> For lumber, there is an end user who wants the lumber to e.g. make a house. There might be some middlemen who buy it and then resell it, but they are also generally providing value in some way: storing it to smooth over demand variance, doing arbitrage to improve pricing, moving it from one location to another, etc. There's never just an infinite chain of middlemen selling it for ever increasing prices.
What about something like Ethereum? There is an end user who wants the Ethereum in order to pay network fees so they can register a domain name, move a stable coin, etc. I realize this isn't the primary use, but people are betting that it will be. Is that really any different than speculating on a startup that isn't yet profitable, but could be in the future?
And since something like Bitcoin is fundamentally trying to be a currency.. Why is this any different than something like the Russian Ruble? People want it because other people want it (medium of exchange). The differences are that:
1. You're required to use it to pay taxes, or people with guns will put you in jail
2. A central party can issue unlimited amounts of the currency and give it to whoever they want
Fundamentally, why is it so crazy to have a native digital currency that isn't owned by any one entity, has a set issuance schedule, and can be used as a medium of exchange. Governments have been doing this for centuries, and now we have the technology to make an arguably "better" version. Why not at least try? The real arguments against it seem to be: people are speculating on it.
What about something like Ethereum? There is an end user who wants the Ethereum in order to pay network fees so they can register a domain name, move a stable coin, etc. I realize this isn't the primary use, but people are betting that it will be. Is that really any different than speculating on a startup that isn't yet profitable, but could be in the future?
And since something like Bitcoin is fundamentally trying to be a currency.. Why is this any different than something like the Russian Ruble? People want it because other people want it (medium of exchange). The differences are that:
1. You're required to use it to pay taxes, or people with guns will put you in jail
2. A central party can issue unlimited amounts of the currency and give it to whoever they want
Fundamentally, why is it so crazy to have a native digital currency that isn't owned by any one entity, has a set issuance schedule, and can be used as a medium of exchange. Governments have been doing this for centuries, and now we have the technology to make an arguably "better" version. Why not at least try? The real arguments against it seem to be: people are speculating on it.