With great eagerness I read the article, Crypto’s Decline Was Inevitable, Because It Is Based on a Classic Money Myth. I’ve been struggling for a long time to understand whether Bitcoin (and/or other cryptocurrencies) are the future or a Ponzi scheme:
- Quote of the day—Jim Rickards
- Quote of the day—Lee Reiners
- Quote of the day—Peter Schiff @PeterSchiff
- Existential threat to Bitcoin
- Quantum computing as a threat to Bitcoin
I expected the author to make everything clear to me.
I was extremely disappointed.
While I tend to believe the main conclusion, the decline of the cryptocurrency market is inevitable, is true, I am exceedingly annoyed that he does not back up his claims. He merely asserts that, as a psychoanalyst, he knows his claims about the nature of money are true.
Even highly credentialed economists are not so arrogant as to make sweeping claims about the nature of money or the inevitable decline of cryptocurrency without detailed explanations and/or numerous citations. This guy is not even playing in his area of expertise and claims complete mastery of it.
That’s really, really lame. This discredits his entire profession. And, for a psychoanalyst, that is no easy task.