Peter Schiff is an economist known for his views against Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general.
A couple of days ago, on 30th March, he published a post on X, in which he stated that in his opinion the reason why young people prefer Bitcoin to gold, apart from ignorance and lack of experience, is because during their short lives Bitcoin has risen much higher than gold.
But when they gain the wisdom that comes with age, Bitcoin will have collapsed and they will prefer gold.
While it's true that everyone is free to have their own opinions, it's equally true that one must be consistent.
Indeed, Schiff himself has admitted in the past that he missed the opportunity to invest in Bitcoin in the early years, when its value was very low, showing a kind of regret for not having taken the opportunity to profit. (Rif.)
It's easy to trash-talk an asset when you don't own it.
For Schiff, Bitcoin lacks intrinsic value and he sees the investment more as a bet on market behaviour than a belief in the long-term success of the cryptocurrency. (Rif.)
Bitcoin's success depends on the pressure to buy the asset, which makes it a risky investment compared to other tangible assets such as real estate.
Schiff may not have wanted to offend young people by calling them ignorant and inexperienced, but to warn them that preferring BTC to gold could have disastrous consequences in the near future.
It's also true that today it takes little to gain any visibility if one speaks negatively about BTC.
How many positive comments will it have received?
The ones that will have made a big number are I think, the negative reviews.
But what counts is getting responses and increasing the volume of views.
In my opinion he achieved this.
Being anti-BTC always pays off, especially in this climate of mass euphoria over the imminent halving!
And today, 1 April, this post appears:
Thanks a lot for reading my post.
