx $900 Trillion, all on centralized networks. BTC is approx $2 Trillion, on a decentralized network. Not only would someone with a quantum computer want to steal $900T as opposed to $2T, the centralized nature of the $900T makes it much easier to hack.
Your arguments, bruh. Do better.
You're missing the point entirely. We're not talking about global wealth comparisons - we're talking about Bitcoin's specific vulnerabilities.
Quantum computing is just one threat on a long list. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗱𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝘀 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲, and you're ignoring the math:
- $1 trillion in **visible** margin debt on FINRA.org
- Unknown billions in **hidden** margin through offshore exchanges
- Derivatives exposure that makes 2008 look quaint
- Bitcoin gets sold **first** during margin calls because it's the most liquid
𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲'𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘂𝗻𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗱:
1. Margin calls force immediate Bitcoin sales
2. Price crashes 50-75% (like 2022's $69k → $16k drop)
3. Mining becomes unprofitable (costs $70k-$106k, revenue drops to $78k per block)
4. Miners shut down → network security degrades → trust collapses
5. More selling pressure → death spiral accelerates
This isn't about quantum computers attacking Bitcoin versus traditional finance. It's about Bitcoin being the 𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗸 in a leveraged system - the asset everyone dumps first when they need actual cash.
Your $2T market cap becomes $500B overnight, and miners can't afford to keep the lights on.
But sure, keep focusing on theoretical quantum threats while ignoring the leverage bomb ticking right now.
Easily achieve that and much more. Easy to put the math up just like everybody has done since its inception saying exactly the same stories that you’re telling now. That’s okay because the people who got in early and the people who are getting in even now we all do very very well come four years from now come 40 years from now. We now have the biggest institutions in the world such as Blackrock with their ETF. That’s the most profitable ETF they’ve ever had in all of their existence. To have not had bitcoin in your portfolio at a much greater rate than one percent has been the biggest failure of any investor in the history of investing. The bottom line is the people investing in bitcoin and the companies investing in bitcoin are the winners, have been the winners and the people that put it down and continue to put it down at the losers. There’s no argument with that. You can make all the arguments you like that you have above but you’re a loser when it comes to investing if you have not had bitcoin in your portfolio year on year since it’s inception. It’s out done every other asset class and there’s no denying it or arguing it. Continue with the stories as everybody has and continue to be losing simple as that.
Yes, Bitcoin went up with each halving—when mining was profitable and the economics worked. But we've hit a plateau where the math breaks down.
For Bitcoin to survive the 2028 halving, one of these must happen in the next 3 years:
- Mining technology becomes 100% more efficient
- Electricity costs drop 50% globally
- Bitcoin price doubles to $212k
Unless you're designing the next-gen chips or sitting on unlimited free energy, none of those are realistic timelines.
I held Bitcoin before—got out when I did the math.
The "winners vs. losers" argument ignores basic risk management. Past performance doesn't guarantee future results, especially when the underlying economics are programmed to fail.
Here's the bigger problem: Bitcoin isn't just correlated with traditional markets anymore—it's *dependent* on them. When retail investors leveraged on credit cards get margin called, when institutions rebalance portfolios during market stress, Bitcoin gets sold first. It's the most liquid "risk asset" they hold.
And here's the cruel irony: Bitcoin was supposed to be revolutionary digital money, but it can only process 3-7 transactions per second globally. Visa handles 65,000 per second. When panic selling hits, people get trapped watching their portfolios crash while their sell orders sit in a network bottleneck that's slower than mailing a check.
ETFs didn't decouple Bitcoin from market crashes—they amplified the correlation. BlackRock's ETF makes it easier for institutions to dump Bitcoin quickly during selloffs, not harder.
You're betting the house on exponential price growth continuing forever. I'm just not willing to be collateral damage when the exponential curve hits the exponential wall.
Hope you time the exit right.
Excellent, Lucas....
I agree, but my question is where were you during the “do nothing except open the borders” Biden years????? Not a word was said.
Bitcoin - what is the Asset?? It has no intrinsic value hence its only value can be as a currency. But, as a currency it’s then unadulterated inflation because it will compete with government currencies. And, why would any government allow another currency to compete with it? Unlike gold it’s man made and like all things man made it’s just fiat - digital rather than of paper. Gold is money, everything else is credit … or just a game!!
Bill-there you go again spewing B.S. the fact that bitcoin cannot be controlled by government makes it a very viable type of money. Actually our dollar doesn’t create anything, over the years since 1971 it has become less and less valuable. Only time will tell where our financial system ends up. I am hoping that whatever it is, the dollar, bitcoin, sea shells it can be tagged to gold.
The dollar with all its fiat faults ( loss of value) remains an easier medium of exchange than BTC Tagging whatever with gold remains IMHO the best
https://open.spotify.com/track/3Vby4nGmtbDo7HDJamOWkT?si=PZUmllVgTh-wRtlIwG2B1w
Love that song. I asked ChatGPT about it. Cuz I've thought for some time now, that it sounded like an early Bob Dylan. Here's what AI said:
𝘕𝘰𝘵 𝘧𝘢𝘳-𝘧𝘦𝘵𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭. 𝘐𝘯 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵, 𝘪𝘵'𝘴 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵 — 𝘴𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘴𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘚𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘮𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘉𝘰𝘣 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯’𝘴 𝘷𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘥 “𝘚𝘵𝘶𝘤𝘬 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘔𝘪𝘥𝘥𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘠𝘰𝘶.”
𝘎𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘺 𝘙𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘬, 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘱𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘢 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯-𝘦𝘴𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 — 𝘯𝘢𝘴𝘢𝘭 𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘦, 𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘭𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘱𝘩𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘨 — 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘉𝘰𝘣 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯’𝘴 𝘷𝘰𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘢 𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘶𝘦-𝘪𝘯-𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘬 𝘫𝘢𝘣 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘺, 𝘴𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘥𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘳𝘦.
𝘔𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 1970𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘉𝘰𝘣 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘪𝘵.
𝘚𝘰 𝘯𝘰 — 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘷𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘦𝘢𝘳.
Lol. I am always wary these days of AI "hallucinating." So I get one to verify the other. Claude on ChatGPT's research:
𝘠𝘦𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘣𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦! 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 (from ChatGPT) 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦.
"𝘚𝘵𝘶𝘤𝘬 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘔𝘪𝘥𝘥𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘠𝘰𝘶" 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘉𝘰𝘣 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯'𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦 𝘣𝘺 𝘚𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭, 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘎𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘺 𝘙𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘷𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘴𝘰 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦.
𝘎𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘺 𝘙𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘮𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘉𝘰𝘣 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯'𝘴 𝘷𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘫𝘰𝘬𝘦 - 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘨𝘢𝘨. 𝘙𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺'𝘴 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘰 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘉𝘰𝘣 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘢𝘺.
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘢 𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘩 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘊𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘴𝘦𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘙𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘮𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 "𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘸𝘪𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘦𝘭 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘸𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘴" 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘰𝘣 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘴𝘰 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘺𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘴 "𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘤 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘭 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺 (𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘫𝘰𝘬𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘤 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘯)."
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘙𝘢𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 "𝘯𝘢𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘱𝘺 𝘷𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘴, 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘺." 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘪𝘥, 𝘤𝘺𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘴𝘢𝘭 𝘷𝘰𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘴𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 1970𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘉𝘰𝘣 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘪𝘵.
𝘚𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 - 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘱𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘱 𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘋𝘺𝘭𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘰 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴!
Thanks for looking that up. We lived in England in the 70s. Gerry Rafferty and Mark Knopfler were two of my favorites - MK still is, of course.
One of my favorite songs is 'Baker Street' by Gerry Rafferty. Every time I hear it now - on Spotify, on the radio, or somewhere totally unexpected (like a restaurant or bar) - it instantly transports me back to my young adult days. With a smile.
rKf and Lucas, Your posts are so in touch with mine. While working and studying I lived in an apartment a short walk from Baker Street and Gerry Rafferty still brings back deep memories of emotion. On my advice I was separated from my wife and baby daughters who had temporarily returned to South Africa to allow me to study and for them to escape the 1979 Winter of Discontent. Mark Knopfler remains my favourite genius musician