He did a rugpull in a shitcoin right before his inauguration and likely pulled megaprofit out of some bag holders.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/currencies/trumps-meme-coin-...

Any other administration this would have been a huge scandal but when we're in an avalanche of corruption I guess it can be missed.

I think the point was that it gave his supporters a quasi-legal way to donate money while skirting campaign finance regulation, making the trumpcoin itself not so much a unit of currency as a receipt - a proof of loyalty.

I don't get the point you're trying to make?

That legitimate stores of value are typically not that simple to manipulate.

Like real estate?

You are equating legitimacy with liquidity, and the that isn't necessarily true.

Liquidity is necessary, and a good marker, but not sufficient.

> You are equating legitimacy with liquidity, and the that isn't necessarily true.

How so? Liquidity is a measurement of how easy it is to trade, and if it's easy to trade there are many people/entities that believe it's "legitimate" currency, or they wouldn't trade for it

Parent said "store of value" not "currency". Liquidity is probably sufficient for a currency (depending on the features of the liquidity), but it is not sufficient for a store of value.

Fair enough; store of value additionally requires restricted supply so that the value isn't debased. But in the context of this thread, that just strengthens the argument that 'Bitcoin is different'.

It also requires a value proposition that doesn't depend on the current zeitgeist, among other things. Society changes, and stores of value need to exist outside that change, lest they be left behind with the norms and dogmas.

This is where I personally think bitcoin fails.

> Society changes, and stores of value need to exist outside that change

I completely agree. I don't think this is different from saying the store of value needs to stay liquid tho. Bitcoin is currently very illiquid compared to many things, but there's no reason to think it's liquidity will decrease, and based on trends and first principles of what makes something a good 'money', significant reason to believe liquidity will continue to increase

I don't even have a problem with some unwitting celebrity promoting this kind of stuff. They aren't subject matter experts and I imagine they have grifters targeting them all the time.

What I do take issue with is this keeps happening because there's a lot of money to be made off transaction fees so nobody looks too hard into how fraudulent any of these memecoins are before allowing them on the trading platforms.

Admittedly, I don't know how the trading system works so maybe the platforms taking a cut of the profits from the blatantly fraudulent activity are victims too? Crying all the way to the bank I suppose...