TIMESTAMPS: 00:01:19 Opening Statement: Green 00:07:55 Opening Statement: Pomp 00:13:07 Nefarious Activity and Transparency 00:23:26 Who Controls Bitcoin? Should It Be Banned? 00:35:23 Are There Benefits of Bitcoin to the US? 00:46:30 Exposure to Bitcoin in an Unpredictable Future 00:52:19 Can Bitcoin Be Successfully Attacked? 00:59:41 Is Wide Spread Adoption Likely? 01:11:44 Final Thoughts 🔥 𝗚𝗘𝗧 𝟳 𝗗𝗔𝗬𝗦 of Real Vision Premium access & insights for only $𝟭 (seriously!) rvtv.io/RVfor1dollar
Someone mentioned Andreas antanopolis , he would have eaten Mike for breakfast pomp is great but he is more about the asset where as bitcoin and the Genesis block is a direct attack on the banks and we all support it that is why we are investing and getting those around us to do the same .... the current global currency’s are debt based !?!? And can’t get out of that debt ..?? For many reasons Bitcoin is here and we will do all we can to keep it here . Pomp was silly to ignore the Genesis block and why it was created , honesty is needed . This is for our freedom 🔱 the banks and their friends have had many hundreds of years of dominance and war .... this is the last war ! Bitcoin is a fork for society and it’s been decided to be implemented ✌️💚☯️🔱🤿 viva la revolution
Notice the type of companies buying Bitcon with their cash versus those buying up their own stock. So we should all sell our stocks and hand over our cash to someone who is selling us their Bitcon? Why are they selling?
That did not age well bro🤣 I laughed out loud at 42min 36sec. I think both are right, bitcoin will never be the world currency however, at the end of consumer capitalism and the ensued subscription based economic system will ensure that deflationary assets will be out of reach for those can't afford to be financially independent!
What this had made me do is to look up more of Mike Green's opinion. I love listening to smart articulate people who are against bitcoin. Too many vids on youtube are simply in an echo chamber. It is important to listen to the other side
In a system where only the wealthy can grow is an absolute non sense. In this system an engineer (myself) need to be a real estate agent or a trader and invest so that my savings don't loose value. It's might be easy for a person like me. But for a person who earns daily wage to eat daily to keep up with their daily spending cannot be expected to do this.
James koury...Take my advice (Don't Trade) buy or hold for years then get retired. You don't want all the stress and crazyness involved in trading. Don't believe the is formula.
The hodling is the actual problem with crypto. If there is no trading in long and shorts, bitcoin will experince the same thing that happened to gamestop. Lots of bagholders and they are not going to be the ones who know how markets work. Not everybody can just hodl, what happens when theres no new suckers coming in anymore? A stock needs buying to go up, but it can fall on its own.
@Andre Anyone I would say Green is a payed propaganda tool. Question: What is your view on Bitcoin? Answer Green: It is an evil tool used by Iran, Russia and China to sell drugs to American babies and stop us from bombing countries to keep the MIC going.
Mike ate this guy up with objective data that I would have loved to hear refuted, instead of defensive soundbites. I hope Anthony is right because I have a lot to lose, but he's too emotionally fragile to defend. Get Saylor!
Hello everyone I thank Mr Carlton Jefferson for his super strategy for helping me be a better trader , he helped me grow my $700 investment to $9000 Mr Carlton we need more men like you in these world and it will surely be a better place for any support
Successful people don't become that way overnight. What most people see at a glance-wealth, a great career, purpose - is the result of hard work and hustle over time
People come here with the aim of chasing money more than knowledge and that will damage your progress, trust me. Chase knowledge first and I promise! The money will follow you just like it's following some of us now
A $100 investment in Crypto with an ROI of 62,500% would have resulted in a gain of $62,500. A $1,000 investment, over $625,000, and a $10,000 investment would have netted the investor over $6.25 millionaire💰
I see Crypto as ultimately becoming a reserve currency for banks, playing much the same role as gold did in the early days of banking. Banks could issue digital cash with greater anonymity and lighter weight, more efficient transactions
@@OldManNutcakez And yet it amusingly all started with a money manager - who is asserting understanding of technology if only to impeach it - claiming someone else (who worked at a technology firm for years) isn't a technologist is the classic ad hominem. Nocoiners tend to become emotional when they're busy implicitly shorting one of the greatest technologies ever created.
Timestamp Summary 01:25 - Background & Opening 7:00 - BTC is Anti-USD? 12:30 - Should we ban BTC? 17:10 - is BTC China controlled? 23:00 - Mike rebuttals 52:00 - 51% Attack on BTC 59:00 - 1% exposure vs CBDC/Gold 01:05:00 - BTC is Monopoly game Some timestamps got deleted while editing, sorry.
Exactly, “I lIkE tO ExPlIn ThInGs tO PeOpLe lIkE ThEyRe 3Rd GrAdErS” Pomp simply believes that Bitcoin is the ONLY crypto currency out there, why are there no discussions about Alts being superior to bitcoin? Bitcoin played a role to introduce us to Crypto and have these conversations about future of finance, but it is definitely not superior to other projects. First bitcoin is going to uproot evil banking system, now bitcoin is going to moon because banks and politicians own it.
@@anthonycarrillo16 Bitcoin does have all the problems mike pointed out but plenty of alts don't and have inherent value to the world everyone can see.
@@anthonycarrillo16 Bitcoin is the only decentralized non-fiat crypto there is...that's why it's superior to alt coins which are all centralized to some degree. Bitcoin has value for its fundamental attributes...not what Mr. Market says the price is in terms of fiat dollars.
Most of my assets are in crypto but I don’t like how Pomp was being so accusatory and sensational in this debate. He put a lot of words in Mike’s mouth.
Pomp comes out as a generic story investor who has his entire portfolio in bitcoin and "save the world" kind of investments and gets triggered with people who don't share his same views. Mike on the other hand is just China/Russia/Iran fear mongering.
Military industrial complex, probably the single most pertinent factor influencing countries to forsake ethics and morality in favour of economic gain...
Was thinking the same thing...If you've been a professional investor for over 30 years like Mike has, and putting out such an obviously false claim, that makes me take the rest of his assertions with a proper grain of salt.
Look... every single person I know wants the central bank to stop printing money. So it's not simply about communicating our preferences. They won't stop printing. So our way to communicate is to opt out of the system!
buying precious metals, buying crypto I do not necessarily believe is ultimately opting out of the system. You can't really opt out lest you completely unplug from the system. At best, crypto and precious metals and other vehicles are merely ways to guard ones wealth from the ravages of the system .... not really opting out. You can't, as of yet and it will be resisted strongly, be paid in these forms, to transact in these forms full out. Best you can do is secure your wealth, ideally, redeem it for other forms of currency in order to engage in other transactions. The day may come where one does not need to redeem these alternatives stores of value before preforming basic, standard transactions, but I do not see that day as today. If one wants to communicate their displeasure at the destruction of the dollar, one needs to communicate this with those they elect. Unless this occurs, there is no incentive otherwise to act unless the crash of the system forces action .... and in that case, chances are those elected will not correct for the original error, but will double down on poor central planning and ensure greater future pains. Politicians are responsive to pressure. We see this in Covid. With a recall petition with over 2 million votes, all of a sudden the Governor of California is beginning to 'see' the science which now warrants changes in executive orders. It is funny how science all of a sudden seems to present itself that certain restrictions by government mandate are no longer necessary when the populace applies pressure. Don't wait for the 'right' people to populate the positions which impact us ..... make the system preform no matter who is in those positions.
My favorite articulation of Anthony’s: “Mike likes to use sleight of hand and insults when he’s backed into a corner. I’m not like Mike and I’m not going to do that. And I DO know technology and how it works, because I was once employed by a tech company.” My ex-girlfriend used to work for JetBlue as an IT manager. She didn’t know a thing about jet engines. I once worked for an architectural firm. I was the janitor. Would you like me to design your next house?
I'm going to say Mr. Green is the winner here, IMO. mostly because of his unflappable nature in the face of silly, nonsensical attacks by Pomp. Also Green raises important points about cyrptos vulnerability to regulation and taxation as well as more.
Despite being on Pomps side, I agree. But rather than having proven his arguements right, Mike just proved to be unmatched as intellect and knowledge. He should have debated someone more knowledgeable in the matter.
I must say I love the fact, that they actually let the counterpart SPEAK. They take notes and then react in a civil manner. I would love to see this in the politics debate so much! Kudos for all of them!
@@Stewiehleba yeah its so accountable that its never been audited and rejects attempts to do so. Not sure where you get your info but it doesn't check with reality
@@Stewiehleba No, they aren't. Alan Greenspan stated that publicly and you can look it up on RU-vid. Our government gets to pick the chairman and that's it. It's an unregulated private body and any other influence is feigned. The only thing that Congress could do, to r"egulate" the Fed, is to decide not to use them, completely, by deciding to use our Treasury to print our own money, which was the original intent. We could create our own money, but chose to borrow it, at interest, from a group of private banks.
Bitcoin trading is hard in the measure of your commitment, dedication, patience and persistence.more you work with dedication for the long term trade less hard become the Bitcoin trading.
Although this debate is indeed civilized and well-moderated, I must say that Pompliano is not really engaging Mike Green's specific arguments. Instead, he is destroying a strawman of his own making.
Incorrect. He is saying that despite ANY argument against bitcoin, the answer is not to ban bitcoin and leaving america behind... There are plenty of micro arguments, but only one true argument is debatable. Do we embrace this technology, or get left behind?
I expected a lot more out of this to be honest. I am a big Pomp fan but he failed to address on merit many of the "facts" brought up by Mike. Instead he kept on talking about his vision for bitcoin or repeatedly stating how misinformed Mike's vision was, without really stating why.
I’m glad you acknowledged how bad at debating that Pomp guy was. All he did was claimed the other guy was saying things that he never said and then swerved every question put to him. His smug arrogance was very off-putting, as well.
@@businesspartners619 Dumb it down for Mike? Mike offered sophisticated technical criticisms of the Bitcoin blockchain, and Pomp couldn't even respond to it, with the excuse of "making the debate understandable to a 5 year old". what??
lol this guy Pomp. The fact that you worked as a Product Manager for 1 year in Facebook does not make you a technical figure. To prove that you did not debate the argument mentioning the node attacks, which I found very interesting
Pomp has a lot of skin in the game. He doesn’t address many of mike’s points head-on. Bitcoin, at this point, is all about risk management and pomp’s views tend to ignore risk management in general.
He actually specifically addresses this a few different times in other podcasts. His reasoning is that he's young and capable of recovering even if this bet goes to zero. Can't fault his logic there.
pretty much how i felt about the debate. Pomp seemed very emotional. We cannot discount the possibility that the US govt will ban bitcoin transactions. It is definitely on the table. Pomp kept saying that Mike was advocating for banning it, when he clearly isn't, especially if you've listened to his other interviews. At the same time, i don't see a world where crypto completely disappears. We need to be ready for when the revolution happens. It is coming.
@@MrReconjon having 80% in one asset is a bias and affects anything u say. So shuld public take him seriously, I don't think so. He is gambling bcoz he is young and not investing.
@@varunsahlot I absolutely agree that anyone in any situation should be taken with a grain of salt especially if there is clear incentive for their behavior. That being said making a highly concentrated allocation also shows a high level of conviction at least for the short term from someone closer to the industry than ourselves. Words and actions. Take it all for what you will and make your own choices accordingly. If I were to tell you that I'm 80 percent commodities and producers, 5 percent growth and 15 percent cash would that make me un credible? Or would it just show you how serious I am when I say I'm confident that the system is very shaky and I believe that they are going to inflate or bust. I'd argue that me saying that would be taken more seriously than me being in a 60/40 and saying the same thing.
@@G8tr1522 the US govt cannot and will not ban bitcoin... it has far too much risk as a democratic republic and reputational risk if they had to do it, they should have tried it (and then eventually have to rescind it) years ago..
I hold bitcoin. Mike won. Sure Pomp had all the one liners, but they don’t disprove what Mike is saying. You can read about precisely the evidence Mike Is bringing up. Pomp used logical fallacies to argue against Mike which isn’t very respectable and doesn’t really help me place faith in Pomp’s arguments. Mike was more prepared and had way more evidence and information on the subject than Pomp did. Mike has clearly researched it more. If Pomp had actually debunked Mikes arguments, and responded [directly] (emphasis on the directly) to them, I’d be more in agreement with Pomp. But Pomp didn’t (or couldn’t)
Stock are crashing bitcoin investment right now will be at every wise individual's list. In a month you'll be ecstatic with the decision you made today.
Thanks for the sweet video, i want to use this opportunity to say a big thanks to ms Jane investment platform i was so scared investing at the first time, now I'm enjoying it now.
I was watching RU-vid video until i came across ms Jane investment platform then I said it all scam, but after my investment with ms Jane investment platform, my life changed i just bought a new car from my increased.
I saw a post about Ms Jane here last month, although i doubted but decided to give it a try. Now my family is enjoying from that decision. Thanks to Ms Jane
It’s a rare debate that all three participants are well informed, civil, and have respect for one another. I have shared with everyone I know who are bitcoin and/or gold investors.
Mike did a great job, but Pomp did a horrible job. Sounds like he never heard of or thought about the issues raised by Mike. The BTC community is completely filled with people like Pomp. The arguments have changed so much for BTC "Money -> Currency -> Digital Gold -> Store of Value" and now its a "protocol." The psychology of this market is too reminiscent of a bubble to be investable, but its certainly fun to watch.
Pomp "language" is compromising. He is using default techniques to degrade "Mike" and his knowlege. Pomp does not answer the questions, is very vague and does not defend but attacks Mike. Pomp has a lot of money in Bitcoin, he has to defend his decision because otherwise hew will compromise himself. Every time Pomp talks, I feel like a child instead of an adult with Msc. degree.
All these people are being proven wrong time after time on bitcoin. It doesn’t matter if Mike is smart or speaks intelligently. He is absolutely wrong and Pomp is right.
@@rubenperez509 Beeing right now does not mean being right for ever. Bitcoin is currently similar to AOL in 2000er. To know now that there is a big problem will prevent us from sticking to it in when it crashing to insignificant number.
@@vitaliyschreibmann6653 you need to understand that it’s not about which blockchain has the best technology. BTC is the only true decentralized blockchain, it’s the most secure, it has a finite supply and it is being adopted as a better form of gold as far as wealth preservation. People aren’t looking for the best tech (to store their wealth) like they were with AOL.
Outstanding discussion... Extremely well moderated. I'm a Bitcoin investor and 35 year trader. Mike Green's perspective is powerful and necessary. Great job to all three participants!
If set of all investors pays certain fee to miners, doesn't that mean investors (in total) will always be in loss? How can investors gain their money back that they lost to miners' fee, other than from other investors?
@@bgbusiness_ Only if you believe that USA government has the right to starve and punish Iranian and NK people by denying them access to international finance and markets. National sieges only reward and solidify those regimes. 70 years of practice stands as absolute proof. There is no reasonable debate left about the matter. The results are in. Get with the program. Logic stands on initial assumptions that the logic can not prove. Internally consistent logical construction is easy to make. Are his assumption correct? He starts from "USA has the right to siege foreign nations." No. That mos def is not correct.
Yep. He just brings up the usual concerns with crypto. All the other guy does is attacking the person instead of the arguments while making none but speculative claims. Comes off more of a crazed cultist.
Mike talks specifics, tries to debate with logic and raises very logical concerns. Pomp is trying to attack the other person and says nothing of essence , just going around cycles being obviously defensive with no grace and sounds like a member of a sect.
Completely agree. Anthony came out the gate with his “approach it at a 3rd grade level..as to avoid an intellectual slight of hand”...then proceeds with (as you said) ad hominem and straw-man techniques. This is how 90% of people here in Seattle communicate...about everything..big or petty. I’m so tired of these types of “conversations” and can’t recall the last time I witnessed a forthright discussion. I tapped out of this one at 40 min.
Pomp is a bitcoin maximalist who actually thinks bitcoin will overtake the dollar, when in reality, bitcoin is just an extension of the global USD money supply.
Mike doesn’t understand Bitcoin fully yet. Bitcoin is a better form of Gold and not a substitute for the fiat System. It’s not easy to understand and we shouldn’t be ignorant about the potential dangers that Mike is talking about.
@@prula Which part is he not understanding? He’s discussing the societal, regulatory, macro, and institutional side of bitcoin. These are all areas that bitcoin maximalists ignore. For now, the miners dominate bitcoin and it’s still very slow and expensive and too volatile for any central bank to denominate its currency in.
@@grapplerke For example he doesn’t understand the difference between nodes and miners. He doesn’t understand the decentralized nature of Bitcoin and that a bad actor can be easily detected and thrown out of the chain by the majority of actors who are economically incentivized. You can transfer 100 Billionen worth of Bitcoin around the world with final settlement in 30 minutes for 30 dollars. When Germany repatriated their gold it took 2 years and cost millions of dollars. You are right that Bitcoin is too slow to buy a coffee. Nobody wants to wait 10 minutes until the transaction is settled
@@prula Majority of the mining is already done in China. Theoretically all of the miners could be captured by the state and be enough for a 51% attack. Bitcoin is not as decentralized as you would like to believe it is. And still today, the transactional volume used for bitcoin for actual purchases of goods and services have not gone up from 2017. Bitcoin is more like a deflationary digital gold with a tech growth stock flavor to it. Bitcoin had a chance to become more like a digital currency, however, the miners and OGs wanted to their share to appreciate and for the miners to make a lot from the fees, and that’s why we have the bitcoin we have today. Bitcoin still has more to go up, but the last and late comers will get their butts handed to them and lose everything. I’m posting as someone who’s sat next to all the OG crypto folks and made out a lot from trading crypto. I still hold a little, but institutional money has always been the dumb money in new markets. I’ll be entering bitcoin again after the next combined bitcoin bear cycle and the macro bear market super cycle.
haha That's how you know he lost the argument. Can't imagine a more dishonest statement from a guy who clearly knows the difference. Not a big Pomp guy, but this was an easy debate to win. Mike Green's argument was basically, "bitcoin is scary"lol. It's no more or less speculative than gold. Any person who follows the two assets knows this. Great debate between two bright men all the same.
@@settledown5392 Settle Down needing to settle down himself. Mike's argument is to think for yourself and consider what the return of this asset could be in Pomp's hypothetical future. Nobody knows and nobody could figure that out.
@@TheWeastBeast I'm perfectly calm sir. That was one of his points he made.....and probably the best. The repetitive stuff about China, Russia, Iran couldn't be more intellectually dishonest though, along with him saying war is not an economic interest lol. Great debate either way, from two intelligent guys..... but Mike looked like an MSNBC shill to some degree here.
I don't know about competing debates for Best Ever, but I don't think this one would even be a nominee. Whoever in a debate that calls the opponent's opinions "absurd" the most is the LOSER!
I own bitcoins and other cryptocoins, but must say Mike Green is a beast. There is such a hype around the crypto space in general and it is hard to find the kind of valuable observations on risk that Mike provides. Many are the first time I hear and I´m thankful for that.
Mike doesn't seem more intelligent, he says a lot of stuff that isn't really relevant. It bothers me that he never smiles too, that combined with his arguments makes it seems like he's just a paid shill rather than someone engaging in actual discussion
@@Alistair ya. I listened to Nic Carter vs Mike debate and it was much better. Honestly, I felt like pomp didn't know enough about how Bitcoin actually works to be able to thwart Mike's arguments.
3 года назад
pomp was totally unprepared to the debate with this guy ..
Anthony sure did a great job of explaining it to three-year-olds. The rest of us would love to see less scorning laughs and more heavily grounded arguments from Anthony. Great debate, great performance from both although Mike is the clear winner in my opinion, even though I would love to see Anthony prevail here
Early on, he ignored the moderator’s request to explain for laymen what Mike meant by an “empty block” attack, nor did he refute the possibility. I thought a lot of Pomp’s responses were non sequiturs.
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks", That's what Satoshi said on that Genesis block of the Bitcoin network, Not sure he imagined the second far larger wave of quantitative easing in this last year!
Mike runs circles around Pomp intellectually. Pomp did not address Mikes points, instead returned slights and smug smiles. Pomp makes me want to sell my bitcoin.
Mike Green: Has facts, articulate thoughts, deductive reasoning Pomp: You are wrong because i FEEL like you're wrong!! BTC 1 milli by 2025, you DON'T think there's at least a 1% chance of this?!!
I think Mike doesn't really understand the full nature of decentralization though. It isn't just decentralization of miners, but decentralization of protocol resulting in altcoins. We have already witnessed this defense in the Bitcoin Cash community when Craig Wright tried to take over the network with superior hash power and resources. I do agree that Mike Green seems to understand the technical and political aspects better than Pomp, so he wins this debate in my view. However, I still disagree with Mike for reasons not brought up in the debate.
Mike Green's position of being against BTC for the younger people or any one for that matter is if BTC continues to go up in fiat dollar terms those holding BTC will no longer participate in economic activity (aka keep working)? Isn't that what the wealthy in paper assets is doing? Equities, stocks, real estate, etc? Why can't the avg working class invest in something that can provide financial opportunity in a fiat system that continues to dwindle the working classes purchasing power? I agree with Pomp everyone should have a non-zero allocation into crypto. Even if you think BTC will fail you can see the current trends and data points and think of it as an insurance policy.
Pardon my poor English. Can't listen to this Pompliano guy... He claims that Mike can't prove this, cant' prove that, but the only thing he can prove is only the "transaction record" of Bitcoin, which is NOT an important feature of any currency ever. Every point he is making is also just an opinion (which he has the right to do so,) just like Mike has been doing in this debate. But this Pomp guy even dares to assume what Mike is thinking, or what he is advocating about (20:33, which also cannot be proved unless he asks Mike directly) which is crossing a line during debating. You don't do this in an argument, advocating or assuming what the other party is representing. Please just represent YOURSELF and what YOU stand for... The major concern of any official currency is CONTROL, and then wide acceptance for its own survival. Bitcoin is far more fragile compared to gold or any other assets. This young man clearly has never experienced no electricity for days, or any social upheaval. Yes, you can access your Bitcoin in ordinary days when everything is normal, and when the invisible hand (Big Brother) is not in harms way. I also believe as Mikes says, that all governments already have their own crypto currency schemes planned out, and I'll be very surprised if any one will include Bitcoin in it. Regarding wealth preservation, stability, and durability reasons, gold trumps Bitcoin any day. Crypto currency sure is the future, but Bitcoin is NOT deemed to be The One at all. It's like the masses rushing in and heavily investing in AOL or Yahoo stocks just before the Dot Com bubble... Yes, internet was the future at those times, but those BBS and email companies were not the mainstream in the future. Same as the Blockchain hype nowadays: it is the future, but Bitcoin isn't going to be the APPL, FB or GOGL of blockchain.
@@cryptorio1570 Right now, Bitcoin is a textbook Ponzi scheme: It has no intrinsic value. You can’t eat it, wear it, or heat your house with it. ... It is not a productive asset. It’s not a factory that produces an item. ... It has zero underlying value. None. ... It has minimal utility. ... Its value is solely derived from the trust that the price will continue to rise indefinitely. ...
@@tmo2798 Right now, Gold is a textbook Ponzi scheme: It has no intrinsic value. You can’t eat it, wear it, or heat your house with it. ... It is not a productive asset. It’s not a factory that produces an item. ... It has zero underlying value. None. ... It has minimal utility. ... Its value is solely derived from the trust that the price will continue to rise indefinitely. ...
Lol mature? Hardly. When you personally bash people in your statements, I wouldn't consider that mature. Saying Micheal Saylor is not someone to accept life advice from because he's invested in Bitcoin is absurd. Especially since Micheal is extremely intellectually inclined.
Why did Pomp get to be the face of bitcoin? He's sounds like a charlatan and got wrecked by Mike Green. Real Vision should get a smarter person to argue Bitcoins case on the level of Mike Green because Pomp is not it
We need more thoughtful conversations like this where both sides can clearly articulate their perspective while not interrupting each other. Well done!
I love BTC but the Bitcoin pumper, but he is completely disingenuous in his arguments and refuses to go into the weeds because he loses and says it. I was blown away when he said “just because it’s in China doesn’t mean China runs it.” Holy shiet.
I've seen both this debate and the Saylor vs Giustra debate and it was interesting to see how different and informative the two debates were. Mike is very well-spoken, very cultivated, civilized and not easily provoked, whereas Pomp was rather disrespectful and made attacks personal by employing words like ridiculous, absurd and hysterical in discrediting Mike's beliefs, and smirked rather frequently. It felt more like he was looking for an argument rather than a debate. One enlightening thing that he said however was how the stock market is actually lower than it was way before if we priced it at the value of gold. Moderator also did a great job keeping the heat at bay. Really insightful show overall.
"War is not an economic interest."? That may be the single most unintelligent statement I have ever heard any Human Being utter. Ever!!! Now he must stop talking. Debate over!
Wow Mike really blows Pomp out of the water here. And Pomp helps him all the way. Definitely need Raoul or Saylor on the pro-Bitcoin side next time to really flesh out these issues and actually respond to Mike’s points
The only thing of interest that Mike mentioned that I had to research is the st. petersburg paradox. Mike's arguments just didn't make logical sense to me. Is there risk in investing in bitcoin? Yes, but there seems to be much less risk in bitcoin than there is risk in not putting store of value in bitcoin.
Bitcoin was not to be a store of value it was meant for P2P transactions. Plain and simple the Fed's control BTC, he who control's the liquidity control's the game.
@@etishbite456 wait so you can't do transactions on BTC? Guess I'd better go delete the ones that I did fictional edit: oh, turns out the blockchain is immutable
Bitcoin is a revolutionary idea most due to the blockchain concept. However, Bitcoin has become a burden to the crypto-verse. Every time it has some issues, it drags down with it truthful useful projects like Ethereum, just to name the main one. Its future desperately needs an effective application in the real world. Simply being a store of value will not make it any better than gold. Without a tangible utility, you gonna have Bitcoin occupying the same space that gold already occupies in the investment world: an occasional asset to go to when inflation comes along too strong. Bitcoin is way riskier though cuz gold doesn't require an operational network to exist, gold simply exists.
@@MrMiggy1978 Make that, 100K. It doesn’t change the fact this is a fad. If you want to speculate then go ahead. Bitcoin isn’t as attractive to me as , say Raoul Pal who could snorkel in Caymans while pumping it and pay no taxes when he sells it. I’ll 35% to Uncle Sam and another 10% to local leeches. Suddenly the Bitcoin Scheme isn’t so attractive.
Interesting to revisit this debate over a year later and see how the crypto casino has evolved and Bitcoin in particular. It's now quite clear that pompous Pom's call on Bitcoin is dead wrong and the forecasts of Bitcoin evangelists like him, Saylor, Mark Moss et al. have proven to be grandiose BS. Mike Green's analysis has stood the test of time.
@@Nick_Chanas totally i think this opinion comes from peoples reaction to the growth that ignites after war. suppliers of military equipment do well though everyone else doesn't
Hello I'm new to bitcoin trade and i have been making few loses, but recently i see a lot of people earning from it , can someone please give me a new strategy or a direction
Most time having knowledge or insight about a particular activity can as well be a pleasing exercise. I can boldly say that forex and crypto trading is one of the profitable money exchange services that elevates investors and their financial status.
Great Debate, 2 smart guys! Anthony's smirk every time mike made a point was annoying, Crypto supporters are very sensitive to anything negative said about it! Why get so sensitive over something if you think it will just play out?
Pomp may be right or he might also not be. Not what I ultimately saw. Green clearly was the more polished debater and kept ruffling Pomp’s feathers without even trying. Frustration was oozing from Pomp’s screen. His lack of composure hurt his credibility. Also, who invests over 90% of their net worth on a speculative asset? He’s all in and not hedging for any risk.
@@HenryPaulThe3rd if it's 'crypto' then it's not THAT insane (as tech has proved to be the big winner = even in the S&P). What will be insane is if he's portfolio is 96% 'BTC'. That's indeed portfolio suicide.
@@HenryPaulThe3rd lol that ppl are making whole salaries off. Some that are persistent become millionaires within a few years. I've worked a 9-5, invested in stocks etc so if crypto is digital beanie babies then someone please feed me some hahaha
I feel like Anthony is playing to the emotions of the viewers and is covertly implanting buzzwords that might appeal to a large group of viewers. On the other hand, I feel Mike uses the principles of stoicism and his responses are very well thought out. Despite what you believe about Bitcoin, Mike truly is more credible in this debate.
no. Mike is just going through the government approved script. body language tells hes actually quite uncomfortable in his in-denial position. fun fact : most of the " criminal activity" is only " criminal" because the government says so ... and most of it is just because they dont get the dollars. governments are quick to demonize what threatens them.... things like decentralization and free spreech are high priority as we know. Furthermore : he asks if we really believe there is a 1% chance the us gov will adapt bitcoin ... of course we dont - thats why why we distrtact them with bitcoin debates. what he didnt talk about, probably because he knows its the nail in the nail in the coffin of government control is the Helium Network + deeper network + defi combo. There are 1000 coins and blockchains and it continues to grow. his estimated few billion dollars to disrupt bitcoin has to be 1000x. if bitcoin gets disrupted the crypto space will instantly move to another network. centralized control is practically destroying itself due to stoopid decisions.
@@thephuntastics2920 exactly. The US government will protect its own interests. What are those? To remain as is. What are the interests of other actors? For things to not remain as is. So the US government deems illegal and bad anything that does not protect its own existence. Circular logic
I HAVE BEEN MAKING LOSSES TRADING MYSELF...I THOUGHT TRADING ON DEMO ACCOUNT IS JUST LIKE TRADING THE REAL MARKET... CAN ANYONE HELP ME OUT OR AT LEAST ADVICE ME ON WHAT TO DO?
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Bitcoin can withstand a denial-of-service attack in the form of its network being flooded by empty transaction blocks because miners can choose which blocks they attempt to mine. Since the difficulty of mining a block is constant at any given time, empty blocks will be given the lowest priority because they have no transitions fees. This will probably result in empty blocks being ignored.
Some people can't wrap their head around the idea that bitcoin could be successful. To the point of allocating 1% is justing losing 1%, is ridiculous. The market moves more then that in a day, so not agreeing to that is just being stubborn. Much like Peter Schiff. It more important being right, than to accept the possibilty.
Mike wiped the floor with Pomp in this debate. Mike made many solid points that were not refuted by Pomp. Pomp simply reverted to personal attacks and treading the same ground each time.
