????暫且管這叫末日預(yù)言者大戰(zhàn)吧。

????在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的某些角落，全球貨幣體系崩潰或惡性通脹這樣的話題總會引發(fā)熱烈討論，而其中有一個話題尤其能引起熱議——比特幣和黃金一樣值錢嗎？

????自1971年布雷頓森林貨幣體系崩潰、以及隨之而來的兩位數(shù)通脹后，投資者就開始把黃金作為對抗通脹的避險首選以及對某些央行的制衡措施。這類央行的能耐就是，把大肆印鈔和讓貨幣貶值作為減輕公共債務(wù)負(fù)擔(dān)、鼓勵出口增長的手段。但黃金除了常常會在通脹環(huán)境中價格飛漲外，它還確實是對抗比通脹更糟的情況的一種籌碼。畢竟，普通股、不動產(chǎn)或是免受通脹影響的政府債券都能讓你免受政府發(fā)行的貨幣貶值的侵蝕。但對全球很多投資者來說，如果出現(xiàn)比20世紀(jì)70年代式的通脹還要糟糕得多的情況，比如戰(zhàn)爭或經(jīng)濟持續(xù)低迷，黃金還是對抗這些狀況的出色保護(hù)手段。

????不過，比特幣現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)越來越接近主流了，而且還能提供許多與黃金一樣的特質(zhì)，比如稀缺性以及不受政府影響。那么它與黃金相比，哪個能更好地幫助投資者抵御極端惡劣的形勢呢？

????作為保值手段：能挖掘的比特幣總量已預(yù)設(shè)為2100萬個，而可開采的黃金總量到底有多少則是個更為復(fù)雜的問題。長期以來，黃金供應(yīng)量增幅大概是每年增長1-3%。但從短期來看，由于新探明儲量的影響，金價必然會經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)大幅波動。當(dāng)然，作為一種新技術(shù)的產(chǎn)物，比特幣肯定比黃金更容易波動。但從長期來看，由于2100萬個比特幣挖完后不再有新比特幣，我們可以預(yù)計它將最終成為一種比黃金更好的保值手段。

????優(yōu)勢方：比特幣。

????充公風(fēng)險：在發(fā)生大范圍社會動亂或經(jīng)濟衰退時，確實存在政府沒收私人財產(chǎn)的風(fēng)險。實際上，1933年和1934年間，美國政府就宣稱私人持有黃金非法并強制沒收。一開始是由總統(tǒng)頒布行政命令，隨后又通過國會法案執(zhí)行。當(dāng)時持有黃金的人因為這種充公獲得了一定補償，但這種政策的出發(fā)點就是要使美元對黃金貶值，因此這些人實際上并沒有獲得被充公資產(chǎn)的真正市場價值。

????如果再發(fā)生類似情況，那到底是持有黃金還是比特幣更安全？在某種程度上，這個問題其實無所謂。如果政府打算收走你的黃金或比特幣，而你堅決不從，那你怎么樣都是觸犯了法律。但如果你決心要讓政府這種做法沒戲唱，可能持有黃金比持有比特幣更管用。的確，是有辦法來買比特幣讓自己的身份無法通過比特幣數(shù)據(jù)區(qū)塊鏈查到，但比起在錢幣展上買點黃金并不向政府報告來說，這還是要更復(fù)雜些。

????免責(zé)聲明：不用說，違法就是違法，這么做絕不可取，哪怕是在最糟糕的假想情境中也是如此。

????優(yōu)勢方：黃金。

????對沖最壞情況：如果一想到可能發(fā)生第三次世界大戰(zhàn)你就夜不能寐，那很難想象比特幣能比黃金更讓你安心。畢竟比特幣要靠互聯(lián)網(wǎng)才有用，如果一旦斷電或是沒法上網(wǎng)，那比特幣就會一錢不值，哪怕你把它們存在物理介質(zhì)里也不管用。

????優(yōu)勢方：黃金。

????便于使用：比特幣可能在那些不太理想的環(huán)境中更有用，比如如果身處一個政府喜歡彈壓或不負(fù)責(zé)任、但仍然能夠上網(wǎng)的國家。比如比特幣在阿根廷這樣的地方就日益流行，這完全是因為該國貨幣管理混亂，經(jīng)濟長期深陷通脹。在這種環(huán)境中，比特幣就比黃金更有價值，因為實物黃金儲藏運輸都很昂貴，而花費、存儲比特幣卻幾乎毫無成本。

????Call it a battle of the doomsayers.

????In some corners of the Internet -- where topics such as the collapse of the global monetary system or runaway inflation are the stuff of common, and lively, conversation -- one question in particular elicits particularly heightened emotions: is bitcoin as good as gold?

????Since the fall of the Bretton Woods monetary regime in 1971 and the double-digit inflation that followed, investors have considered gold a hedge against inflation and a check against central banks who have the capacity to resort to money printing and currency devaluation as a means of decreasing the burden of public debt and encouraging export growth. But while gold often thrives in inflationary environments, it's really a bet against something far worse than inflation. After all, run-of-the-mill stocks, real estate, or even inflation-protected government bonds can protect you against against a decline in the real value of government-issued currencies. But for many investors all over the world, gold is a great protector against much more severe events than 1970s-style inflation, like war or prolonged depression.

????Now that bitcoin has grown closer to the mainstream, though, and offers many of the same qualities that gold does -- like scarcity and freedom from the influence of government -- which is better at protecting investors against the very worst?

????As a store of value: The total number of bitcoins that can be mined has been preset at 21 million, whereas the amount of gold that can be mined is a more complicated question. Over time, the increase in the supply of gold has increased at roughly 1-3% per year, but on a short-term basis there can conceivably be a lot of volatility in the price of gold due to new discoveries. Of course, as a new technology, bitcoin is subject to much more volatility than gold. But over the long run, given the fact that no new bitcoins will be mined after the 21-millionth, we can expect it to ultimately serve as a better store of value than gold.

????Advantage: bitcoin

????Confiscatory risk: In the event of widespread social upheaval or depression, the risk that governments will confiscate private assets is quite real. In fact, in 1933 and 1934 the United States government made it illegal to privately own gold and confiscated it, first by executive order, then by Congressional decree. Gold holders were compensated for their assets, but the whole point of the exercise was to to devalue the dollar in gold terms, so those reimbursed weren't receiving the real market value for their assets.

????If something like this were to happen again, would you be safer holding gold or bitcoin? In one sense, it doesn't really matter. If the government wanted to take your gold or your bitcoins, and you resisted, you'd be a lawbreaker in any case. But if you're determined to thwart the government, it's probably a bit easier to do it with gold than with bitcoin. Sure, there are ways to buy bitcoin so that your identity is not traceable via the bitcoin blockchain, but it's more complicated than buying small amounts of gold with cash at a coin show and not reporting it to the government.

????Disclaimer: obviously, breaking the law is breaking the law and that's not advisable, even in some of these worst-case, hypothetical scenarios.

????Advantage: gold

????Hedge against the absolute worst: If the prospect of World War III is keeping you up at night, it's difficult to imagine bitcoin as a better bet than gold. After all, bitcoin relies on the Internet to be functional, and if you are somehow severed from the power grid or the online community, your bitcoins will be worthless, even if you store them in physical form.

????Advantage: gold

????Ease of Use: Bitcoin is likely more useful in less dire situations, like if you're a citizen of a country with a repressive or irresponsible government but you still have regular access to the Internet. Bitcoin has surged in popularity in places like Argentina, for instance, precisely because the currency there has been mismanaged and the Argentine economy suffers from chronic inflation. In a situation such as this, bitcoin is a better alternative than gold because owning real, physical gold is expensive to store and transport, while spending and storing bitcoin is effectively costless.