Peter Schiff Reignites Bitcoin Criticism, Calls 21M Supply Arbitrary

Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff has sparked a debate on X by calling the 21 million BTC supply cap arbitrary. He raised questions about Bitcoin’s scarcity amid the recent rally to an ATH of $118K, claiming that its perceived value is based more on public belief than actual scarcity, triggering a wave of responses across the X space.

Peter Schiff Sparks Debate On Bitcoin’s Supply

In an X post shared today, Peter Schiff has questioned whether Bitcoin could still feel scarce if its total supply were 21 billion instead of 21 million. He suggested that the number of satoshis—the smallest unit of Bitcoin—would remain the same if each Bitcoin was divided into fewer satoshis, saying, “The supply of Bitcoin is actually meaningless—it’s the satoshi supply that counts.”

He further stated that the idea of scarcity in Bitcoin is built on public perception rather than objective reality.

“21 million creates an illusion of scarcity that would be lost if the number was 21 billion,” Schiff added.

The post quickly reached over 146,000 views, with users across the platform weighing in. The conversation intensified when Schiff said, “Bitcoin’s scarcity is about perception, not reality.” The discussion brought attention to the psychological effects of supply numbers on public belief.

Public Reactions Show Divided Views

Many users on X disagreed with Peter Schiff’s take, using analogies and math-based arguments. One user replied, “If BTC had a 21 billion supply but each coin = 100K sats, nothing changes fundamentally.” He added, “Scarcity isn’t about how big the number looks, it’s about the sat count.”

Another commenter, @agentic_t, stated, “This is like arguing whether cutting a pizza into 8 or 16 slices changes how much pizza there is.” In response, this metaphor was subsequently reiterated by others who sought to point out that its scarcity is defined by its fixed limit rather than by the unit denomination in which it is measured.

@cheznico_ claimed that Schiff’s posts may be intended to increase engagement, writing, “He owns Bitcoin and has 4x his following since becoming an ‘antibitcoiner.’ It’s engagement farming lol.”

Peter Schiff On Bitcoin vs Precious Metals and the Dollar

Peter Schiff has defended his preference for physical assets, stating that while BTC cannot be consumed like food or used like metal, gold and silver retain value in real-world applications.

“Gold has taken a temporary pause. Meanwhile, silver is beating Bitcoin. I own silver too,” he replied in one exchange.

During the week, Schiff had commented on the increasing adoption of Bitcoin by corporations, calling it a risky trend. He posted that companies are “fools looking to take advantage of other fools” and accused them of lacking real business models.

He also criticized the growing political support for Bitcoin. In an earlier post, Peter Schiff claimed that Bitcoin is weakening the U.S. economy by increasing pressure on the dollar. “The sale of dollars to buy BTC poses grave dangers to the broader economy,” he warned.

Corporate and Institutional Adoption Grows

Bitcoin adoption by public companies has continued to expand. Over 100 public firms now hold Bitcoin on their balance sheets. According to BitcoinTreasuries, more than 852,000 BTCs are collectively held by these companies.

Investment giants like BlackRock and Michael Saylor’s firm have accumulated over 1.3 million Bitcoins combined. This total represents about 6% of all Bitcoins that will ever exist. Schiff has repeatedly called these strategies speculative and questioned their long-term sustainability.

Despite Peter Schiff’s criticisms, interest in BTC from institutional and retail investors has grown. Many users on X accused him of changing his views to suit the narrative despite declaring his biggest regret on Bitcoin. “You always need an asset to back your story, don’t you, Peter?” asked @subwayzarry1, referring to his shifting focus from gold to silver.