Bitcoin decried as “fraudulent money” and a poor store of value compared to gold

The United States is mired in a debt crisis that stems from the nation being oppressed by a private central bank that maintains near-total control over its currency. The Federal Reserve lends its fiat notes – which are backed by nothing of actual value – to the Treasury on interest, and the American people are left with insurmountable debt. It’s why different currencies like Bitcoin have emerged as an alternative to this system of slavery that threatens to bring about total economic ruin. But how reliable is Bitcoin?

Not very, according to some. While Bitcoin does represent a decentralized alternative to Federal Reserve Notes, it isn’t technically money (at least not yet): It’s merely a medium of transfer. Its value on any given day has proven to be exceptionally volatile, which means that relying on it as a secure store of value isn’t a good idea – again, at least not at the current time, and with the current state of the technology’s maturity.

Something like gold, which includes gold-backed currency, is a much better alternative to Federal Reserve Notes because it’s been around since the beginning of time. In fact, the U.S. dollar used to be backed by it until the central bankers took over and began running the show for their own benefit – at the expense of the American people. Now that it’s clear to many Americans that they’ve been duped by these parasites, people everywhere are evaluating viable alternative currencies, including Bitcoin.

But according to Fay Dress, writing for Soren K. Group, Bitcoin will never be a viable alternative to Federal Reserve Notes – or to gold, for that matter – because it simply doesn’t meet even the baseline requirements for what constitutes a secure form of money.

Fiat currencies like Federal Reserve Notes are horrible, but Bitcoin could be worse

In a repost to Zero Hedge, Dress points out that Bitcoin does, indeed, constitute a viable medium of exchange – meaning that a person can convert his Federal Reserve Notes into Bitcoins without being “watched” or tracked by the government. There are benefits to this in that it allows people to unshackle themselves from fiat slavery, or at the very least begin the process of doing so.

The problem, though, is that Bitcoin isn’t “commonly accepted” as a form of payment like Federal Reserve Notes. While some online stores and other niche businesses accept it as a form of payment, one can’t exactly run out to the grocery store and pay for the week’s meals using Bitcoin. Because of this, Bitcoin has ended up becoming more of a speculative investment than an actual currency, which has contributed to its wild price volatility.

When the value of something is too volatile, such as is the case with Bitcoin, people as a whole simply won’t trust it. This isn’t to say that Federal Reserve Notes are any better – as Dress points out, fiat currency in general is likewise a terrible store of value, at least in the long term. But Bitcoin is perhaps worse because it’s a terrible store of short term value, which means that people who don’t know what they’re doing with it could get burned big time.

In Dress’ view, both fiat currency and Bitcoin should be regarded as fraudulent forms of money. Again, this isn’t to say that Bitcoin doesn’t serve other purposes – it could potentially one day become a better store of value that might function as a type of currency ­– but currently, this isn’t the case.

“Those who buy and hold Bitcoins are likely the speculative class inadvertently betting on collapse of economies and wealth moving around,” writes Dress. “That is fine. But do not tell us it is money. At least not yet, anyway.”

Sources for this article include:

ZeroHedge.com

NaturalNews.com