this post was submitted on 26 May 2026
1 points (100.0% liked)
Pulse of Truth
2419 readers
5 users here now
Cyber Security news and links to cyber security stories that could make you go hmmm. The content is exactly as it is consumed through RSS feeds and wont be edited (except for the occasional encoding errors).
This community is automagically fed by an instance of Dittybopper.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There are different kinds of value. Houses indeed have more use value than a bitcoin which only has exchange value and whose use is entirely in exchange. NFTs and smart contracts were a failed attempt at adding use value to crypto.
The numerical money value of commodities and real property is historically dependent, whereas the use value of a house is vital and inflexible.
No, bitcoin can be sent to anyone anywhere in the world in about 10 minutes. So despite your claims bitcoin isn’t worthless. Housing value is inflexible? That doesn’t make any sense in the slightest. We can certainly live in a house but it’s purchase price is untethered from that fact.
Your response is very funny.
So is this how you think ideas are defended, by lying about what I said in order to make your arguments sound better? Maybe you don't understand written English, idk. Or maybe you think that things that are sold are never used. You have a closet full of clothes you try to sell on eBay, but you are a nudist and never wear them. You rent an apartment but sleep in the dumpster. You buy books but refuse to open them. Explains a lot actually. Very consistent and logical argument, Nudie Kanudie, illiterate dumpster person.
I am not the other poster, I didn't say bitcoin was worthless, I said it only has exchange value, and its only use value was for exchange. This does not contradict you at all, nor does it say it is worthless. However being specific in this way keeps us from being dishonest, and talk about value in a way other than an abstract number decided by 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓶𝓪𝓻𝓴𝓮𝓽𝓹𝓵𝓪𝓬𝓮.
Wrt housing, its USE value is inflexible. Only so many people can safely occupy a house and a house's use is in being occupied. There are many other uses for a house too, and price may reflect this. A larger house cost more materials and labor and may have a higher theoretical exchange value. The exchange value can fluctuate like btc, but if the exchange value goes up more people can't live in it. That's what inflexible use value means, but this is also linked to demand.
Everyone needs a place to live, so demand expands or contracts with population, which doesn't change enough year on year to dramatically effect need/demand, therefore it is inflexible, a constant determined by other factors and can be accounted for and planned.
However exchange value is flexible, and not based on need but on supply. So in order to increase the value of existing housing, supply must be restricted in compare to demand. So you either have to have less houses than there are places to live, or make the houses that exist less affordable. Since there is currently a near global housing supply crisis, driven by these market forces, anyone who has stepped outside their dumpster for the last 10 years is aware of these dynamics.
Value is not only a number. There is a kind of value, exchange value, that is a number, but using the stuff we buy is a different kind of value, use value. But because you can't think in these terms, you aren't able to relate to complex ideas like "people live in houses".
You start with insults so I’m not going to read whatever is you wrote after that.