Peter Schiff’s Bitcoin Debate with CZ: Who’s Actually Winning?

by

Ah, Peter Schiff, always eager to remind us that Bitcoin is nothing more than a glorified game of musical chairs.

In a rather lively debate at Binance Blockchain Week, Schiff took the stage opposite the ever-calm Changpeng Zhao (CZ) and launched into his usual spiel about Bitcoin being a “zero-sum wealth transfer.” I must say, it’s always a treat when Schiff asserts that Bitcoin’s only purpose is to line the pockets of sellers at the expense of the poor, unsuspecting buyers.

Allow me to present Schiff’s statement, dripping with his signature flair for dramatic understatements:

“All Bitcoin does is enable a transfer of wealth from people who buy BTC to the people who sell it. When Bitcoin is created, there’s no real wealth. We have about 20 million Bitcoin now that we didn’t have 15 years ago. But we’re no better off because that BTC exists. They don’t actually do anything. But what has happened is that some people have been enriched at the expense of other people. Now, the people who have lost a lot of money in Bitcoin don’t even realize they lost it yet, because they still have the BTC, and the token still has a $90-$92,000 price, or whatever the price point is in the current market. So, they don’t realize they have lost the money. But if they try to get out, that’s when they’re gonna realize it’s lost.”

“Bitcoin Enables Transfer of Wealth From Buyers to Sellers”

Well, that’s certainly true, as any freely traded asset-be it stocks, gold, real estate, or even fine art-can make a similar claim. Ah, the charm of a zero-sum game! But let’s not confuse wealth transfer with wealth creation. Bitcoin, unlike your average lump of gold or set of shares, generates utility far beyond mere price.

Bitcoin doesn’t just shuffle wealth around-it powers cross-border settlements, serves as a censorship-resistant store of value, and acts as collateral across financial platforms. Not bad for a “zero-sum” asset, eh?

BINANCE FOUNDER CZ JUST DESTROYED GOLD BUG PETER SCHIFF IN 30 SECONDS

THIS IS A MUST WATCH!!

– Vivek Sen (@Vivek4real_) December 4, 2025

Value is not just a matter of “things” being present; it’s about the capability they offer. A global network that moves capital instantly without relying on banks or middlemen-that’s new, that’s valuable, and that’s wealth creation by definition. Let’s face it, folks: a zero-sum asset simply doesn’t have this kind of staying power. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be seeing institutional treasuries and entire nations jumping on the Bitcoin bandwagon.

If Bitcoin were merely redistributing value, it would never have become the backbone of multi-billion-dollar remittance systems, payment channels, or custody platforms. A true zero-sum asset doesn’t attract such high-profile interest. And yet, here we are.

Wealth doesn’t need to be tangible. It thrives on demand, utility, consensus, and the ability to preserve or transfer value. And let’s not even get started on Schiff’s historical blind spots.

  • Fiat currency: created out of thin air but accepted globally. Check. 🧐
  • Internet domain names: intangible, yet worth millions. Check. 🤯
  • Software and cloud infrastructure: non-physical, but absolutely critical. Check. 💻

By Schiff’s logic, these things would also fail the wealth test. Yet these intangible assets power today’s economy. If Bitcoin were just a “transfer” of wealth, it wouldn’t have revolutionized money, now would it? That’s something entirely new in monetary history: a bearer asset that moves like data, settles instantly, and is verifiably secure-without the need for storage or transport. Sounds a bit like a magic trick, doesn’t it?

Gold, eat your heart out. Bitcoin’s here, and it’s better than ever.

“People Only Don’t Know They Lost Money Because Price is Still High”

Ah, the classic “Bitcoin is a bubble” prediction. How quaint. While Schiff’s theory is based on the assumption that Bitcoin’s inevitable collapse is a foregone conclusion, the reality is far murkier.

If Bitcoin continues to see global demand and its network keeps growing, then scarcity (and, dare I say it, utility) will sustain its value. You see, dear reader, the beauty of Bitcoin is that it doesn’t rely on someone else’s opinion for its worth. If demand persists, so will its value. And with adoption expanding, Schiff’s prediction looks increasingly like wishful thinking.

Of course, Schiff’s view equates unrealized gains with illusions, but consider this:

  • If you hold Bitcoin for 10 years and sell it at a higher price, that’s wealth, my dear! 🤑
  • If Bitcoin becomes integrated into the financial system and is widely transacted, it stops being just speculative and starts being functional. 🏦

Peter, darling, your thesis only holds if Bitcoin doesn’t evolve. But considering it’s been growing for over a decade, it’s time to adjust your outlook, don’t you think? 💁‍♂️

Conclusion

Schiff’s comments, though amusing, miss the mark entirely. Bitcoin isn’t merely a wealth transfer mechanism-it’s a fully functioning global monetary network with capabilities that no traditional asset can replicate. His argument that it “creates no wealth” is rooted in outdated assumptions about where value comes from.

But don’t worry, Peter. The rest of us will be here, enjoying the future of money. 🥂

Read More

2025-12-05 03:45