Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
A cryptocurrency? Tech stock? Bubble? What exactly has Bitcoin become?
A cryptocurrency? Tech stock? Bubble? What exactly has Bitcoin become?
Jul 14, 2025 3:13 PM

Four years ago I wrote a series of posts on what Christians should know about bitcoin. At the time a single bitcoin was worth $266, and I wasn’t sure it’d be around for five more years. This week a single bitcoin was trading for $17,800 and it looks like it’ll be around long past my five-year mark. But the rapid and inexplicable rise in price of bitcoins has caused some people to wonder what’s going on—and even e confused what bitcoin is anymore. What is bitcoin nowadays? Here are a few possible answers.

Is bitcoin still a cryptocurrency?

Not really. Bitcoin has e the most popular mainstream cryptocurrency by ceasing to be a form of currency. Sure, you can still technically buy some goods and services with bitcoin. But because it is prone to deflation you’d be foolish to do so.

Deflation, a decline in the general price level, occurs when the price of goods and services decline relative to a specific measure. The value of the goods and services themselves do not have to decline for deflation to occur; all that is required is for the value of the currency itself to increase. This is exactly what has occurred for the entire existence of bitcoin.

Because of its deflationary nature, bitcoin is a terrible form of currency. For example, in 2010, a developer named Laszlo Hanyecz traded 10,000 bitcoins for two Papa John’s pizzas. At the time the bitcoins were worth about $40. Today, those coins would be worth $1.7 million dollars. Anyone who bought anything with bitcoins prior to 2017 is likely regretting their purchase.

It bitcoin a tech stock?

Definitely not. There are several ways that stocks are valued, but most of them are based on the assumption that the pany has or will have future earnings which will either justify the rise in price or will lead to a distribution of dividends to shareholders.

While bitcoin sometimes acts like a stock (i.e., it can be traded on exchanges, is subject to technical analysis, etc.), there is pany underlying bitcoins—only a blockchain. Bitcoin will also never have earnings, though it currently pays out a form of “dividend” to bitcoin miners (see my previous series for more on how bitcoin works).

Is bitcoin the “new gold”?

Bitcoin is like Gold 2.0, says Tyler Winklevoss.

No, it’s not. While bitcoin appeals to many of the same people who once preferred gold as an investment vehicle, bitcoin has few similarities to the precious metal. For starters, bitcoin is a pure “fiat currency” similar to the U.S. dollar. Gold modity money. Gold is also an actual physical asset that has some use for real-world applications. Bitcoin is an intangible asset whose monetary value is solely dependent on how much hard currency people are willing to exchange for it.

Additionally, gold has the advantage of being a long-term illusion: gold is valuable because for thousands of years we humans have convinced ourselves that gold is valuable. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have a long way to go before they can create a similar “money delusion.”

Is bitcoin a wealth redistribution system?

Yes, it is. The question is what type of wealth redistribution system. The most generous take is that similar to Valentin Schmid, who contends that bitcoin “favors risk takers, innovators, savers, and people who are curious and persistent enough to learn new technology as well as history.” Those people, who jumped on the bitcoin train early enough “will be richly rewarded and their purchasing power will increase.”

That’s certainly true to some extent, since 40 percent of bitcoin is held by about 1,000 people. As the price of bitcoin increases, the value of the holdings of these early movers is rising almost exponentially. The key for them is when to unload bitcoins for hard currency and collect the wealth that has been accumulating to them. When they do (and they can even collude together on the timing since bitcoin isn’t subject to financial regulations) the bitcoins held by the late movers will be worth much, much less than they bought them for.

Another, less congenial, term for this is a ponzi scheme. The price of bitcoin is currently rising based solely on the idea that the price will rise even further. And as long as there are “greater fools” to bid up the price of the cryptocurrency, the price will continue rise. Eventually, though, when there are no more fools left, the bubble will pop—and thousands of people will have lost real money.

Is bitcoin a speculative bubble?

Yes, almost assuredly. Financial bubbles involve outsized growth in the price of an asset beyond its true value. Bitcoin has no intrinsic value so why do people hold it as an asset? Because they think it can be sold an even higher price in the future (see: greater fool theory). As economist John Cochrane explains:

[I]f the price [of an asset] is greater than zero, either people see some “dividend,” some value in holding the asset, beyond its cash payments; equivalently they are willing to hold the asset despite a lower expected return going forward, or they think the price will keep going up forever, so that price appreciation alone provides petitive return. The first two are called “convenience yield,” the latter is a “rational bubble.”

“Rational bubbles” are intriguing, but I think fundamentally flawed. If a price goes up forever, eventually the value of bitcoin must exceed all of US wealth, then all of world wealth, then all of interplanetary wealth, then all of the atoms in the universe. The “greater fool” or Ponzi scheme theory must break down at some point, or rely on an irrational belief in the next fool. The rational bubbles theory also does not account for the association of price surges with high volatility and high trading volume.

The fact that bitcoin is a speculative bubble, though, does not mean that it will pop anytime soon. As long as the people who hold the most coins—the “bitcoin whales”—think there are greater fools who will bid up the price, the bubble is likely to last a long time.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Review: Billy Graham and the Rise of the Republican South
Explaining the realignment of American Southern politics is often a favorite area of study among historians and scholars. A region that was once dominated by yellow dog Democrats, has for the most part continued to expand as a loyal region for the Grand Old Party. Among the earliest and mon narrative among liberal historians and writers is the belief that the realignment in the South had to do with a backlash against desegregation. Steven P. Miller in his new book...
Potential and the Peace Prize
In his book Elements of Justice (reviewed in the Journal of Markets & Morality here), University of Arizona philosophy and economics professor David Schmidtz introduces the idea of desert not simply as pensatory notion, but also as including a promissory aspect. That is, what we deserve isn’t always about only what we have done. There might be a real sense in which what we do after an opportunity provides a kind of retroactive justification for having been given a chance....
Capitalism is Not Based on Greed
In a new essay at The American, Jay Richards explains why capitalism isn’t based on greed. In Acton’s first documentary, The Call of the Entrepreneur, Richards along Rev. Robert Sirico, Sam Gregg, Michael Novak and others touch on this matter in making the moral case for the free economy. ...
What hath Vienna to do with Colorado Springs?
Working as we do here at the intersection between economics and theology, the relationship between various kinds of classically liberal, libertarian, Austrian, and other economic modifiers and religion in general and Christianity in particular is in constant view. Sometimes the conversation is friendly, sometimes not so much. Sometimes the differences are less apparent, sometimes more. Once in awhile a piece will appear on the Acton site or from an Acton writer that brings this discussion to the fore. Last mentary...
The Economics Nobel
My response to the awarding of the Nobel Prize in Economics to Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson was published on National Review Online: Unlike a certain other Nobel Prize, the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel actually requires evidence of substantial achievement. Mere aspirations and lofty rhetoric count for nothing. This year’s Nobel Prize in Economics has been given to two economists, Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson, who have deepened our understanding of economic governance....
Healthcare and Catholics: True and False Arguments
This week’s Acton Commentary: Healthcare reform – it’s one of those causes almost everyone favors, but which almost automatically produces sharp arguments when we ask what it means and how it might be realized. You would have had to be living in a cave for the past eight months to be unaware that Americans are deeply divided on this matter, and that the division runs clean through the middle of munities. That includes Catholic America. Of course, there are a...
America’s Uncontrolled Debt and Spending is the Real ‘Waterloo’
In mentary this week, “America’s Uncontrolled Debt and Spending is the Real ‘Waterloo,’” I offer the well known point that debt and spending threatens our liberty and prosperity. It is ing very evident that it will be up to citizens to demand accountability from their lawmakers, as I mentioned. What has been tried before has not worked. In terms of liberty, Thomas Jefferson declared, “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.” What...
Kling on Conservatism and Authority
Arnold Kling continued last week’s conversation about the relationship between conservatism and libertarianism over at EconLog. Kling’s analysis is worth reading, and he concludes that the divide between conservatives and libertarians has to do with respect (or lack thereof) for hierarchical authority. Kling does allow for the possibility of a “secular conservative…someone who respects the learning embodied in traditional values and beliefs, without assigning them a divine origin.” I’m certainly inclined to agree, and I think there are plenty of...
Journal of Markets & Morality, Spring 2009
We’re happy to announce that the latest print issue of the Journal of Markets & Morality is available online. The Spring 2009 issue includes a noteworthy study by Alan T. Y. Chan and Shu-kam Lee. In “Christ and Business Culture: Another Classification of Christians in Workplaces According to an Empirical Study in Hong Kong,” Chan and Lee outline four types of Christians at work: Christian soldiers, panic followers, strugglers, and Sunday Christians. Following the classification, Chan and Lee “develop a...
Catholics and Health Care
The Detroit News published mentary on Catholics and health care reform in today’s newspaper. A slightly longer version of the article will appear in tomorrow’s Acton News & Commentary: Catholic America is about as divided about health care reform as the rest of the country. But there are a small number of non-negotiables for Catholics that principally concern any provisions that facilitate or encourage the intentional termination of innocent human life or diminish existing conscience exemptions. These issues dwarf everything...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved