Bitcoin vs Gold – Which Is Best For Investors

0
36
Bitcoin vs gold

Bitcoin vs gold – which is best for investors? : The perpetual rivalr

There’s Hobson’s choice with going for the best investment bet with either Bitcoin vs Gold. Which one rewards your efforts the best? Which one has the innate qualities that could lick all challenges? Which involves the least costs and maximal returns? When we compare Bitcoin and Gold as investment instruments, it dawns upon us that both have persuasive merit, one topping the other in disparate aspects. 

Gold Rush 2021? It’s early days yet 

Following aggressive government monetary stimulus, inflation is beginning to froth in the pan. But there’s an unwonted nonchalance from the vast body of gold connoisseurs. What explains this? 

Even as robust fiscal spending has bolstered government debt, the Fed’ balance sheet has fairly nudged a record. As a result, the dollar’s value is something alternatives may wipe the floor with yet. Truth to tell, Bitcoin and company are slated to manage the inevitable tapering and winding down of money-supply growth, as opposed to the recent past when they were making higher-highs many times over. Bitcoin nudged a dizzy $65000 this very April. Bullion, not to be discounted, after touching a record $2,075 an ounce plus last year, has now reached a plateau. But, per sage watchers, gold is expected to keep rising throughout this year in the next. 

More than a bit of Life in gold yet!

One mega-fund manager (SkyBrtidge) lets us in on its secret. It has a bit of exposure to a leveraged gold miner. The fund is sanguine as regards a continued gold p[rice rally. The fund’s primary exposures are cash flow generative strategies bolstered by tangible assets, convertible bond arbitrage and corporate credit.  

Gold has made its way into diversified portfolios, just like alternatives to bitcoin have as well. An attractive risk-reward profile yields attractive non-correlated returns. 

Gold continues to be held in high regard. In fact, all manner of portfolios are going to keep upholding gold. The yellow metal is thought of as insurance for their money. Therefore, going by conventional wisdom makes eminent sense to invest in gold in these times of aggravated volatility. 

Gold: safe-haven logic 

The one thing that pins down the argument for gold is that it crystallises the act of wealth preservation. That you can conserve wealth while grappling with uncertainty has had a lot of historical credence behind the reputation. Gold may not pay interest or dividends. However,  its name as an inflation hedge and diversifier remain unassailable. 

Is rooting for Bitcoin worth it?

Bitcoin will always have a fixed supply. There will never be a number in excess of 21 million Bitcoins in circulation. There’s always an expectation posited after Bitcoin – since the crypto’s value is fixed, provided interest does not wane – there will be an ever-increasing appreciation attending Bitcoin. 

Bitcoin has had  to plummet to $32000 from vertiginous heights this June. Too much volatility could perhaps become a liability. However, the cryptocurrency primus inter pares is in the thick of furious intellectual discussions at the very top. 

Bitcoin’s ascendancy under Ivory Tower scrutiny 

If we must believe Princeton historian Harold James, Bitcoin has begun to mimic the cross-border monetary language long the preserve of the US Dollar. The national era in money is witnessing the onset of twilight – aggravated directly by the pell-mell acceleration o the digital revolution. This has precipitated a demand for a monetary revolution. New forms of government-issued fiat currencies shall enter the scene. There shall be a plethora of private currencies yielded innovatively. A government’s credibility shall no longer have any say in the stability of a currency. James calls the Bitcoin dominated sphere the monetary order based upon the information.  While the shifting away from the gold standard was for the US Dollar, the move from a commodity-based monetary order to one that was fiat-currency based, Bitcoin has ushered in a new phase of the monetary revolution. With Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) being actively planned for launch, the influence of bitcoin on the policy-makers agenda globally is beyond dispute. 

Arguments  against Bitcoin

The Bank of International Settlements financial economist Hyun Song Shin is in the forefront of the vanguard against cryptocurrencies. Taking up the cudgels, he reiterated recently that Bitcoin and company are speculative assets rather than money. Also, these are used to facilitate money laundering, ransomware attacks and other financial crimes. Therefore, he is dismissive of Bitcoin and asserts that central banks ought to expedite the adoption and issuance of their own digital currencies. 

Similarly casting aspersions on the motives of Bitcoin, Financial Times’s Martin Wolf found himself in concordance with his Korean coeval. He assets that governments, and logically central banks as instruments of Policy, ought not to abdicate their duties as keepers of the public interest. Calling cryptocurrencies such negatively loaded words as ‘Wild West’, he stresses emphatically that ‘private currencies’ have no business continuing and are in fact entirely ‘illegal. 

Such views have earned the attention of Washington. The president’s Working Group on Financial Markets, under TYraesury Secretary Janet Yellen, has expressed misgivings about two stable coins – Tether, and Facebook’s Diem. these stablecoins, Circle’s USDC among them, are backed by dollar assets. a Former Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has aired the view that stablecoins are akin to unsteady money market funds. Fed governor Lael Brainard has gone so far as to liken stablecoins to wildcat banks’ notes issued in 19th century US. per George Selgin, this is obnoxious financial history. 

Abortive amendment to Infrastructure Bill 2021

Bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies formed the meat of the debates surrounding institutional regulation and its demarcation. Interestingly, the several positions taken up by legislators were bipartisan. This at least reflects that regardless of party affiliations, lawmakers of all hues are tending to show a certain depth of perspective. 

In a speech given by SEC Chairman Gary Gensler, we get an inkling of the roiling waters. 

Gensler finds himself in agreement with the authorities quotes above. He likened the crypto sphere and its modus operandi to the iniquities of the intelligence Services under Kissinger. Just like Kissinger did not concede malfeasance in the extra-legal exercises of the Services, so too the crypto sphere regularly preens its feathers, priding itself as an impeccable vehicle of speculation. Gensler showed that public policy goals do not form any part at all of Bitcoin & Co.’s operations. Even then, these have not even been used, he asserted, as a medium of exchange. He warned his listeners that the main objective of Bitcoin and allied currencies is to circumvent laws and regulations to enable money laundering, getting around sanctions, and such like. He also agreed that the whole scenario smacks of the Wild West. Gensler pitched for regulation. 

Drawing Bitcoin & Co. into the ambit of the Law

Everything in the cryotosphere that makes a movement is, per Gensler, an unregistered security. This logically necessitates at least crypto exchanges to be brought within the ambit of securities law, even commodities laws and banking laws. Gensler in his speech finally put forward the request that Congress empower the SEC to write rules for crypto trading and lending. 

The Biden Administration needed no more cues to subsequently add a provision to the Infrastructure Bill, treating crypto ‘participants’ – which are no more than nodes in a network – as taxable entities. Per the provision, these nodes are ‘brokers’ and therefore come within tax revenue collection regulation. The missing link, however, was that these nodes do not have all the information that they would need to submit to the authorities, were the Bill with this amendment were to be passed. 

One of the amendments in response, courtesy of Senators Warner and Portman,  found support from Yellen and the Biden Administration since they wished to avoid a long protracted debate on standalone legislation, but rather would be satisfied with a legislative basis for comprehensive digital financial surveillance. 

Bitcoin regulation will be unrestrictive

All the amendments, however, have fallen by the wayside. The original bill remains unamended with respect to crypto regulation. What’s come to light as a result of all the confabulations, is the following: it is widely recognised that future regulation enforced with Bitcoin & Co. in mind ought not to be akin to strangulation. The US remained ahead because it was pro-innovation. Through the decoupling from Gold, and deregulation the US economy and the dollar remained largely unharmed. Stablecoins that are linked to the USD are actually allowing the extended dominance of the Dollar as the premier exchange medium globally. Some do make the case that Bitcoin will be brought under regulation, but in a language that understands the Blockchain’s topography. As such, it will be unique, and not restrictive. 

Conclusion 

Gold and Bitcoin are both staple ingredients of investment. While gold is the classic safe haven, Bitcoin is slated to become the domesticated version of the Wild West in the near future. Both would find relevance in diversified portfolios. Bitcoin will, thanks to regulation, become a bona fide exchange medium. It is expected not to be fated for too much curtailment. The language of Law will b in concordance with the architecture of technology. Bitcoin, as sure as gold, is here to stay. 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here