The New York Post Really Doesn’t Have a Clue About Bitcoin


Here at NewsBTC we love hearing the musings of dusty old conservatives trying to debase something they know absolutely nothing about. Today we thought we’d share with you one such baseless attack on the protocol that the bankers just love to hate.

John Crudele: “Bitcoin is Really Worth Nothing”

Throughout its relatively short existence, there have been many verbal attacks made against Bitcoin. There was JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon’s outburst calling the most successful digital currency of all time a “fraud” with little to no explanation as to why he felt this way.

Then there was Warren Buffet’s similarly scant-on-reasoning yet wonderfully creative insult: “Probably rat poison squared” levied at BTC. Amusingly, Dimon was later accused of market manipulation over his comments and as for Buffet, he’s the first to admit he hasn’t the foggiest idea about technological innovation.

When high profile financial types resort to such slanderous comments, you’ve got to wonder the motives behind them. If Bitcoin really wasn’t anything to be concerned about, would they be publicly voicing condemnation in such a way?

The latest of these factually scant critiques doesn’t come from a bastion of high finance, however. Instead, they’re the musings of New York Post “journalist” John Crudele. In a spectacularly poorly reasoned article titled “Why Bitcoin May Soon Be Worth Nothing,” Crudele addresses the 70% losses that have occurred thus far in 2018. Naturally, in doing so he neglects to comment on the almost 2,000% gains of 2017.

He goes on to state that Bitcoin is “really worth nothing, since it’s backed by nothing or no one.” Like so many other Bitcoin naysayers, Crudele fails to grasp that Bitcoin is backed by something – infallible code.

Code, unlike people (bankers included), doesn’t have a motive. It doesn’t have an agenda. It certainly can’t gamble with your future for its own benefit. Code is neutral and consistent. When it’s successfully proved itself over the course of nearly a decade, it’s far more reliable than if it were backed by any single, or group of human beings.

Unfortunately, this is all Crudele offers in the way of reasoning for his click-baitesque headline. He quickly resorts to throwing out tired old insults:

“Ponzi scheme. Confidence game. Fraud.”

What? No tulips, money launderers, or drug runners, John? I guess you didn’t finish up reading the script.

All told, Crudele’s analysis is, well, crude. Realistically, could we expect anything else from the guy? It would seem Crudele’s the name, crude reasoning’s the game.