OT: Crypto, Stocks, Bonds, Real Estate, Investments, IRAs & Finances, etc.

[N Y K]

Why are they not assets?

They are only assets based on their trading price being exchangeable into other currencies. That is their sole basis for being called an asset in your porfolio.

The stock market is used to raise capital for actual businesses. Yes, some businesses that do that may be scams, but that does not change the inherent basis for investing in shares of a public company.

Other commodities have some degree of finitude. If there were 500 Billion tons of Gold available it would not be worth much.

Etc etc. Crypto has no value store other than consensus reality.

Thanks for this. Do you think blockchain technologies are valuable/are assets? Cryptography features? smart contract features?

Blockchains and Smart Contracts will matter, but it is very possible they will never matter in the way the mythologizers want them to be. Think logistics. Think joint venture transactional record keeping. IOW, it may help with some aspects of transactional integrity, but it does not necessarily change that it will probably mostly be in the service of business processes that have already existing for a long time and are already automated or becoming more so

AI is a much bigger force overall. That’s what will change our realities the most.

But for all the guys who create systems built on crazy BS like buying an expensive pair of sneakers to make money from walking are mostly clever ponzi schemers. People have wound themselves up over stuff like that and self-governed meta spaces. Don’t ever forget that most of it is going to developed to exploit human addiction to technology using game theory, not fresh alternatives to doing business as usual that will save the planet from environmental disaster and the wars and famines that are looming. The metaverse will make a new wealthy class from its exploits no doubt, but it will be mostly meaningless BS dressed up in fancy justifications to hide the truth that they will mostly be used to exploit our attention for profit

Online community is still driven by systems like the one we’re using here. Reddit is brilliant in part because it is not obsfuscated by laborious nonsense about the means towards the end of sharing opinions. But every decade there will be another 1939 World’s Fair that predicts the future and much of it will be a big hustle that makes us more gullible towards shiny objects and less human

Perhaps, but that doesn't help the "assets" argument, regardless of the centralized vs decentralized debate. If crypto currencies, specifically, are the means to interact with those assets, then maybe there is something there. I honestly do not know and do not pretend like I have the answers.

I don't think it matters to get hung up on price discovery, early applications, and early mission statements. Looking at the core of what the frontrunners in this space are doing is not something that I think we can definitively sneeze at like you're doing here.

Crypto seems like a very different concept, and while I hate a lot in the crypto communities, trying to retrofit something that doesn't fit traditional valuation models because it's not convenient isn't an answer in my eyes. Clearly there are scams. Clearly there are trash assets out there. That doesn't mean that there isn't potentially real value that will come out of all of this.

For the record, I've got the smaallllllllest bit of my portfolio allocated to ETH and BTC just in case we're looking at something special and not the 1939 World's Fair.

[N Y K]

Why are they not assets?

They are only assets based on their trading price being exchangeable into other currencies. That is their sole basis for being called an asset in your porfolio.

The stock market is used to raise capital for actual businesses. Yes, some businesses that do that may be scams, but that does not change the inherent basis for investing in shares of a public company.

Other commodities have some degree of finitude. If there were 500 Billion tons of Gold available it would not be worth much.

Etc etc. Crypto has no value store other than consensus reality. IOW, the only thing backing crypto’s value is faith. The trust factor is gone, because it was all mythological BS about being a more honest decentralized system when the systems were manipulated by shysters, equity ballers and sovereign funds. And maybe a handful of the bitcoin billionaires who re-leveraged their positions to become manipulators in their own right. It’s all smoke and mirrors

And that is the great irony of all the annoying crypto bro nonsense about alternative virtual nation states. The bottom has fallen out because the only way it will ever be legit is to become regulated. Without that it is just a game of who blinks first

What backs the value of other modern world currencies?

There’s a big difference between a crypto wallet and a treasury bond. People like to argue that state issued paper is inherently worthless or that it is a consensus reality that the rest of the world invests in U.S. Treasury Bonds as a safe haven, but until the U.S. defaults on its obligations it is a system with regulatory controls that allow you to transact in the real world and have recourse in legal ways when you are owed an obligation based on those currencies. There is no such infrastructure for crypto. The myth was decentralization was a strength, but without regulatory oversight it became a weakness. There is no systemic backstop for the value of Bitcoin other than speculators trying to time when to buy low

Yes, but faith is the driving factor isn't it. I'm just commenting on the faith based system that's "backing" these modern economies. There's no intrinsic value for these currencies. Fiat or crypto.

[Clyde_Style]

What backs the value of other modern world currencies?

There’s a big difference between a crypto wallet and a treasury bond. People like to argue that state issued paper is inherently worthless or that it is a consensus reality that the rest of the world invests in U.S. Treasury Bonds as a safe haven, but until the U.S. defaults on its obligations it is a system with regulatory controls that allow you to transact in the real world and have recourse in legal ways when you are owed an obligation based on those currencies. There is no such infrastructure for crypto. The myth was decentralization was a strength, but without regulatory oversight it became a weakness. There is no systemic backstop for the value of Bitcoin other than speculators trying to time when to buy low

Yes, but faith is the driving factor isn't it. I'm just commenting on the faith based system that's "backing" these modern economies. There's no intrinsic value for these currencies. Fiat or crypto.

Because you say so it seems. That does not address anything I wrote though

[N Y K]

There’s a big difference between a crypto wallet and a treasury bond. People like to argue that state issued paper is inherently worthless or that it is a consensus reality that the rest of the world invests in U.S. Treasury Bonds as a safe haven, but until the U.S. defaults on its obligations it is a system with regulatory controls that allow you to transact in the real world and have recourse in legal ways when you are owed an obligation based on those currencies. There is no such infrastructure for crypto. The myth was decentralization was a strength, but without regulatory oversight it became a weakness. There is no systemic backstop for the value of Bitcoin other than speculators trying to time when to buy low

Yes, but faith is the driving factor isn't it. I'm just commenting on the faith based system that's "backing" these modern economies. There's no intrinsic value for these currencies. Fiat or crypto.

Because you say so it seems. That does not address anything I wrote though

Ok. Honestly you're jumping around so much in your posts from one subject to the next it's like I need to write in line to each to address your points. I don't even see your point here tbh, so I'll just bow out.

[Clyde_Style]

Yes, but faith is the driving factor isn't it. I'm just commenting on the faith based system that's "backing" these modern economies. There's no intrinsic value for these currencies. Fiat or crypto.

Because you say so it seems. That does not address anything I wrote though

Ok. Honestly you're jumping around so much in your posts from one subject to the next it's like I need to write in line to each to address your points. I don't even see your point here tbh, so I'll just bow out.

I was quite clear. I wrote that the only systemic backstop in crypto is people timing their entry to buy low. There is no state stepping in to support the price of cryptocurrencies. Your reply was to say putting your faith in crypto is no different than putting your faith into the currencies issued by centralized banking systems. They are not equivalent.

[N Y K]

Because you say so it seems. That does not address anything I wrote though

Ok. Honestly you're jumping around so much in your posts from one subject to the next it's like I need to write in line to each to address your points. I don't even see your point here tbh, so I'll just bow out.

I was quite clear. I wrote that the only systemic backstop in crypto is people timing their entry to buy low. There is no state stepping in to support the price of cryptocurrencies. Your reply was to say putting your faith in crypto is no different than putting your faith into the currencies issued by centralized banking systems. They are not equivalent.

This is clear. The previous was not. Either way, this was good to hear your perspective. Thanks, sir!

[HarthorneWingo]

There is zero economic or mathematical basis to say the value of Bitcoin (or any cryptocurrency for that matter) is greater than zero. So, the only way to assign it a “value” is to blindly bet that someone will assign it a higher “value” in the future. No one can tell you what the right bet is, and they’re lying if they tell you otherwise.

I tried to tell 'em. The entire thing is a scam.

Say more please. Seems like you've got an opinion here about the LACK OF value of cryptocurrencies. Or is this "scam" position "too negative" to explain too?

Fixed.

I already have ad nauseum. Go back a bunch of pages.

[HarthorneWingo]

Prove a negative? I don't know what that means.

I'm just trying to understand the statement he made. I haven't offered any opinion about any cryptocurrency's economic value, so that "why not just tell us...?" question is not for me, sir.

Therein lies the problem.

How do you prove the absence of something, for instance, like crypto having no value? How do you prove that God doesn’t exist? Same thing.

Hmmm... I can take a stab at this.

I guess we'd need to start with how you're defining "value". If we're talking about the easier definition and want to use monetary value, pick currency and check price. Problem solved! aq_ua alluded to this with the second half of their post about value purely being a function of what the next price someone is willing to pay for the thing.

Economic value? How are we defining economic value? That specifically confused me. Maybe there's something more philosophical here that's worth discussing (so still feel free to let me know what you meant by this @aq_ua).

Is the real question about intrinsic and extrinsic value? IDK, so I asked.

I'm referring to value to society as opposed to just moving around money that has no such value.

If you invest in a company that produces a product that people use, then that has value. That's the kind of value I'm talking about. Crypto doesn't serve any such purpose plus it's virtually unregulated.

[Clyde_Style]

Therein lies the problem.

How do you prove the absence of something, for instance, like crypto having no value? How do you prove that God doesn’t exist? Same thing.

Hmmm... I can take a stab at this.

I guess we'd need to start with how you're defining "value". If we're talking about the easier definition and want to use monetary value, pick currency and check price. Problem solved! aq_ua alluded to this with the second half of their post about value purely being a function of what the next price someone is willing to pay for the thing.

Economic value? How are we defining economic value? That specifically confused me. Maybe there's something more philosophical here that's worth discussing (so still feel free to let me know what you meant by this @aq_ua).

Is the real question about intrinsic and extrinsic value? IDK, so I asked.

I'm referring to value to society as opposed to just moving around money that has no such value.

If you invest in a company that produces a product that people use, then that has value. That's the kind of value I'm talking about. Crypto doesn't serve any such purpose plus it's virtually unregulated.

I’m loading up on Obi coins and dumping all of my Randles

[Clyde_Style]

To this day you still have MLM money schemes floating around. Years ago I ran into it in NYC when people called it the Airplane Game.

You hand someone an envelope of money which entitles you to recruit other suckers who will give you an envelope full of money. And the one who recruited you gets a piece of everything. The one who starts the pyramid scheme gets a piece of everything and makes the big bucks.

I went to a wealthy person’s apartment facing the Museum of Natural History and crowded into their living room was 30 people to hear the presentation on why they should join. I was taken by the girl I briefly dated and she wanted me to do it with her and then go hit bars in the East Village and chat up new recruits. Yeah, we didn’t date much longer after that. When I asked the presenter at this scam party if they’d give me a written receipt for my envelope of cash they looked at me like I was crazy and said “Why would I do that?’

What was fascinating about this phenomenon is it was very common among groups of people with New Agey belief systems. IOW, the ones who thought they were spiritual because of the clothes they wore or the crystals they vibed were the ones who didn’t see anything wrong with a pay-to-play pyramid cash scheme. It was about manifesting wealth consciousness, yo, don’t be so negative with that receipt talk.

Anyway, crypto is a ponzi scheme too. And it has its own wealth consciousness manifestation BS versions of reality too. Like I said, it’s based on the Greater Fool Theory and definitely has nothing to offer because of its “technology”. It’s pure and utter BS. If you can trade it, all the power to you, but do it knowing it is complete rubbish regardless of whether you come out on the right end of the trade.

That said, the infrastructure looks pretty screwed up now so if you’re holding now you might want to exit until the dust clears, because there are no guarantees you’ll be able to sell your stake in the future if it fully collapses. It could.

[aq_ua]

Prove a negative? I don't know what that means.

I'm just trying to understand the statement he made. I haven't offered any opinion about any cryptocurrency's economic value, so that "why not just tell us...?" question is not for me, sir.

Therein lies the problem.

How do you prove the absence of something, for instance, like crypto having no value? How do you prove that God doesn’t exist? Same thing.

Hmmm... I can take a stab at this.

I guess we'd need to start with how you're defining "value". If we're talking about the easier definition and want to use monetary value, pick currency and check price. Problem solved! aq_ua alluded to this with the second half of their post about value purely being a function of what the next price someone is willing to pay for the thing.

Economic value? How are we defining economic value? That specifically confused me. Maybe there's something more philosophical here that's worth discussing (so still feel free to let me know what you meant by this @aq_ua).

Is the real question about intrinsic and extrinsic value? IDK, so I asked.

Hi hi, sorry I’m late to the response chain. So, first definitions - I define economic value as the ability to produce income in the future, as anything that is considered an asset should generate a positive income in the future, and that positive income is discounted to present value and that is essentially its economic value today. Bitcoin does not produce any future income, therefore it relies on a belief that someone will pay more for it in the future than you did today to justify a buying price greater than zero.

[Dantares]

Jerome Powell is summoning his inner Volcker and he will keep raising rates until inflation comes down. I will be interested in buying stocks again when we hit 3500-3600 on the S&P.

.38 fib retrace and bounce is usually a continuation of a trend.
So to do the math 4818(all time high) - 2192(2020 low) = 2626.

Now 2626 x .38 = 998

Now 4818 - 998 = 3820

If we close below 3820 on the S&P or break down hard from that level then this is a bear market. If we bounce from the level I will be ready to pivot. Just to be clear I am leaning toward bear market so I don't expect to reverse and turn bullish.

We pierced the 3820 by only 10 points then rebounded for a few weeks before the selling came back with a vengeance. I was a daredevil and made a little money on the way up and on the way down. I have a heavy short position so if the market rallies I am so screwed.

Bottomline is using the same math as before but replacing the .38 retrace with the .50 retrace puts as at 3505 as the next bounce spot.

[stuporman]

There's a few different breeds of crypto and different ways to trade them for gains considering there's nothing preventing someone from personally using different strategies to trade with simultaneously.

Someone can just ride the broader wave of the cycle or find find more activity to squeeze additional gains from the available volatility using whatever excess funds ones has to increase the account.

Someone can buy expensive lottery tickets on exotic crypto shyt in hopes that one or two pop off and genrate life changing money...if you feel lucky.

and someone can do both or all and more

Speculating can lose all of the money involved, that's why it is advised to only use money we are prepared to lose.

[N Y K]

Therein lies the problem.

How do you prove the absence of something, for instance, like crypto having no value? How do you prove that God doesn’t exist? Same thing.

Hmmm... I can take a stab at this.

I guess we'd need to start with how you're defining "value". If we're talking about the easier definition and want to use monetary value, pick currency and check price. Problem solved! aq_ua alluded to this with the second half of their post about value purely being a function of what the next price someone is willing to pay for the thing.

Economic value? How are we defining economic value? That specifically confused me. Maybe there's something more philosophical here that's worth discussing (so still feel free to let me know what you meant by this @aq_ua).

Is the real question about intrinsic and extrinsic value? IDK, so I asked.

Hi hi, sorry I’m late to the response chain. So, first definitions - I define economic value as the ability to produce income in the future, as anything that is considered an asset should generate a positive income in the future, and that positive income is discounted to present value and that is essentially its economic value today. Bitcoin does not produce any future income, therefore it relies on a belief that someone will pay more for it in the future than you did today to justify a buying price greater than zero.

Ok cool. That helps me understand what you meant a bit better. When I read economic value, I would have defined it differently than you did. Your definition is more like terminal value on a DCF, which of course, would not make sense for any crypto just like it wouldn't make sense for any other thing that isn't a company/property/insert cash flowing asset. By that definition, I don't think, we'd say gold or art or oil would have economic value either. And that's fine based on your definition.

[N Y K]

Therein lies the problem.

How do you prove the absence of something, for instance, like crypto having no value? How do you prove that God doesn’t exist? Same thing.

Hmmm... I can take a stab at this.

I guess we'd need to start with how you're defining "value". If we're talking about the easier definition and want to use monetary value, pick currency and check price. Problem solved! aq_ua alluded to this with the second half of their post about value purely being a function of what the next price someone is willing to pay for the thing.

Economic value? How are we defining economic value? That specifically confused me. Maybe there's something more philosophical here that's worth discussing (so still feel free to let me know what you meant by this @aq_ua).

Is the real question about intrinsic and extrinsic value? IDK, so I asked.

I'm referring to value to society as opposed to just moving around money that has no such value.

If you invest in a company that produces a product that people use, then that has value. That's the kind of value I'm talking about. Crypto doesn't serve any such purpose plus it's virtually unregulated.

Wait, even if we take your money movement example here, you don’t think that those efficiencies have value in society? That’s a utility. A service of economic activity that’s far more efficient than sending money on the SWIFT network. Able to reach people that normally would not be able to receive those funds. Surely there’s value to society in that?

[RHODEY]

To this day you still have MLM money schemes floating around. Years ago I ran into it in NYC when people called it the Airplane Game.

You hand someone an envelope of money which entitles you to recruit other suckers who will give you an envelope full of money. And the one who recruited you gets a piece of everything. The one who starts the pyramid scheme gets a piece of everything and makes the big bucks.

I went to a wealthy person’s apartment facing the Museum of Natural History and crowded into their living room was 30 people to hear the presentation on why they should join. I was taken by the girl I briefly dated and she wanted me to do it with her and then go hit bars in the East Village and chat up new recruits. Yeah, we didn’t date much longer after that. When I asked the presenter at this scam party if they’d give me a written receipt for my envelope of cash they looked at me like I was crazy and said “Why would I do that?’

What was fascinating about this phenomenon is it was very common among groups of people with New Agey belief systems. IOW, the ones who thought they were spiritual because of the clothes they wore or the crystals they vibed were the ones who didn’t see anything wrong with a pay-to-play pyramid cash scheme. It was about manifesting wealth consciousness, yo, don’t be so negative with that receipt talk.

Anyway, crypto is a ponzi scheme too. And it has its own wealth consciousness manifestation BS versions of reality too. Like I said, it’s based on the Greater Fool Theory and definitely has nothing to offer because of its “technology”. It’s pure and utter BS. If you can trade it, all the power to you, but do it knowing it is complete rubbish regardless of whether you come out on the right end of the trade.

That said, the infrastructure looks pretty screwed up now so if you’re holding now you might want to exit until the dust clears, because there are no guarantees you’ll be able to sell your stake in the future if it fully collapses. It could.

I'm starting to to think it is will collapse. I was big in...heck I started the original crypto thread here but it feels like it's all built on sand. When you add to that the fact that anyone can make a crypto and the lack of regulation... I'm starting to agree with the theory that the future of crypto will be government backed currency. And I think 99 percent of what we see now will crash down to zero. Even Bitcoin won't be immune. All it will take is a few whales liquidating their bags and the tumble will proceed. In fact I fully expect btc will plummet to down to ~12k or lower in the next 30days. We are at the start of one of the worst recessions since the great Depression. It's going to be BAD.

[HarthorneWingo]

Hmmm... I can take a stab at this.

I guess we'd need to start with how you're defining "value". If we're talking about the easier definition and want to use monetary value, pick currency and check price. Problem solved! aq_ua alluded to this with the second half of their post about value purely being a function of what the next price someone is willing to pay for the thing.

Economic value? How are we defining economic value? That specifically confused me. Maybe there's something more philosophical here that's worth discussing (so still feel free to let me know what you meant by this @aq_ua).

Is the real question about intrinsic and extrinsic value? IDK, so I asked.

I'm referring to value to society as opposed to just moving around money that has no such value.

If you invest in a company that produces a product that people use, then that has value. That's the kind of value I'm talking about. Crypto doesn't serve any such purpose plus it's virtually unregulated.

Wait, even if we take your money movement example here, you don’t think that those efficiencies have value in society? That’s a utility. A service of economic activity that’s far more efficient than sending money on the SWIFT network. Able to reach people that normally would not be able to receive those funds. Surely there’s value to society in that?

I mean, yeah, it’s good to have money. But those are typically Ponzi schemes.

[ccvle]

Hmmm... I can take a stab at this.

I guess we'd need to start with how you're defining "value". If we're talking about the easier definition and want to use monetary value, pick currency and check price. Problem solved! aq_ua alluded to this with the second half of their post about value purely being a function of what the next price someone is willing to pay for the thing.

Economic value? How are we defining economic value? That specifically confused me. Maybe there's something more philosophical here that's worth discussing (so still feel free to let me know what you meant by this @aq_ua).

Is the real question about intrinsic and extrinsic value? IDK, so I asked.

I'm referring to value to society as opposed to just moving around money that has no such value.

If you invest in a company that produces a product that people use, then that has value. That's the kind of value I'm talking about. Crypto doesn't serve any such purpose plus it's virtually unregulated.

Wait, even if we take your money movement example here, you don’t think that those efficiencies have value in society? That’s a utility. A service of economic activity that’s far more efficient than sending money on the SWIFT network. Able to reach people that normally would not be able to receive those funds. Surely there’s value to society in that?

Applying your logic, it would make even less sense to invest in Bitcoin. what happens when there's better Blockchain technology? Swift is relatively fast. There are trillion dollars worth of transaction moved via swift every day. Let's see if Bitcoin can do that. Swift is also near instant if there's just two banks involved. What ever is delayed is not because of swift.

[N Y K]

I'm referring to value to society as opposed to just moving around money that has no such value.

If you invest in a company that produces a product that people use, then that has value. That's the kind of value I'm talking about. Crypto doesn't serve any such purpose plus it's virtually unregulated.

Wait, even if we take your money movement example here, you don’t think that those efficiencies have value in society? That’s a utility. A service of economic activity that’s far more efficient than sending money on the SWIFT network. Able to reach people that normally would not be able to receive those funds. Surely there’s value to society in that?

Applying your logic, it would make even less sense to invest in Bitcoin. what happens when there's better Blockchain technology? Swift is relatively fast. There are trillion dollars worth of transaction moved via swift every day. Let's see if Bitcoin can do that. Swift is also near instant if there's just two banks involved. What ever is delayed is not because of swift.

Is that what you got from what I wrote?

SWIFT is not near instant. It takes days in many instances to move money globally over the SWIFT network. Heck you have startups like WISE and Remitly popping up with their own “networks” exactly because of how terrible it is to send money over SWIFT. And even if SWIFT is not the culprit, the job is to move money quickly. Don’t care what middle man is causing the delay.

A lot of people in third world countries struggle to access banks, but have greater access to phones, which I could see as making their use case more crypto centric. So what good does the bank to bank example do for those people?

And to be even clearer, I’m not making an argument to invest in Bitcoin or any other crypto. I’m clearly responding to the point about value to society and money movement.

And you’re right about let’s see. Either you see value in the technology or you don’t. And based on that you can either make a bet or not. That’s all. So if you look at the Bitcoin market cap, it’s use cases, or potential and think that’s the tech, then I could see why someone would bet there. If some other tech is more likely disrupt, sure, go with that instead. Or do nothing. Do what you want with your money, but money movement innovation (even failed attempts at innovation) is important and valuable to society.

[ccvle]

Wait, even if we take your money movement example here, you don’t think that those efficiencies have value in society? That’s a utility. A service of economic activity that’s far more efficient than sending money on the SWIFT network. Able to reach people that normally would not be able to receive those funds. Surely there’s value to society in that?

Applying your logic, it would make even less sense to invest in Bitcoin. what happens when there's better Blockchain technology? Swift is relatively fast. There are trillion dollars worth of transaction moved via swift every day. Let's see if Bitcoin can do that. Swift is also near instant if there's just two banks involved. What ever is delayed is not because of swift.

Is that what you got from what I wrote?

SWIFT is not near instant. It takes days in many instances to move money globally over the SWIFT network. Heck you have startups like WISE and Remitly popping up with their own “networks” exactly because of how terrible it is to send money over SWIFT. And even if SWIFT is not the culprit, the job is to move money quickly. Don’t care what middle man is causing the delay.

A lot of people in third world countries struggle to access banks, but have greater access to phones, which I could see as making their use case more crypto centric. So what good does the bank to bank example do for those people?

And to be even clearer, I’m not making an argument to invest in Bitcoin or any other crypto. I’m clearly responding to the point about value to society and money movement.

And you’re right about let’s see. Either you see value in the technology or you don’t. And based on that you can either make a bet or not. That’s all. So if you look at the Bitcoin market cap, it’s use cases, or potential and think that’s the tech, then I could see why someone would bet there. If some other tech is more likely disrupt, sure, go with that instead. Or do nothing. Do what you want with your money, but money movement innovation (even failed attempts at innovation) is important and valuable to society.

swift is instant. It is basically just a message system. How fast the recipient bank handles the messages is what slows down the process. Often time, a manual review is required for compliance reasons (money laundering review , ofac review). My bank can send a Treasury transaction to another bank for 300 million dollar and the other can confirm in less than 10 sec.

I see the value in a technology that can move money easily and effectively. I don't exactly see what more Bitcoin can offer as a currency than many other options available. If I want to send money to someone else I can use zelle or PayPal. I can make an instant transaction to buy with a credit card.

The biggest problem I have with Bitcoin is not with its technology but some how that it is being treated as a investment. Let's face it , 99% of the people with Bitcoin don't own it because they want people in third world countries to have access to the financial system. Most people buy it as speculative investment bet.