<p>There are some good answers here. I'd just like to point out that the thing with scams is that there's a lie or deception involved in it. With bitcoin there is no such thing. Everyone knows about the 21 million coin limit. Everyone knows that those who got in earlier got it cheaper and have a strong influence on the price. Knowing all this you can make an informed decision about whether to buy bitcoin or not.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-06-03T18:40:27.900Z
2018-06-03T18:40:27.900Z
Abdussamad
<blockquote>
  <p>Nobody who has even the smallest understanding of economy would spend bitcoin to buy things with because it is guaranteed that it will be, sooner or later more valuable over time.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>If you assume this statement is a fact, why spend your fiat currency on anything except more Bitcoin? The stock market is virtually guaranteed to keep increasing over time as well, but people are still spending money on non-investments. By your logic, everyone would be keeping everything in investments and only cashing out for bare necessities, because "sooner or later they would be more valuable".</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-22T16:00:12.543Z
2018-02-22T16:00:12.543Z
Dan Mandel
<p>You make a lot of interesting claims. The ethos behind bitcoin is similar to that of gold, hence 'mining'. Gold is also limited supply and I am certain that people who first found gold a long time ago are rich beyond their wildest dreams. That does not stop anybody trading gold for something of value.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>... a kind of ponzi scheme ...</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Ponzi scheme is a particular arrangement which Bitcoin certainly is not.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-22T09:18:44.453Z
My understanding until now was that Bitcoin is designed to serve as a currency not as a storage of value only. thus the term, cryptocurrency.
Orsinus
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-22T10:18:11.707Z
@Acroneos True, and gold was once widely used as a currency and still regularly is. Paper money is an adaptation of the right to access gold.
Willtech
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-22T09:14:09.017Z
2018-02-22T09:14:09.017Z
Willtech
<blockquote>
<p>Nobody who has even the smallest understanding of economy would spend bitcoin to buy things with because it is guaranteed that it will be, sooner or later more valuable over time.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Apparently, that's not true, because there's an entire economy that's backed by bitcoins. Merchants are willing to accept bitcoin, because it comes with benefits they can't otherwise have, such as privacy, censorship-resistance, fast transaction finality, and less costs.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>For me, it seems that the only reason this technology was created was just to trap people into buying it, believing that it will become more valuable, but in the end, the only people who do really make real (fiat) money from this are the &quot;early adopters&quot; and the creator himself who got the bitcoins when they were very cheap.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Some did sell their coins, and bought them solely to return to fiat. Granted. Just as some others didn't.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>you got a lot of evidence to why this whole system is just a kind of ponzi scheme designed to distribute wealth from late adopters to early adopters.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The last thing I'd call it is a ponzi scheme. First of all, in a ponzi scheme there are  promised returns from the founder(s). There were no zero promised returns from Satoshi Nakamoto.</p>
<p>Secondly, ponzi schemes are characterized by lack of transparency. Bitcoin is the exact opposite. Everything's transparent, from the source code of the software, to the discussions that were made by those who got involved early.</p>
<p>Thirdly, in ponzi schemes old investors earn when new investors lose. This is clearly not true with bitcoin. If the market value rises, it makes both old and new investors gain, and oppositely, when the market value drops, it makes both the old and new investors lose. It's no more different than gold and stocks.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-03T13:39:26.707Z
2022-10-03T13:39:26.707Z
Angelo
<p>Or...</p>

<p>... it's limited because we (at least we in Europe) made bad experiences with inflationary money in the past. banks waste your money but you have to pay for that (taxes). banks can print more and more money until it's worthless. One $ is always one $, but you could buy more in the past than now.</p>

<p>I don't think, that Bitcoin is a scam. It's "trying something new". The system has proved that banks are not relevant within it.</p>

<p>And: Why should Satoshi not cash out if it's a scam? He should have around 10,000,000,000$ but his known addresses are untouched for years. What's the reason of risking that money?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-22T10:53:32.390Z
2018-02-22T10:53:32.390Z
hardfork
<p>Bitcoin is limited by design. It is part of tokonomics. Only if it is limited will it have value. It is not a scam, it is governed by a protocol, not a regulatory body.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-10-03T07:07:15.620Z
2022-10-03T07:07:15.620Z
Aditya Agrawal
<p>As we all know the total amount of bitcoins which can be available at any time are capped at 21 Million. This was done by design by its creator/creators (he/she/they say that it is intended to make the coin "scarce").</p>

<p>But if I think about it, this fact is completely destroying the intent of creating a currency for people to buy things with. Nobody who has even the smallest understanding of economy would spend bitcoin to buy things with because it is guaranteed that it will be, sooner or later more valuable over time.</p>

<p>For me, it seems that the only reason this technology was created was just to trap people into buying it, believing that it will become more valuable, but in the end, the only people who do really make real (fiat) money from this are the "early adopters" and the creator himself who got the bitcoins when they were very cheap. Also, take into account that the creator is still anonymous to this day et voila - you got a lot of evidence to why this whole system is just a kind of ponzi scheme designed to distribute wealth from late adopters to early adopters.</p>

<p>Please prove me wrong because until now I was very fascinated by bitcoin and altoins.</p>

<money-supply><fraud>
Does the fact that bitcoins are limited prove that the system is a scam?
Orsinus
# Does the fact that bitcoins are limited prove that the system is a scam?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-02-22)

As we all know the total amount of bitcoins which can be available at any time are capped at 21 Million. This was done by design by its creator/creators (he/she/they say that it is intended to make the coin "scarce").

But if I think about it, this fact is completely destroying the intent of creating a currency for people to buy things with. Nobody who has even the smallest understanding of economy would spend bitcoin to buy things with because it is guaranteed that it will be, sooner or later more valuable over time.

For me, it seems that the only reason this technology was created was just to trap people into buying it, believing that it will become more valuable, but in the end, the only people who do really make real (fiat) money from this are the "early adopters" and the creator himself who got the bitcoins when they were very cheap. Also, take into account that the creator is still anonymous to this day et voila - you got a lot of evidence to why this whole system is just a kind of ponzi scheme designed to distribute wealth from late adopters to early adopters.

Please prove me wrong because until now I was very fascinated by bitcoin and altoins.

**Tags:** money-supply, fraud


---

## 6 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2018-06-03. Score: 2

There are some good answers here. I'd just like to point out that the thing with scams is that there's a lie or deception involved in it. With bitcoin there is no such thing. Everyone knows about the 21 million coin limit. Everyone knows that those who got in earlier got it cheaper and have a strong influence on the price. Knowing all this you can make an informed decision about whether to buy bitcoin or not.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2018-02-22. Score: 2

> Nobody who has even the smallest understanding of economy would spend bitcoin to buy things with because it is guaranteed that it will be, sooner or later more valuable over time.

If you assume this statement is a fact, why spend your fiat currency on anything except more Bitcoin? The stock market is virtually guaranteed to keep increasing over time as well, but people are still spending money on non-investments. By your logic, everyone would be keeping everything in investments and only cashing out for bare necessities, because "sooner or later they would be more valuable".


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2018-02-22. Score: 1

You make a lot of interesting claims. The ethos behind bitcoin is similar to that of gold, hence 'mining'. Gold is also limited supply and I am certain that people who first found gold a long time ago are rich beyond their wildest dreams. That does not stop anybody trading gold for something of value.

> ... a kind of ponzi scheme ...

Ponzi scheme is a particular arrangement which Bitcoin certainly is not.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: My understanding until now was that Bitcoin is designed to serve as a currency not as a storage of value only. thus the term, cryptocurrency.  
> **username_3**: @Acroneos True, and gold was once widely used as a currency and still regularly is. Paper money is an adaptation of the right to access gold.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2022-10-03. Score: 1

> Nobody who has even the smallest understanding of economy would spend bitcoin to buy things with because it is guaranteed that it will be, sooner or later more valuable over time.

Apparently, that's not true, because there's an entire economy that's backed by bitcoins. Merchants are willing to accept bitcoin, because it comes with benefits they can't otherwise have, such as privacy, censorship-resistance, fast transaction finality, and less costs.

> For me, it seems that the only reason this technology was created was just to trap people into buying it, believing that it will become more valuable, but in the end, the only people who do really make real (fiat) money from this are the "early adopters" and the creator himself who got the bitcoins when they were very cheap.

Some did sell their coins, and bought them solely to return to fiat. Granted. Just as some others didn't.

> you got a lot of evidence to why this whole system is just a kind of ponzi scheme designed to distribute wealth from late adopters to early adopters.

The last thing I'd call it is a ponzi scheme. First of all, in a ponzi scheme there are promised returns from the founder(s). There were no zero promised returns from Satoshi Nakamoto.

Secondly, ponzi schemes are characterized by lack of transparency. Bitcoin is the exact opposite. Everything's transparent, from the source code of the software, to the discussions that were made by those who got involved early.

Thirdly, in ponzi schemes old investors earn when new investors lose. This is clearly not true with bitcoin. If the market value rises, it makes both old and new investors gain, and oppositely, when the market value drops, it makes both the old and new investors lose. It's no more different than gold and stocks.


---

### Answer by username_5 on 2018-02-22. Score: 0

Or...

... it's limited because we (at least we in Europe) made bad experiences with inflationary money in the past. banks waste your money but you have to pay for that (taxes). banks can print more and more money until it's worthless. One $ is always one $, but you could buy more in the past than now.

I don't think, that Bitcoin is a scam. It's "trying something new". The system has proved that banks are not relevant within it.

And: Why should Satoshi not cash out if it's a scam? He should have around 10,000,000,000$ but his known addresses are untouched for years. What's the reason of risking that money?


---

### Answer by username_6 on 2022-10-03. Score: 0

Bitcoin is limited by design. It is part of tokonomics. Only if it is limited will it have value. It is not a scam, it is governed by a protocol, not a regulatory body.


---

