저자: 미상 · 외국인
요약 보기
찰리 멍거가 비트코인을 전면 비판한 발언을 모아 소개하는 영상이다. 결론: 멍거는 비트코인을 가치 없는 투기 수단이자 비도덕적 사기성 자산으로 보며, 장기적으로 0으로 갈 가능성이 높다고 주장한다. 멍거의 핵심 주장: 암호화폐는 통화도, 상품도, 증권도 아니며 주州 단위 규제가 느슨한 도박 계약과 같다고 규정했다. 비트코인에 대한 평가: 내재 가치가 없고 단지 다른 사람에게 더 비싸게 팔 수 있다는 기대로 거래되는 인공적 투기 매체라고 봤다. 사회적 비판: 사회적으로 유용한 목적이 없고, 가격이 하루에 20% 움직이는 자산을 결제 수단으로 쓸 이유가 없다며, 체계를 해치는 행위로 봤다. 중국 사례 언급: 중국은 위챗페이 같은 효율적 결제 시스템이 있어 비트코인이 필요 없으며, 중국이 비트코인을 금지한 것과 비교해 미국이 더 어리석어 보인다고 말했다. 금융기관 관련: 골드만삭스의 비트코인 트레이딩 데스크 진출에 대해 투자은행은 동물적 본능이 강하다는 취지로 언급했다. 과거 발언 인용: 5년 전 비트코인을 쥐약(rat poison)이라 불렀고 당시 약 150달러였으나 이후 약 9,000달러, 최고 1만 9,000달러까지 올랐다는 점을 짚으며, 그래도 그것은 '더 비싼 쥐약'이라 평했다. 정책 주장: 바보 같은 투기 붐은 국가에 해롭고 나쁜 결말을 맞으며, 정부가 이런 붐을 부추기기보다 강하게 억눌러야 한다고 주장했다. 출연자 전망: 멍거는 비트코인이 '결국 0으로 갈 가능성이 매우 높다'고 명확히 하락을 예상했다. 영상 제작자의 의도: 멍거의 비판을 정리하며, 미국이 비트코인을 규제하는 새 연방법이 필요하다는 시청자 질문을 던진다.
다듬은 글
it makes us look foolish compared to the communist leader in China he was smart enough to ban Bitcoin in China with all of our presumed advantages of civilization we are a lot dumber than the communist leader in China 99-year-old billionaire and Warren Buffet's right-hand Man Charlie Munger recently sat down to blast crypto yet again and plead for its complete and utter banishment in a recent quote he said a cryptocurrency is not a currency not a commodity and not a security instead it's a gambling contract with a nearly 100 Edge for the house entered into in a country where gambling contracts are traditionally regulated only by states that compete in laxity obviously the U.S should now enact a new federal law that prevents this from happening what do you think folks does he have a point or is he just really really out of the loop why don't we take a look back on his previous comments to better understand exactly what makes him so grumpy about crypto thanks for watching well Bitcoin as a that's in it the computer science behind that's behind Bitcoin is a great Triumph of the human mind that's what captivates a lot of these people they've actually created a product that's hard to create more of but not impossible now that is very peculiar but they've managed to do it so a lot of the computer computer science people love it just because it's such an extreme achievement of computer science I of course have no interest in in that because it's not my subject and I see an artificial speculative medium that people are buying just because they think they can sell to somebody else at a higher price even though it inherently has no intrinsic value and so I regard the whole business as anti-social stupid immoral immoral yes why why would you trade suppose you could make a lot of money trading freshly harvested baby Brands would you do it or would you say that's immoral you wouldn't trade them would you two it's too too awful a concept well to me Bitcoin is almost as bad it's not having any desirable social purpose we've got debit cards it isn't like we don't have a payment system we've got WeChat in China incredibly efficient payment system China doesn't need Bitcoin and if you have a WeChat why would you do it in a medium where the value changes enormously nobody is Right mine would want a payment system where the very thing you were using went up and down by twenty percent of the day no I regard the thing as a as a combination of dementia and immorality and I think the people that are pushing it are a disgrace there ought to be some things that are beneath you you just don't do yeah and this is one we did not need a gold certificate I made a gold substitute like this so how about you do you feel like you have dementia for investing in Bitcoin Bitcoin is worthless artificial gold which if it succeeded would be so they had a lot of illicit activity now that is not something I think the world needs and the fact that it's clever computer science doesn't mean that it should be widely used in the respectable people should encourage other people to speculate on Bitcoin reminds me of Oscar Wilde's definition of fox hunting the pursuit of the uneatable by the Unspeakable well that sounds better than what I used before we asked her player Charlie Andrew brought it up with Warren but I think it's a scumball activity does that serve you better thank you yeah um we we asked earlier about Goldman Sachs getting into the business of having a trading desk for Bitcoin Berkshire Hathaway owns about two and a half billion dollars of Goldman Sachs does it bother you or does it not surprise you just well I don't expect every investment bank to agree with everything I think there they have a lot of animal spirits and investment banking five years ago right here in these chairs on Fox Business you called it rat poison but that was when it was about 150 dollars today it's nine thousand it had hit 19 000.
so it's more expensive rat poison but but there are some people who were able to make some money and and we heard from people who are very passionate about this and they said oh those guys are just trying to protect their uh old school uh investments in U.S dollars what do you say to that well I think these idiot booms do harm to a country they frequently come to bad ends and they cause Economic Consequences that are bad for the whole damn country and so I like it when my country steps hard on idiot booms instead of Fanning the flames and if there's ever anything that needed stepping down on hard it's Bitcoin do you think Mr Munger isn't a fan of Bitcoin still not sure maybe this will convince you in my life I try and avoid things that are stupid an evil and made me look bad in comparison with somebody else and Bitcoin does all three yeah and and the first place it's stupid because it's very likely to go to zero the same but it's evil because it undermines they've had a Reserve System and the national currency system which we desperately need to maintain its integrity and government control and so on and third it makes us look foolish compared to the communist leader in China he was smart enough to ban Bitcoin in China with all of our presumed advantages of civilization we are a lot dumber than the communist leader in China thanks for watching and we'll see you next time
Comments 0