BTC no intrinsic value, but do any currencies
Money (Fiat Currency), in and of itself has no value it is fair to say, it is a tool and as such derives value from utility – in trade both at a point in time and in the future (a store of value). I think the term “intrinsic value” doesn’t fit very well for currencies or BTC, due to the fact it doesn’t directly generate economic output (cashflow or capital capacity).
So I think we are safe to say BTC as a so called “asset class” is very similar or the same as Money, it is a tool for trade either in the present or future as a store of value. As Money we can trade for other Money, currency exchange. To do this we need an exchange rate and a basis on which to set that rate – which like everything that has ever been traded on free markets is based on supply and demand.
What drives the supply and demand of most currencies is international trade or capital flows, which are influenced by the productive output of a country, the amount of currency on issue, the real interest rates capital can achieve on that currency and the balance of payments for the trade of goods and services. As such there are some “intrinsic” elements that exist to measure comparative value between currencies that are based on the underlying size and productivity of the economy connected with the currency, plus the pricing (interest rates) and quantity of the currency (money supply).
I would use the term “derived value” rather than “intrinsic value”, currencies act more like a derivative of the underlying value of an economy – they are not of value beyond their ability to lay claim on pool of things which have value. That is limited by the economy to which they relate, even the USD which has supply and demand for transactions outside of the US, still has it’s value derived significantly from the US economy. If the US economy was worth nothing the so would the USD – no one would trust it or use it… or would they?
Well they could, if everyone accepted the USD was worth something and agreed to use it as a basis for exchange, then it would act like a currency and have a value attributable to relative to the value of other currencies. The only difference to BTC in this case would be in the trust that more USD would not just be created and devalue the existing money on issue.
This, to me is a key point of distinction, which says that BTC can be money, but it can’t be a currency. A currency derives value from the economy it is connected and hence can (with great difficulty) be measured against other currencies for rates of exchange.
So, I conclude that BTC has no intrinsic or derived value, while Fiat Currencies have no intrinsic value but do have a derived value. Both have value in use, but so do seashells if that is what people chose to use. The key point of difference for BTC is it’s scarcity, so price reacts strongly to demand, where as currencies, seashells and other cryptocurrencies have supply flexibility, so supply is also a major influence on price – which if you don’t have trust, can be a major driver of that price.
I will make one other point on BTC in terms of inflation and it’s use as money. It’s scarcity is it’s greatest feature which offers price appreciation when compared to Fiat currencies which continue to be diluted and inflated away. However, no one seems to talk to the increase in the money supply that is created by BTC’s global use and increase in price.
BTC increases the money supply across the globe, but there is no increase in assets or productive capacity associated with the rise in the value of BTC. Simple maths says you increase the money supply associated with an economy, you get inflation – more money chasing the same amount of goods and services makes them more expensive. Underlying economic value is transferred to the holders of BTC as it’s price rises, away from non-holders, but no value is being created in the process, so it is also a wealth transfer.
For BTC the economy is global, the expansion of the BTC money supply is price driven, rather than money printing, but the underlying economic activity/value already has currencies in place. So BTC is adding to global money supply = increasing global inflation…
Now to address a bit of a contradiction in the above – BTC still is not a currency, it’s money, despite any tenuous link to global economic activity. Because it does not provide a means of relative value between the economy it covers and others… until we start trading with aliens.
Just some of my thoughts on BTC as I grapple with understanding it and evaluate the investing opportunities.