Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
A cryptocurrency? Tech stock? Bubble? What exactly has Bitcoin become?
A cryptocurrency? Tech stock? Bubble? What exactly has Bitcoin become?
Apr 30, 2026 10:10 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
Samuel Gregg On The War On Poverty: ‘Pass More Laws And Throw More Dollars At The Problem’
In today’s National Review Online, leading economists are asked ment on the 50th anniversary of Lyndon Johnson’s “War on Poverty.” Acton’s Director of Research, Sam Gregg, weighs in: As we know now, Johnson’s offensive against poverty did not have the impact envisaged by its progenitors. By the early 1970s, the failure was stark. Even today, this failure remains Exhibit A for the ineffectiveness of government intervention when confronting many economic problems. Not that this has led to any major rethinking...
The Bond of Fellowship
I was reading an essay that I found in an old book I bought in Vermont. Dr H.J. Laski (Oxford and Yale) wrote, “The less obvious the differences between men in the gain of living, the greater the bond of fellowship between them.” In other words the less we talk about differences between the rich and poor, the better we will all like each other and get along. In the Depression which began as he was writing, nearly everyone was...
Is the $17 Trillion Federal Debt Immoral?
Even when we agree on what Biblical principles should guide our political choices, evangelicals from the left and right rarely agree on policy solutions. But there is one area where there appears to be an increasingly significant level of agreement: the immorality of our national debt. At Christianity Today, David P. Gushee — an ethicist and politically progressive evangelical — explains why the $17 trillion national debt is both immoral and unwise: Most progressive evangelicals who address government spending focus...
Taxpayer-Funded Abortions And Obamacare
Today, Professor Helen Alvaré of George Mason University, testified before the House Judiciary Committee mittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice regarding taxpayer-funded abortions under Obamacare. Alvaré, who teaches family law, law and religion, and property law, states that Americans have never understood abortion as a “good,” and that abortion cannot be labeled health care. The video below is her testimony. ...
By the Numbers: The War on Poverty
Fifty years ago today, President Lyndon B. Johnson gave his 1964 State of the Union Speech, in which he launched the ‘war on poverty.’ Within four years of that speech, the Johnson administration enacted a broad ran of programs, including the the Job Corps, Upward Bound, Head Start, the Neighborhood Youth Corps, the Social Security amendments creating Medicare/Medicaid, the creation of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and over a dozen others. Here are a few numbers related to...
Fatherlessness and the War on Poverty
In addition to reading Joe Carter’s striking by-the-numbers piece on the War on Poverty, and in keeping with Sam Gregg’s reflections on the deeper social and cultural forces at work, I heartily mend taking in Josh Good’s excellent retrospective in AEI’sThe American. Leveraging a lengthy quote from Herman Bavinck’s The Christian Family, one I’ve put to use myself, Good notes the “inverse impact of changing family structure on productive work and a flourishing economy”: The fact is, poverty is not...
Whom Would Jesus Indebt?
Putting ourselves and our children further in debt, notes Timothy Dalrymple, is not the way to help the poor: One of the great difficulties of this issue, for Christians, is that the morality of spending and debt has been so thoroughly demagogued that it’s impossible to advocate cuts in government spending without being accused of hatred for the poor and needy. A group calling itself the “Circle of Protection” recently promoted a statement on “Why We Need to Protect Programs...
At-A-Glance: Public Vs. Private Sector Health Care
The Washington Examiner has published a chart that clearly lays out the difference between Obamacare versus private sector health care. Using Walmart as an example (despite the employer’s much-disparaged employee benefits), Elliot Smilowitz at the Examiner shows that the private sector is able to parable health care at much less expense than Obamacare. ...
It’s Not Enough to Care About ‘The Poor’
“Each of us has a personal responsibility to heed the call to care for the poor,” says Jennifer A. Marshall. “The Bible doesn’t leave us room to make poverty someone else’s problem.” Long before LBJ’s call bat poverty, Christians heard a higher call passion for the poor. How to live out that mand in the context of 21st-century America is the challenge. And it’s one that thinkers such asSherman, author of the bookKingdom Calling: Vocational Stewardship for the Common Good,have...
Book Review: ‘The New School’ by Glenn Harlan Reynolds
Book information: The New School: How the Information Age Will Save American Education from Itself by Glenn Harlan Reynolds. Jackson, TN: Perseaus Books, 2013. Pp. viii + 106. Paperback. $21.50. Instapundit’s Glenn Harlan Reynolds’ The New School: How the Information Age Will Save American Education from Itself is a clear and succinct, yet thorough, essay on creative destruction and American education. This slim volume (only about 100 pages) is divided approximately into 50 pages on higher education, 25 on secondary...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved