On March 21, Peter Schiff made wildly inaccurate claims in his post that labeled Bitgold a “Secret Taxation Time Bomb“.
James Turk, founder of GoldMoney responded to Schiff in his article March 22 article Peter Schiff’s Taxation Tantrum Post about BitGold.
I responded to Peter Schiff on March 23, with BitGold vs. SchiffGold: Facts vs. Fiction.
Roy Sebag, founder of BitGold, weighed in on the matter later in the day on the 23rd. Sebag now challenges Schiff to a debate.
Sebag’s Response to Schiff
Sebag responded to Schiff in a no-hype article simply titled Roy Sebag Response to Peter Schiff’s BitGold Truth Piece.
His post contains much of what I covered, but with additional details.
In addition, Sebag covers some aspects that I didn’t, including a financial analysis of Bitgold the company, and its profit model.
It would be interesting to see Schiff provide the same type of analysis for SchiffGold, but I rather doubt such a response ever sees the light of day.
I challenge to anyone who believes BitGold does not have a viable business model or viable product to read Sebag’s article and explain where and how it is wrong.
And if it isn’t wrong, how about a retraction?
Sebag’s Debate Challenge
Sebag has a challenge of his own. He challenges Schiff to a debate.
“I therefore challenge Peter Schiff to a one on one debate on BitGold, our platform, our business, or anything really. My only requisite is that the debate be unedited and streamed live on Youtube. I think it could be fruitful for both sides. Maybe, we can even find some common ground.”
Willingness to Debate
I am certain there is common ground, we all promote gold.
Common ground aside, Schiff has backed down from every debate chance he has had with me.
I wrote about Schiff’s backing out of debates with me on November 30, 2012 in Peter Schiff Backs Down from Debate with Mish 3rd Time After Agreeing to Do So.
Peter claims he never agreed to debate me, rather his agents accepted on his behalf, without his approval. Perhaps he should have told his agents that he was not really willing to debate anyone.
Actually there was a 4th time. I recall an NBC local affiliate radio station asking me if I would debate Schiff. The same thing happened. I said Schiff would not be willing but the producer claimed he had a guarantee.
You know the ending. One person backed out and that was not me.
That’s all history, from four years ago and longer.
Question of Legitimacy
One of the reasons Schiff has given for his refusal to debate me has been on the lines of he does not want to provide any legitimacy to me or my views.
But it’s not my views that need legitimacy. His do. He was right about gold and housing but wrong about the dollar, commodities at the peak, decoupling theories, China, emerging market currencies, US treasuries, and out of this world wrong about hyperinflation.
As measured by prices (albeit very briefly), as well as the plunge in the value of credit on the books of banks, we had the deflation I called for. And I expect another plunge in the value of that credit (my key measure of deflation).
Schiff simply cannot get into his head, the overwhelming deflationary effect of debt. Instead, he has a spotlight on the US dollar, effectively ignoring actions of other central banks.
With his myopic focus on the dollar, he continues to promote hyperinflation, even doing so in a ridiculous example involving BitGold.
My willingness to debate Schiff on the idea the US is about to go into hyperinflation or even high inflation any time soon still stands.
Sebag’s Generous Offer
Sebag is equally willing to risk giving legitimacy to Schiff with his generous debate offer.
Peter, are you willing to debate someone or not?
Mike “Mish” Shedlock