Care to explain your reasoning?

What say you on the Carolina Panthers using Bitcoin to pay for the services of Russell Okung?

This post was edited by SharpNips on Apr 15 2021 06:03am

so glad you mentioned that

"To be clear, the Panthers are not paying Okung directly in bitcoin. Instead, the team will divert roughly $6.5 million from Okung’s salary to Strike, which will then presumably take a fee and process bitcoin transactions for Okung"

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/30/russell-okungs-bitcoin-salary-could-trigger-more-pro-athletes-to-invest.html

but yes, it's clearly a currency...

again, people are trying to offer it as a form of payment so that they themselves can hold it as an investment, it's not being used as a currency

not sure why you guys are struggling with this, i'm not dogging on bitcoin, as an investment it's been one of the highest returning offerings out there, but it's not currently a currency

butt sore cuz crypto investors getting rich while you sit on sidelines

no, i will openly admit that i could have made more on bitcoin than portions of my current portfolio, but i'm plenty wealthy as is so i'm content to enjoy my holdings

as i've said, as an investment go nuts, but don't tell me that it's being openly traded as currency

those who are in search of it are doing so with the intent to hold and profit on the value gain, they have no intent on turning to then use it for buying goods and services

It is still an exchange of services for Bitcoin. Whether there is a “middle man” involved or not. The player is working directly for Bitcoin.

I’m not a Bitcoin/crypto hardass, I currently have no positions in the space.

I guess it comes down to is what you define a currency as, it appears in your case government regulation is a must? Although historically and colloquially speaking government regulation isn’t a necessity to deem something a currency or not.

Unless you can’t prove that to be incorrect, I can’t really agree with you.

no, i jest about the centralization piece just to get a rise, but i will stand on the fact that CURRENTLY those seeking bitcion do so in order to profit from the gains, not simply use it as currency

the people "spending" bitcoin are those who have had it for years and view it as free money from their gains

those "accepting" bitcoin as a means of payment are doing so in order to hold the position to profit as an investment

i am not oblivious to the fact that in certain spaces it parallels currency, but the vast, vast majority of transactions in the space are intended as investments still, which in my mind, eliminates it CURRENTLY from the currency conversation

maybe when the price stabilizes it will transition, but fundamentally think about it; how can you have a currency that shifts 5-10% in value daily?

This post was edited by stuartg85 on Apr 15 2021 06:25am

Whatever dude not going to have a internet typing war... either way if crypto isn’t part of your portfolio your doing it wrong

you're proving my point....

you just admitted that crypto should be a portion of someone's holdings, which would inherently mean they SHOULD NOT trade it as currency, no?

You can literally checkout on PayPal using Bitcoin... are you retarded?