黄金与比特币上演终极对决
|
暂且管这叫末日预言者大战吧。 在互联网的某些角落，全球货币体系崩溃或恶性通胀这样的话题总会引发热烈讨论，而其中有一个话题尤其能引起热议——比特币和黄金一样值钱吗？ 自1971年布雷顿森林货币体系崩溃、以及随之而来的两位数通胀后，投资者就开始把黄金作为对抗通胀的避险首选以及对某些央行的制衡措施。这类央行的能耐就是，把大肆印钞和让货币贬值作为减轻公共债务负担、鼓励出口增长的手段。但黄金除了常常会在通胀环境中价格飞涨外，它还确实是对抗比通胀更糟的情况的一种筹码。毕竟，普通股、不动产或是免受通胀影响的政府债券都能让你免受政府发行的货币贬值的侵蚀。但对全球很多投资者来说，如果出现比20世纪70年代式的通胀还要糟糕得多的情况，比如战争或经济持续低迷，黄金还是对抗这些状况的出色保护手段。 不过，比特币现在已经越来越接近主流了，而且还能提供许多与黄金一样的特质，比如稀缺性以及不受政府影响。那么它与黄金相比，哪个能更好地帮助投资者抵御极端恶劣的形势呢？ 作为保值手段：能挖掘的比特币总量已预设为2100万个，而可开采的黄金总量到底有多少则是个更为复杂的问题。长期以来，黄金供应量增幅大概是每年增长1-3%。但从短期来看，由于新探明储量的影响，金价必然会经常出现大幅波动。当然，作为一种新技术的产物，比特币肯定比黄金更容易波动。但从长期来看，由于2100万个比特币挖完后不再有新比特币，我们可以预计它将最终成为一种比黄金更好的保值手段。 优势方：比特币。 充公风险：在发生大范围社会动乱或经济衰退时，确实存在政府没收私人财产的风险。实际上，1933年和1934年间，美国政府就宣称私人持有黄金非法并强制没收。一开始是由总统颁布行政命令，随后又通过国会法案执行。当时持有黄金的人因为这种充公获得了一定补偿，但这种政策的出发点就是要使美元对黄金贬值，因此这些人实际上并没有获得被充公资产的真正市场价值。 如果再发生类似情况，那到底是持有黄金还是比特币更安全？在某种程度上，这个问题其实无所谓。如果政府打算收走你的黄金或比特币，而你坚决不从，那你怎么样都是触犯了法律。但如果你决心要让政府这种做法没戏唱，可能持有黄金比持有比特币更管用。的确，是有办法来买比特币让自己的身份无法通过比特币数据区块链查到，但比起在钱币展上买点黄金并不向政府报告来说，这还是要更复杂些。 免责声明：不用说，违法就是违法，这么做绝不可取，哪怕是在最糟糕的假想情境中也是如此。 优势方：黄金。 对冲最坏情况：如果一想到可能发生第三次世界大战你就夜不能寐，那很难想象比特币能比黄金更让你安心。毕竟比特币要靠互联网才有用，如果一旦断电或是没法上网，那比特币就会一钱不值，哪怕你把它们存在物理介质里也不管用。 优势方：黄金。 便于使用：比特币可能在那些不太理想的环境中更有用，比如如果身处一个政府喜欢弹压或不负责任、但仍然能够上网的国家。比如比特币在阿根廷这样的地方就日益流行，这完全是因为该国货币管理混乱，经济长期深陷通胀。在这种环境中，比特币就比黄金更有价值，因为实物黄金储藏运输都很昂贵，而花费、存储比特币却几乎毫无成本。 |
Call it a battle of the doomsayers. In some corners of the Internet -- where topics such as the collapse of the global monetary system or runaway inflation are the stuff of common, and lively, conversation -- one question in particular elicits particularly heightened emotions: is bitcoin as good as gold? Since the fall of the Bretton Woods monetary regime in 1971 and the double-digit inflation that followed, investors have considered gold a hedge against inflation and a check against central banks who have the capacity to resort to money printing and currency devaluation as a means of decreasing the burden of public debt and encouraging export growth. But while gold often thrives in inflationary environments, it's really a bet against something far worse than inflation. After all, run-of-the-mill stocks, real estate, or even inflation-protected government bonds can protect you against against a decline in the real value of government-issued currencies. But for many investors all over the world, gold is a great protector against much more severe events than 1970s-style inflation, like war or prolonged depression. Now that bitcoin has grown closer to the mainstream, though, and offers many of the same qualities that gold does -- like scarcity and freedom from the influence of government -- which is better at protecting investors against the very worst? As a store of value: The total number of bitcoins that can be mined has been preset at 21 million, whereas the amount of gold that can be mined is a more complicated question. Over time, the increase in the supply of gold has increased at roughly 1-3% per year, but on a short-term basis there can conceivably be a lot of volatility in the price of gold due to new discoveries. Of course, as a new technology, bitcoin is subject to much more volatility than gold. But over the long run, given the fact that no new bitcoins will be mined after the 21-millionth, we can expect it to ultimately serve as a better store of value than gold. Advantage: bitcoin Confiscatory risk: In the event of widespread social upheaval or depression, the risk that governments will confiscate private assets is quite real. In fact, in 1933 and 1934 the United States government made it illegal to privately own gold and confiscated it, first by executive order, then by Congressional decree. Gold holders were compensated for their assets, but the whole point of the exercise was to to devalue the dollar in gold terms, so those reimbursed weren't receiving the real market value for their assets. If something like this were to happen again, would you be safer holding gold or bitcoin? In one sense, it doesn't really matter. If the government wanted to take your gold or your bitcoins, and you resisted, you'd be a lawbreaker in any case. But if you're determined to thwart the government, it's probably a bit easier to do it with gold than with bitcoin. Sure, there are ways to buy bitcoin so that your identity is not traceable via the bitcoin blockchain, but it's more complicated than buying small amounts of gold with cash at a coin show and not reporting it to the government. Disclaimer: obviously, breaking the law is breaking the law and that's not advisable, even in some of these worst-case, hypothetical scenarios. Advantage: gold Hedge against the absolute worst: If the prospect of World War III is keeping you up at night, it's difficult to imagine bitcoin as a better bet than gold. After all, bitcoin relies on the Internet to be functional, and if you are somehow severed from the power grid or the online community, your bitcoins will be worthless, even if you store them in physical form. Advantage: gold Ease of Use: Bitcoin is likely more useful in less dire situations, like if you're a citizen of a country with a repressive or irresponsible government but you still have regular access to the Internet. Bitcoin has surged in popularity in places like Argentina, for instance, precisely because the currency there has been mismanaged and the Argentine economy suffers from chronic inflation. In a situation such as this, bitcoin is a better alternative than gold because owning real, physical gold is expensive to store and transport, while spending and storing bitcoin is effectively costless. |
