Bitcoin giveaway! :)

[Pointedstick]

If the government didn't require you to accept slips of paper for your labor and pay taxes in them (which essentially forces employers to pay you in them)......you would take them?

Why on Earth would you accept valueless slips of paper for your property or labor? The ONLY reason people use them is because they are fiat. Is there any instance in hisorty where people volutarily exchanged something of value for a slip of paper that is backed by nothing?!?!? OMG why on Earth would anyone accept that swindle?

You realize the slip of paper is inherently worthless right?

Why do people accept something that is worthless? (they are required to accept them by law)

So it begs the question......why are so many people collecting bitcoins? I think it's only for the hope that they will make money on their "investment" and not to actually use them.

You sound like you're grasping at straws. Your forceful argument that nobody in their right mind would exchange something of value for something you believe is devoid of value without the government putting a gun to their head has run into the uncomfortable reality that people are indeed voluntarily exchanging worthless electronic impulses for real, actual products and services that have use values in the complete absence of laws forcing them to. That implies, like all commerce does, that the buyer valued the good or service more than the Bitcoins and the seller valued the Bitcoins more than the good or service. I personally have been paid for my products in Bitcoins. Were these customers idiots? Am I an idiot?

I think you should spend a little more time trying to understand what's happening and less time trying to stuff reality into your theory that unbacked currencies are worthless and nobody sane would voluntarily transact in them unless a government held a gun to their head. There might (just might) be some value that come from qualities such as liquidity, transmissibility, a large market, and especially, expectations of future exchange value. That makes unbacked currencies a bit of a shell game, yes, but we humans are funny like that. You don't need to approve of it to understand it or even profit from it, as I have by stockpiling Bitcoins through the sale of products that cost me far, far less than the Bitcoins are now worth.

[Kshartle]

You sound like you're grasping at straws. Your forceful argument that nobody in their right mind would exchange something of value for something you believe is devoid of value without the government putting a gun to their head has run into the uncomfortable reality that people are indeed voluntarily exchanging worthless electronic impulses for real, actual products and services that have use values in the complete absence of laws forcing them to. That implies, like all commerce does, that the buyer valued the good or service more than the Bitcoins and the seller valued the Bitcoins more than the good or service. I personally have been paid for my products in Bitcoins. Were these customers idiots? Am I an idiot?

I think you should spend a little more time trying to understand what's happening and less time trying to stuff reality into your theory that unbacked currencies are worthless and nobody sane would voluntarily transact in them unless a government held a gun to their head. There might (just might) be some value that come from qualities such as liquidity, transmissibility, a large market, and especially, expectations of future exchange value. That makes unbacked currencies a bit of a shell game, yes, but we humans are funny like that. You don't need to approve of it to understand it or even profit from it, as I have by stockpiling Bitcoins through the sale of products that cost me far, far less than the Bitcoins are now worth.

Where is the future exchange value going to come from? If people are buying and holding something without value because they believe the price will go up......what does that sound like to you?

I assure you I am not...grasping at straws. Yes people do obviously exchange things of value for things of zero value as evidenced by bitcoin. Native Americans exchanged long island for beads right? How did that work out?

How does it make sense to exchange something of value for something that has no value? I think it will work until it doesn't and woe to those holding the bag. Of course I could be wrong and humanity could adopt bitcoin like digital gold (non-fiat money). I just don't think this will happen and I've explained why.

"liquidity, transmissibility, a large market" for something without value doesn't give it value. Why not transact in unique smiley-face emoticons? Why do you want want a bitcoin? The ability to get rid of it easily can't be a reason to want it because everyone can't want them to get rid of them and still suppoprt the price.  Someone must want them for a reason....I think it's what you said last.....that bitcoin owners want them because they expect the price to keep going up. If that belief goes away what do you have? What will happen to the price?

The forcefullness of my argument is not evidence that it's incorrect and I'm certainly not grasping at straws. I resent the language but it is certainly commonplace here when someone makes a reasoned argument.

[Bean]

I feel like this thread is mixing the concepts of inflationary fiat currency, deflationary crypto-currency, and bartering.

dollars - have no intrinsic value and is worth less every day because you have more dollars chasing scarce goods.  However, you need to pay your taxes in them and your company pays you in them.

bitcoins - have no intrinsic value, but you know they are scarce and finite.  Also you get all sorts of benefits that dollars do not provide if/when it becomes a widely accepted currency. (Note: currency, not money folks)

Chickens - Sure my employer could pay me in chickens, or I could require chickens from customers when I sell them goods. Chickens have intrinsic value.  At the end of the day though, it sure is hard to give the gas station a chicken to pay for a full tank of gas, especially if they don't want a chicken.  Also, I don't think you want to divided or make chicken change...

[Pointedstick]

I don't know what to tell you, Kshartle. You can continue to phrase your disbelief in the form of a question or you can open your mind and try to understand why people are behaving the way they are. There's not much point in my trying to explain my own reasons or speculate about the reasons of my customers if your skepticism overcomes your desire to learn something. Clearly my customers who gave me their own Bitcoins did not share my reasons that relate to the future value of the bitcoins rising against the dollar when they exchanged something with no inherent value for something with some inherent value. Are they just morons? Was I a moron for accepting it?


I think perhaps the key lies in this statement:

How does it make sense to exchange something of value for something that has no value? I think it will work until it doesn't and woe to those holding the bag.

This is of course correct… but everything will work until it doesn't. My dollars will have value until the world's monetary system undergoes dramatic changes. My gold will have value until it can be distilled from seawater in a cost-effective manner. My computer will work until it breaks. My hypothetical fruit tree will yield fruit until the climate changes to a more hostile one for the tree. My body will function until it starts to shut down.

Impermanence is universal. That entropy and change exist is not a good reason to avoid participating in something, IMHO.

My own strategy for dealing with these constants of life is not trying to avoid them (because them I would need to avoid nearly everything) but by diversifying my risks. If the dollar goes belly up, I'll at least have my gold, my house, and my other physical possessions. If gold becomes very cheap through technology, hey no problem, I've still got my stocks and bonds. If Bitcoin ever collapses because the traders never start to outnumber the hoarders, well no big deal, it's only a tiny fraction of my net worth.

[Pointedstick]

Chickens - Sure my employer could pay me in chickens, or I could require chickens from customers when I sell them goods. Chickens have intrinsic value.  At the end of the day though, it sure is hard to give the gas station a chicken to pay for a full tank of gas, especially if they don't want a chicken.  Also, I don't think you want to divided or make chicken change...

In many places, chickens are actually change for goats and cows!

[Kshartle]

dollars - have no intrinsic value and is worth less every day because you have more dollars chasing scarce goods.  However, you need to pay your taxes in them and your company pays you in them.

You are required by law to accept them for remittance of debts and chickens obviously have value, they're so tasty in nugget form.

If we agree that bitcoins have no value....extrinsic or intrisic.....then what is supporting the price other than the belief that it will keep rising (i.e. a bubble)?

Extrinsic value is utility value....that is....it is useful for some purpose. Medium of exchange is not a useable characteristic. EVERYTHING can be used as a meduim of exchange, everything. Bitcoins cannot be used for anything other sending and receiving (as far as I know). All they do is get traded back and forth and they have no intrinsic value either so they are without value (but clearly not without price). What are they good for other than hoping the price will go up? Why would anyone actually want one, just to trade it for something? That's silly since they have to trade for it. Trading for it just to trade it away cannot support the price.

So if they have no value.....the price can only be driven by the expectation of higher prices right? The price of something without value cannot come from it's non-existant value.

[Xan]

Medium of exchange is not a useable characteristic.

Why not?

I would really suggest that you take some time off to make a careful study of how the world actually works before drawing conclusions about people's behavior based only on what's happening between your ears.

[Pointedstick]

Medium of exchange is not a useable characteristic. EVERYTHING can be used as a meduim of exchange, everything.

Okay, so what's a more liquid, more easily exchangeable medium of exchange: a mountain, or an infinitely-divisible electronic currency? Assuming you will agree that the mountain is a lot more difficult to divide and trade, will you at least agree that the electronic currency had those advantages for the moronic rubes who insist on using it as a medium of exchange?

Even if you believe that anything can be used as a medium of exchange, are you open to believing that some things can have characteristics that make them more desirable or useful for this purpose than others?

[Pointedstick]

And let me ask you this, Kshartle: Do you believe that the single, solitary reason why people acquire dollars is because the government would shoot them if they didn't have enough to pay their taxes?

And if the government hypothetically stopped collecting taxes but kept printing dollars, would you immediately exchange every dollar you had for gold? Would you expect everyone else to do the same thing? What would be your reaction if they didn't? Can you even conceive of a world in which they didn't?

[Kshartle]

I don't know what to tell you, Kshartle. You can continue to phrase your disbelief in the form of a question or you can open your mind and try to understand why people are behaving the way they are. There's not much point in my trying to explain my own reasons or speculate about the reasons of my customers if your skepticism overcomes your desire to learn something. Clearly my customers who gave me their own Bitcoins did not share my reasons that relate to the future value of the bitcoins rising against the dollar when they exchanged something with no inherent value for something with some inherent value.

What am I disbelieving?

I am trying to understand why people are behaving why they are.....that's why I'm asking the question of bitcoin holders what their plans are.

I've said over and over that I want to know what you think and why holding them. If I'm wrong about the bitcoins then teach me. Saying there's no point in answering my questions because by asking them I'm showing an unwillingness to listen to the answers is kind of silly don't you think? I've been accused of grasping at straws when I ask the question what will support the price if the belief in higher future prices dissapears.

Your customers traded something with no value for something of value so yes they disagreed with you to some extent. They bought bitcoins and spent them. That doesn't support the price...your willingness to accept and hold them does. I want to know why someone would be willing to hold them. Why are you willing to hold them? It can't be to spend them because that's not holding them, it's the opposite of holding them.

[Pointedstick]

It's really simple.

I desire Bitcoins for the following reasons:
1. speculative purposes; I believe the price will continue to rise
2. in case it ever develops into a real stable currency, I want to have some already

I believe my customers who previously traded Bitcoins with me owned them for the following reasons:
1. the desire to help Bitcoin become a new global medium of exchange
2. being computer nerds; thinking a digital cryptocurrency is really cool

In all these cases, the underlying view is that Bitcoin has some value or will have some value in the future, purely as a medium of exchange. You've said that this is an illegitimate reason, that being a medium exchange isn't enough to grant value, that anything can be a medium of exchange. I'm telling you that me and my customers are voting with our dollars (Bitcoins?) that you're wrong and that something with no inherent value can indeed have net value due to its exchange value. Is this value based on the hope of future exchange value? Of course. But that doesn't make it some kind of house of cards any more than Dollars or Euros or Yen are a house of cards. If they are, they're houses of cards that have mysteriously stayed upright for quite a long time and stubbornly resist falling down despite repeated assurances for the last 40 years they they were about to collapse.

[frommi]

It's really simple.

I desire Bitcoins for the following reasons:
1. speculative purposes; I believe the price will continue to rise
2. in case it ever develops into a real stable currency, I want to have some already

1. That is the greater fool theory, you need someone to pay you more. When the crash comes it will be hard and fast.
2. Every goverment in the world will fight that status because it is deflationary for the world. So in most cases at that point it will get forbidden.

But nevertheless good luck in your speculation. (But without exiting someday you will have zero profits.)

[Kshartle]

Medium of exchange is not a useable characteristic.

Why not?

I would really suggest that you take some time off to make a careful study of how the world actually works before drawing conclusions about people's behavior based only on what's happening between your ears.

What conclusions have I drawn? I am downright asking the bitcoin holders why they are holding them? Why are they willing to hold bitcoins? Holding them to get rid of them is not holding them right? You store food to eventually eat it, you store gold to store the value, same as dollars. Why would anyone store a bitcoin? See I think it's because they think the price will go up. Why would the price go up though? What is that belief based on? Is it based on the belief that more people will want them? Why would they want them?

Just because I disagree with you there is no need to get personal or nasty. Suggesting someone needs to take some time off to sort out what's between their ears rather than educating them if you think they're wrong is kind of nasty.

If you disagree with me but don't want to actually say why then what is the point of your comment?

[Pointedstick]

1. That is the greater fool theory, you need someone to pay you more. When the crash comes it will be hard and fast.

Okay… welcome to the world of investing. I could say the very same thing about stocks, bonds, and gold. Now I imagine you will reply that stocks and even bonds have some kind of means to value them, but this means to value them goes out the window when there's a crash. All investment is basically a big game of human emotions. When I want to sell, there always has to be someone willing to buy, regardless of what the inherent value may be. We can never escape the "greater fool theory" world.

2. Every goverment in the world will fight that status because it is deflationary for the world. So in most cases at that point it will get forbidden.

They are welcome to try, but the nature of the system makes it as hard as doing something like shutting down the entire internet. Still, if they succeed, it's not much of a big deal for me since like I said, only a very small percentage of my net worth is in Bitcoins.

[frommi]

Okay… welcome to the world of investing. I could say the very same thing about stocks, bonds, and gold. Now I imagine you will reply that stocks and even bonds have some kind of means to value them, but this means to value them goes out the window when there's a crash. All investment is basically a big game of human emotions. When I want to sell, there always has to be someone willing to buy, regardless of what the inherent value may be. We can never escape the "greater fool theory" world.

Gold yes, stocks and bonds definitly no. They have value simply because of the cashflows and asset values, and that value is calculatable. Ok on some stocks like tsla or amzn its the same. 

[Kshartle]

Medium of exchange is not a useable characteristic. EVERYTHING can be used as a meduim of exchange, everything.

Okay, so what's a more liquid, more easily exchangeable medium of exchange: a mountain, or an infinitely-divisible electronic currency? Assuming you will agree that the mountain is a lot more difficult to divide and trade, will you at least agree that the electronic currency had those advantages for the moronic rubes who insist on using it as a medium of exchange?

Even if you believe that anything can be used as a medium of exchange, are you open to believing that some things can have characteristics that make them more desirable or useful for this purpose than others?

Look there is no need to take this personally. I have not called anyone a moronic rube. You are making this personal and it is not. So what if we disagree about the long-term prospects of bitcoin? It seems like you're trying to put words in my mouth that I did not say to invalidate my points about why I think buying bitcoins right now is a mistake.

Can't we disagree without assuming the other person thinks we are moronic rubes? If anyone is ignorant about this stuff I've been saying it's me. That's why I've asked the people who actually are holding bitcoins why they are doing so. I might be wrong and would like to learn. I've provided my skeptisim and the arguments driving them as fodder for anyone to take a shot at. That way I can learn something.

It's definately easier to trasnfer a ditigal....whatever than a mountain....but my point is the ability to transfer something easily doesn't make it valuable. The fact that it's scarce doesn't make it valuable either. If I painted a Kshartle original painting that sucked (it would) and I could fold it up and mail it quickly around the world....the fact that I could easily transfer ownership and it was rare would not give it any value. That argument should prove that transferability and scarcity doesn't create value right?

Am I wrong on that last point?

[Gumby]

Consider that the earliest forms of writing, in Mesopotamia, were used to record transactions — even though the writing and corresponding tokens had no "intrinsic value":

Around the 4th millennium BC, the complexity of trade and administration outgrew the power of memory, and writing became a more dependable method of recording and presenting transactions in a permanent form...

...Archaeologist Denise Schmandt-Besserat determined the link between previously uncategorized clay "tokens", the oldest which have been found through the Zagros region of Iran, and the first known writing, Mesopotamian cuneiform. The clay tokens were used to represent commodities, and perhaps even units of time spent in labour, and their number and type became more complex as civilization advanced. A degree of complexity was reached when over a hundred different kinds of tokens had to be accounted for, and tokens were wrapped and fired in clay, with markings to indicate the kind of tokens inside. These markings soon replaced the tokens themselves, and the clay envelopes were demonstrably the prototype for clay writing tablets.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writing#Th ... of_writing

Obviously the clay tokens had little to no intrinsic value — they were essentially hardened dirt. But, the tokens represented commodities and labor, etc. I'm not perfectly sure how this relates to Bitcoin — since I'm not entirely sure what they represent when they are mined — but at least it shows why early cultures liked tokens

Edit: I suppose the effort it takes to mine a Bitcoin and the effort or whatever it takes to convince a miner to give you a Bitcoin is what they represent.

[Kshartle]

And let me ask you this, Kshartle: Do you believe that the single, solitary reason why people acquire dollars is because the government would shoot them if they didn't have enough to pay their taxes?

And if the government hypothetically stopped collecting taxes but kept printing dollars, would you immediately exchange every dollar you had for gold? Would you expect everyone else to do the same thing? What would be your reaction if they didn't? Can you even conceive of a world in which they didn't?

You are required by law to accept them as payment of debts.

The only support for the slips of paper is the government decree. Does anyone take slips of paper backed by nothing and no government in exchange for something of value anywhere? If so...I would like to meet them and see if I can trade slips of paper for their stuff.

This is my point about bitcoin. This is what I think is happening. People are trading things of value for electronic slips of paper that are backed by nothing of value nor a government. I think they are doing it becuase they think the price will keep going up. The only thing fueling the rise is the belief. That is fundamentally different from dollars or gold.

If I'm wrong and there's another reason I'm all ears.

there may be something to the contrary view that, not being backed by government force or subject to bankster manipulation for the benefit of banksters, actually improves there "value" (what ever that may be) over government fiat.

i don't own any bit coins BTW.. but i have been a fan and watched their development from the beginning

[Pointedstick]

Okay… welcome to the world of investing. I could say the very same thing about stocks, bonds, and gold. Now I imagine you will reply that stocks and even bonds have some kind of means to value them, but this means to value them goes out the window when there's a crash. All investment is basically a big game of human emotions. When I want to sell, there always has to be someone willing to buy, regardless of what the inherent value may be. We can never escape the "greater fool theory" world.

Gold yes, stocks and bonds definitly no. They have value simply because of the cashflows and asset values, and that value is calculatable. Ok on some stocks like tsla or amzn its the same. 

Sure, they have a calculable value. During the stock market crash of 2008, did the stock market fall because all the companies in the market were suddenly all of lesser value? Or was it just a big emotional panic? When a big emotional panic drives down the price, does it really matter when the calculable valuation might be if you're trying to sell at the "true" value?

[Pointedstick]

It's definately easier to trasnfer a ditigal....whatever than a mountain....but my point is the ability to transfer something easily doesn't make it valuable.

It does to me. And it does to other people who hold Bitcoins. Value is determined individually, by people. You may not think that easy transmissibility is valuable, but I and many others disagree. That doesn't make either of us wrong, but it does mean that we have arrived at different conclusions. And the fact that we have been able to reach different conclusions means that your blanket declarative statement that "the ability to transfer something easily doesn't make it valuable" is incorrect. That statement is your own personal opinion, not a fact, and it is an opinion that I and many others disagree with.

[Kshartle]

I'm telling you that me and my customers are voting with our dollars (Bitcoins?) that you're wrong and that something with no inherent value can indeed have net value due to its exchange value. Is this value based on the hope of future exchange value? Of course. But that doesn't make it some kind of house of cards any more than Dollars or Euros or Yen are a house of cards.

You realize that the reason dollars or Euros or Yen have value is different right? They have value because they are supported by governments. The stability of the government provides the support.

The bitcoins are supported by the belief that people will continue to want them....but why would they ever want them in the first place? See I don't think people actually want them for any reason other than they expect them to go up in price. Wanting them to trade them is not wanting them. It's like saying I want dollars to buy a cheesburger. I don't want the dollars in reality...I just want the cheesburger. Now I get that with bitcoins I can conceal my cheesburger purchase better....and that's cool....but how is that different from any another digital currency? Why would someone accept bitcoin and not litecoin?

I think it's the greater fool theory at work and I'm not calling anyone here a fool. If anyone is the fool it's me for not buying when I was looking at them between 100-110. I was going to drop between 5k-10k to get my feet wet but I hadn't solved the problem of where the value comes from.

[Kshartle]

1. That is the greater fool theory, you need someone to pay you more. When the crash comes it will be hard and fast.

Okay… welcome to the world of investing. I could say the very same thing about stocks, bonds, and gold.

You could say that but it would not be correct in my opinion. Companies have value. The current price might be too high or two low or just right....but they still have value. They produce something or whatever and hopefully bring in more cash (purchasing power) than they spend to get it. The owners get a peice of the new purchasing power. Gold has value for reasons gone over at length so many times, it's not the same as bitcoin. Bonds...likewise provide cash flow. Even cash is supported by governments.

None of those reasons are present for bitcoin, it seems to be purely for the greater fool theory (again, please don't fault me for the name of the theory, it's not a personal insult). The reasons you gave above sound exactly like that.

[Kshartle]

Consider that the earliest forms of writing, in Mesopotamia, were used to record transactions — even though the writing and corresponding tokens had no "intrinsic value":

Around the 4th millennium BC, the complexity of trade and administration outgrew the power of memory, and writing became a more dependable method of recording and presenting transactions in a permanent form...

...Archaeologist Denise Schmandt-Besserat determined the link between previously uncategorized clay "tokens", the oldest which have been found through the Zagros region of Iran, and the first known writing, Mesopotamian cuneiform. The clay tokens were used to represent commodities, and perhaps even units of time spent in labour, and their number and type became more complex as civilization advanced. A degree of complexity was reached when over a hundred different kinds of tokens had to be accounted for, and tokens were wrapped and fired in clay, with markings to indicate the kind of tokens inside. These markings soon replaced the tokens themselves, and the clay envelopes were demonstrably the prototype for clay writing tablets.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writing#Th ... of_writing

Obviously the clay tokens had little to no intrinsic value — they were essentially hardened dirt. But, the tokens represented commodities and labor, etc. I'm not perfectly sure how this relates to Bitcoin — since I'm not entirely sure what they represent when they are mined — but at least it shows why early cultures liked tokens

Edit: I suppose the effort it takes to mine a Bitcoin and the effort or whatever it takes to convince a miner to give you a Bitcoin is what they represent.

If it takes a billion dollars to make something that has no value I would call that a waste. Think of how much effort it would take to get ice from the north pole, does that effort and cost "make" the ice more valuable? Maybe as a novelty but I doubt you can make a business out of getting noth pole ice....you're just losing money getting it.

[Pointedstick]

And let me ask you this, Kshartle: Do you believe that the single, solitary reason why people acquire dollars is because the government would shoot them if they didn't have enough to pay their taxes?

And if the government hypothetically stopped collecting taxes but kept printing dollars, would you immediately exchange every dollar you had for gold? Would you expect everyone else to do the same thing? What would be your reaction if they didn't? Can you even conceive of a world in which they didn't?

You are required by law to accept them as payment of debts.

The only support for the slips of paper is the government decree. Does anyone take slips of paper backed by nothing and no government in exchange for something of value anywhere? If so...I would like to meet them and see if I can trade slips of paper for their stuff.

[...]

If I'm wrong and there's another reason I'm all ears.

I do think you are wrong and I will tell you why. Taxation is part of the reason why these fiat currencies are valued, but not all of it. I think the reason reason is a gigantic shared delusion, otherwise known as a meme: in this case, I value dollars because I believe I can trade dollars for goods. The person I trade my dollars to accepts them because he believes the same thing. It works because all of us either believe it, or behave as though we do.

Memes are what define humankind. We all believe imaginary things that don't really exist and we all agree to believe in them. An LLC is a meme. The U.S. government is a meme. The value of the dollar is a meme. None of these things really exist outside our imaginations.

If a critical mass of people stop believing in the meme of the value of green slips of paper and electronic impulses called dollars, it stops being true and the value collapses overnight. Taxation helps to prop this up, but if everyone stopped believing dollars had value overnight they would simply stop paying their taxes and the government can't imprison or kill everyone. It would be the end of the meme of the United States Government.

What you are basically suggesting is memetic fragility and I am suggesting memetic resilience. I believe that the meme that dollars have value has resilience in people's minds beyond simply government agents pointing guns at them. I believe you are suggesting that if the guns went away everyone would wake up form this bizarre mass delusion and say, "wait, why am I accepting these worthless pieces of paper for my valuable labor?" and "wait, why should accept these worthless electronic impulses for these cars I have to sell"?

I don't believe that would happen, for precisely the same reason why the entire world doesn't just give up religion. Religion is another kind of shared delusion, another kind of meme, and even though it's on the wane in many places, you can still see its power. Memes like belief in god or human rights or government or the value of a currency don't just vanish overnight without some kind of very significant galvanizing event to prompt them.

[Kshartle]

It's definately easier to trasnfer a ditigal....whatever than a mountain....but my point is the ability to transfer something easily doesn't make it valuable.

It does to me. And it does to other people who hold Bitcoins. Value is determined individually, by people. You may not think that easy transmissibility is valuable, but I and many others disagree. That doesn't make either of us wrong, but it does mean that we have arrived at different conclusions. And the fact that we have been able to reach different conclusions means that your blanket declarative statement that "the ability to transfer something easily doesn't make it valuable" is incorrect. That statement is your own personal opinion, not a fact, and it is an opinion that I and many others disagree with.

Ok, i can easily trasnfer a bag of poop in a jar. Does that make it valuable? It's very easy to box it up and mail it to someone. Not as easy as bitcoin but still very very easy. How does that make the jar of poop valuable? I guess it's fertilizer!

Wait if we completely disagree doesn't that mean one us has to be wrong and possibly both? How can we both be right?   Can bitcoins have value and not have value?  Price and value are not the same......