He is. troll. He was recommending people to buy gold instead of bitcoin back in 2013 when btc was $50. It went to $1000 while his shilled gold remained stagnant, roubini ate dick. Then it crashed to $200 and he got a new focus on slating bitcoin as he could throw arpund the “down by 80%” stat even though it was still up several hundred % from his original call.
Today at $6000 he talks the same crap. down by 80% lol. Conveniently ignores the fact its up 10000% from his original call in
Troll like him wont be surprised to find if he is paid by banks or other commodity backers. Remember rep sherman. Ha
> He was recommending people to buy gold instead of bitcoin back in 2013
What's wrong with that? Investing in gold was a far smarter investment at the time. Bitcoin was way too risky for any serious investor. Just because gold was a worse investment doesn't mean his advice was bad at the time.
Totally agree. Even to a neutral observer, you couldn't really argue that he out-debated Van Valkenburgh. Roubini was stuttering and his points were all over the place; while it wasn't a flat out debate, his "logic" was easily shut down by his counterpart.
If I weren't involved in the space, I'd still likely be able to tell that at the very least, Valkenburgh was far more prepared and intelligible in the way he presented his arguments and examples.
How? Remove the idea that they were discussing crypto and blockchain technology, and pretend it was a debate about something else. You'd still be able to see that Valkenburgh was more prepared, well-spoken, and had larger amounts of evidence & statistics to back up the points he made.
Not to mention Roubini went on a childish Twitter tirade after the hearing, endlessly insulting random people.