This game, whether you want to participate or not, is mandatory for anyone who is part of society; no one can escape it.

Written by: Cai Leilei

I came across an interesting viewpoint that says Bitcoin has nothing to do with ordinary people; it only matters if you get involved. If you don’t get involved, then it’s just an internal game of mutual cutting, and whether it rises to $1 million or $10 million per coin has nothing to do with you because it’s merely a zero-sum game casino.

Is that true? Whether it’s Bitcoin, gold, or real estate in major cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen, what is it essentially? It is a process of participating in the redistribution of wealth. If I buy something for 1 yuan and you buy it for 1 million, does that mean the fruits of your 10 years of labor now belong to me? You might say you won’t buy it; similarly, you can choose not to buy real estate in those major cities, or you can choose not to buy anything at all. But in what form is your asset stored? Cash? For the first 20 years, if you hold cash while others buy property, can you really say your labor hasn’t been deprived? You’re mistaken. When the gears of fate start turning, whether you actively participate or not, you will inevitably be drawn into it.

The resources in this world are limited and will be distributed to specific individuals through various carriers and rules. For example, we work and create value for society, thus participating in the distribution. Those who create more value get a larger slice of the pie, while those who create less value and lie at home will only have to accept being cut out. If you don’t consume and the amount of money you hold remains unchanged, will you not be cut? No, money is merely a way to calculate the proportion of social resources. If there is a total of 10,000 yuan and you hold 1 yuan, you possess a 1/10,000 social resource voucher. If the government sees that it can’t extract your money, it might simply open a new venue and seize money there, increasing the total to 100,000 or 1 million. It doesn’t need to take your money; your money will naturally disappear—why? Because under the premise that social resources remain unchanged, you can only exchange for 1/10,000 or 1/100,000 of the resources.

So I say the absolute value of money doesn’t represent much; it’s the proportion of the total that determines how much you can exchange for. In the agrarian civilization era, facing the soil and turning your back to the sky, a person with a hoe could obtain social resource distribution through the creation of social wealth. However, in the industrial civilization era, one person can do the work of 1,000 people. By using more efficient tools, one person can seize 1,000 shares. Isn’t that unfair? No, it’s just that you don’t have the right tools to seize it, so you end up being robbed.

This is the "logic of creation," which is easy to understand and many people agree with—though he took 1,000 shares of resources, he contributed 1,000 times more to society than an ordinary person, which seems reasonable. However, the logic of Bitcoin is harder to understand because it involves financial logic, predictive logic, consensus logic, risk logic, and shareholder logic. Given that we have had a long period of misunderstanding in user education, there is a natural aversion to this "making money through judgment," so many people find it incomprehensible and think it’s unfair.

In fact, it’s quite understandable. If there is something that everyone wants, regardless of what it is—even if it’s just a painting for show—if everyone wants to hang it in their home, then realizing "this thing might be desired by more people" will lead to more people coming to seize it. Should this "awareness" be rewarded? Of course, because I also bear the risk of "what if no one wants it and it becomes worthless."

So it’s simple: if more people want Bitcoin in the future, then everyone will invest their hard-earned money into this pool to participate in the game of wealth redistribution. As everyone continuously invests wealth into it, it inevitably draws resources away from other pools. Can you understand this? For example, if there are only two pools in the world—the stock market and the cryptocurrency market—then as people continuously invest their wealth and resource shares into the cryptocurrency market, the funds in the stock market will be drained, causing the price of every stock to plummet. Those who chose the wrong pool will have their wealth taken away. If you don’t play and only hold cash, you are essentially still playing passively because in an ever-expanding large pool, if you don’t seize, you lose; if you don’t seize quickly enough, you still lose.

So is it a game of "mutual cutting among friends"? Of course not. New wealth is constantly coming in; how can it be called "mutual cutting among friends"? Bitcoin is a measuring stick; the amount of coins you hold relative to the total determines how much fiat currency you can allocate within the pool. You might say it doesn’t create new value? Then I must start by popularizing how much the "world’s first and largest peer-to-peer trustless decentralized value transfer system" is worth. Just think about it: how much is the internet worth? If you were an "original shareholder of the internet" or an "original shareholder of SWIFT," how many times would your stocks have multiplied over the decades? You might already be the richest person in the world.

You can choose not to buy Bitcoin, and you can choose not to buy anything else, but remember, cash is also an asset. Essentially, using cash to occupy a proportion of the wealth in society to participate in the distribution of social resources is the same as using any other asset to participate in the distribution. What’s the difference? Some assets will gather an increasingly large consensus, causing other people’s wealth to flow to you; while some assets will lose consensus, leading your wealth to flow to others.

This game, whether you want to participate or not, is mandatory for anyone who is part of society; no one can escape it.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。