Around when Bitcoin was trading at $19,000, my Uber driver told me about the second line he'd taken on his home to buy some. That's not a systemic problem in America. But it might be in some other countries, e.g. South Korea.
Suppose Bitcoin crashed 90% and stayed down for a few months. It is conceivable that Seoul might pay out, to avoid social tension. Directly, e.g. you get a jeon for every won you lost, or indirectly, e.g. temporarily increasing welfare benefits [1].
Note that I said "conceivable." It is unlikely, hence why I think arguing that because lots of people are involved it cannot become worthless is silly.
> Why would it go to zero?
Why would it go to $50,000? Because people decide it's worthless (or worth more).
Around when Bitcoin was trading at $19,000, my Uber driver told me about the second line he'd taken on his home to buy some. That's not a systemic problem in America. But it might be in some other countries, e.g. South Korea.
Suppose Bitcoin crashed 90% and stayed down for a few months. It is conceivable that Seoul might pay out, to avoid social tension. Directly, e.g. you get a jeon for every won you lost, or indirectly, e.g. temporarily increasing welfare benefits [1].
Note that I said "conceivable." It is unlikely, hence why I think arguing that because lots of people are involved it cannot become worthless is silly.
> Why would it go to zero?
Why would it go to $50,000? Because people decide it's worthless (or worth more).
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/sep/03/long-term-u...