Peter Schiff questions Bitcoin’s 21M cap as BTC hits $118K ATH, fueling debate on scarcity, perception, and growing corporate adoption.
Peter Schiff, a critic of Bitcoin, has started a discussion on X by claiming that the 21 million BTC supply cap is arbitrary.
Amid the current surge to an all-time high of $118,000, he questioned the apparent scarcity of Bitcoin, asserting that it is more dependent on public perception than on absolute shortage.
This sparked a flurry of reactions throughout the X sector.
Peter Schiff Starts Discussion About Supply Of Bitcoin
In an X article published today, Peter Schiff questioned if Bitcoin would still feel rare if its total quantity were 21 billion instead of 21 million.
“The supply of Bitcoin is meaningless—it’s the satoshi supply that counts,” he said, implying that dividing each Bitcoin into fewer satoshis would not affect the amount of satoshis, the smallest unit of Bitcoin.
He added that rather than being based on objective reality, Bitcoin’s scarcity concept is based on public perception.
“21 million creates an illusion of scarcity that would be lost if the number was 21 billion,” Schiff added.
The post received over 146,000 views quickly, and users on the platform left comments.
When Schiff stated, “Bitcoin’s scarcity is about perception, not reality,” the discussion heated up.
The psychological impact of supply numbers on public belief was highlighted in the conversation.
Divergent Opinions In Public Reactions
Many X users used analogies and arguments based on mathematics to disagree with Peter Schiff’s position.
“If there were 21 billion bitcoins, but each coin is worth 100K sats, nothing changes fundamentally,” one person retorted.
“Scarcity is about the sat count, not how big the number looks,” he continued.
“This is like arguing whether cutting a pizza into 8 or 16 slices changes how much pizza there is,” said @agentic_t, another commenter.
Others responded by repeating this metaphor to emphasize that its definite limit, not the denomination in which it is measured, defines its scarcity.
Schiff’s posts may be meant to boost engagement, according to @cheznico_, who wrote, “He owns Bitcoin and has 4x his following since becoming a ‘antibitcoiner.'”
Lol, it’s engagement farming.
Peter Schiff on Bitcoin against the Dollar and Precious Metals
While Bitcoin cannot be utilized like metal or eaten like food, Peter Schiff has defended his preference for tangible assets by pointing out that gold and silver still have value in practical applications.
“Gold has taken a temporary pause. Meanwhile, silver is beating Bitcoin. I own silver too,” he replied in one exchange.
Schiff remarked on businesses’ growing use of Bitcoin over the week, characterizing it as a dangerous trend.
Companies are “fools looking to take advantage of other fools,” he said on social media, accusing them of having no viable business plans.
He also took issue with Bitcoin’s increasing political backing.
According to Peter Schiff’s prior piece, Bitcoin is weakening the U.S. economy by putting more pressure on the currency.
“There are serious risks to the overall economy when dollars are sold to purchase Bitcoin,” he cautioned.
Institutional, Corporate Adoption Increases
The use of Bitcoin by publicly traded corporations has kept growing.
Bitcoin is currently held on the balance sheets of more than 100 publicly traded companies.
Together, these businesses own almost 852,000 Bitcoins, according to BitcoinTreasuries.
Investment behemoths like BlackRock and Michael Saylor’s company own more than 1.3 million Bitcoins.
According to this total, approximately 6% of Bitcoins will ever exist.
Schiff has frequently questioned the long-term viability of these tactics and referred to them as hypothetical.
Institutional and individual investors’ interest in Bitcoin has increased despite Peter Schiff’s objections.
Although he expressed his greatest regret on Bitcoin, several individuals on X accused him of altering his opinions to fit the story.
Regarding his transition from gold to silver, @subwayzarry1 questioned, “You always need an asset to back your story, don’t you, Peter?”
