Why the Holder of Bitcoin and a Holder of Nothing Are in the Same Position

If I said publicly that a holder of Bitcoin and a holder of nothing are in the same position, most people would think I had lost my mind.

The reason seems obvious. Bitcoin holders can receive dollars, houses, cars, labor, and all kinds of goods in exchange for Bitcoin. The conclusion appears automatic. If people are willing to give valuable things for Bitcoin, then surely the Bitcoin holder must be in a better position than someone holding nothing.

I disagree.

Imagine a wealthy person decides to give $100,000 to a Bitcoin holder.

What has been proven?

Most people would answer that Bitcoin has value.

I would answer that nothing about Bitcoin has been proven.

The same wealthy person could decide to give $100,000 to someone holding nothing.

The benefit comes from the giver, not what is being held.

This distinction is crucial.

People constantly point to the fact that dollars and goods flow toward Bitcoin holders. But people can choose to give dollars and goods to holders of nothing as well. The fact that someone chooses to transfer something valuable does not tell us what the recipient possesses. It tells us only what the giver decided to do.

So instead of discussing what people are willing to exchange for Bitcoin, we should ask a simple question.

What exactly is a Bitcoin holder holding?

The answer is surprisingly simple.

A Bitcoin holder is holding fragments of the number 21 million defined by a computer protocol written by an anonymous programmer.

That is Bitcoin stripped of all marketing language.

A Bitcoin holder controls ledger entries representing fractions of a number that was imagined and embedded into software.

Now compare that with a holder of nothing.

Can a holder of nothing imagine numbers and make rules about them?

Of course.

Can a holder of nothing write numbers down?

Of course.

Can a holder of nothing store numbers digitally?

Of course.

The existence of a number in a ledger does not make its holder better off than someone holding nothing. That is why the Bitcoin holder and the holder of nothing are fundamentally in the same position.

Bitcoin discussions are entirely dependent on comparisons to gold and dollars. Yet, there is a profound irony here. When we look at gold and dollars as benchmarks to see if a Bitcoin holder is better off than a holder of nothing, these two assets prove the exact opposite of what Bitcoin supporters intend.

Let's start with gold.

Gold is not an imagined number.

Gold shines and resists corrosion; it has physical properties that make it useful.

A gold holder possesses something real, something that cannot simply be imagined into existence.

Even if nobody spoke about gold as an investment, the metal would still exist and its properties would still matter.

The gold holder is therefore in a stronger position than the holder of nothing or Bitcoin.

Now consider dollars.

The dollar is not merely a piece of paper.

Dollars are created through debt, so people, businesses, and the government need dollars to extinguish those obligations.

The dollar holder therefore occupies a position that the holder of nothing or Bitcoin does not.

Others must work, produce, sell, and provide services in order to obtain the dollars they need.

The dollar holder possesses leverage.

The holder of nothing and the holder of Bitcoin possess neither.

Notice the difference.

The gold holder possesses something with useful physical properties.

The dollar holder possesses something needed by debtors to close obligations.

The holder of nothing and the holder of Bitcoin possess neither.

So, Bitcoin boils down to the irrationality of the masses: people willingly trading a position of genuine advantage for a position that leaves them identical to the holder of nothing.