CZ and Hoskinson Fire Back at Schiff’s Bitcoin Critique
- Peter Schiff reignites his Bitcoin criticism, calling it belief-driven after a 12% price decline.
- Binance’s CZ defends Bitcoin, comparing its value to gold and traditional money systems
- Charles Hoskinson mocks Schiff’s record, saying he’s been wrong at every Bitcoin milestone.
Economist Peter Schiff has reignited his long-running criticism of Bitcoin after the leading cryptocurrency fell 12% from its recent peak. His latest remarks came amid a broader market pullback following hawkish comments from the U.S. Federal Reserve. Bitcoin dropped to around $108,900 before finding support near the $111,000 zone, sparking renewed debate over its long-term value foundation.
Schiff, a well-known gold advocate, posted a series of comments on X, describing Bitcoin as a belief-driven bubble. He claimed the asset works “only as long as there is a growing supply of fools who believe nothing is something.” According to Schiff, Bitcoin’s value depends on continuous faith and momentum. He warned that when that belief fades, the digital currency “crashes.”
His criticism resurfaced as Bitcoin struggled to recover following the Fed’s firm stance on interest rates. Schiff noted that Bitcoin was down 11.5% from its high, even as gold corrected and the NASDAQ posted new records. He added that if Bitcoin can fall while gold and equities move in opposite directions, it may face deeper losses when market conditions shift.
CZ Defends Bitcoin’s Value System
Binance founder Changpeng Zhao, known as CZ, quickly responded to Schiff’s comments. In a direct reply, CZ argued that Bitcoin’s value structure mirrors that of gold and traditional money. He stated that gold’s price “is not derived from its industrial or utility value,” describing both assets as belief systems.
CZ’s defense underscored a key point shared among crypto advocates, that Bitcoin, like gold, holds value because people agree it does. Supporters contend that Bitcoin is a contemporary form of digital gold due to its decentralized structure and limited supply. They argue that centuries of faith in fiat money and precious metals are no different from this belief-based basis.
Bitcoin has often faced criticism from traditional economists who see its value as speculative. However, crypto proponents maintain that the asset’s programmed scarcity, transparency, and independence from government control give it unique financial properties.
Hoskinson Calls Schiff’s Views “Outdated”
Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson also joined the debate, directly addressing Schiff in a post on X. Hoskinson dismissed Schiff’s remarks as outdated, highlighting his long history of incorrect Bitcoin predictions. “Peter continues to be wrong and utterly irrelevant,” Hoskinson wrote. He noted that Schiff had doubted Bitcoin at every major price milestone, $100, $1,000, $10,000, and $100,000. He predicted that Schiff would remain wrong when Bitcoin reaches $1 million.
Hoskinson’s response reflected a growing divide between traditional financial thinkers and the crypto community. Economists like Schiff argue that Bitcoin’s price depends on speculation rather than intrinsic worth. Crypto advocates counter that belief, and scarcity forms the same basis of value in all monetary systems.
Related: Bitcoin Eyes Rebound After Fed’s Rate Cut and Liquidity Plan
Despite the online clash, Bitcoin’s price action showed signs of stabilization. Following a recent decline to 108K, BTC was trading at about $110,800 at the time of writing. A close above $113,400 could confirm renewed bullish momentum. This level represents a crucial threshold connected to short-term Fibonacci retracement zones.
Traders anticipate possible targets close to $117,660, the 0.618 retracement of the most recent decline, if Bitcoin breaks above that level. Further resistance appears at $121K and $126K, levels near the previous cycle high.
As volatility continues, the exchange illustrates a persistent ideological divide between traditional economists and blockchain supporters. Each side sees value through a different lens, with one grounded in tangible assets, the other in decentralized consensus.
