Mises has a piece recently about how Peter Schiff, who is famously against Bitcoin and crypto, got 3 of his own criticisms about BTC wrong.
What are these 3 points that Schiff got wrong?
- Bitcoin is unlike gold in that it has no fundamental (or objective) value
- Bitcoin provides no shelter from inflation
- Bitcoin’s scarcity
Kyle Ward at Mises doesn't really address a BTC actually has objective value, as his whole point is from a subjectivist stance that there is no such thing as objective value. But this is where they are wrong in stating that all value is subjective and determined internally by individuals. I disagree.
A common reference between BTC is to that of gold which can be used to make things like electronics. I would argue that electronics which have fundamentally changed the world and allowed an improvement of the human condition is an objective measure that exists in the world. If you think the human condition was better off prior to technology and electronics, with the greater standard of living, health, and access to food, then I would say that your ignoring objective reality.
That's pretty much my objection and criticism to this criticism against Schiff's criticism of BTC. Indeed bitcoin has been used to hedge against inflation and fiat currencies. And bitcoin is scarce with a limited supply of 21 million in the end. So Schiff makes bogus arguments a lot. The only one that has merit in these 3 cases is of a fundamental value in the real world as a substance itself, whereas BTC does not.