How long before nation states buy bitcoin?

[DublinHead54]

The NTMA's investment mandate is here. I don't see how a virtual asset that pays no interest that has a material chance of being worth zero in the medium term is consistent with that mandate.

Rate of return is not referring to assets that pay interest only hence the large equity holdings the NTMA hold. I believe that BTC could be purchased by the NTMA in the future following the necessary governance process.

 

[NoRegretsCoyote]

Rate of return is not referring to assets that pay interest

Correct.

Which is why I also said that bitcoin also has "a material chance of being worth zero in the medium term".

The NTMA is obliged to invest to support investment in the state. If that is not available, to invest with the expectation of an appropriate return given the level of risk to the asset


I have no inside knowledge, but I highly doubt the NTMA board would choose to hold bitcoin given the level of risk involved. It would be a pure bet on capital appreciation of a non-interest bearing asset with limited use as a means of exchange in the legitimate economy.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Yes of course, it would rattle everyone.

Effectively, an admission that the overseers had lost control and were scrambling to retain control.
My somewhat crude point before, about the Irish Censorship Board permitting the sale of Playboy in 1995, coinciding with proliferation of internet pornography on every computer. Imagine if the overseers of censorship had tried to hold their ground? It would have been farcical.

Central Banks, and their political creators, will not go quietly into the night that is for sure. That is why I think it is a great idea for nation states to start buying bitcoin. Rather than automatically take a hostile position to bitcoin, take a positive position in it.
Bitcoin does not have to be this great threat to the $ or €. The biggest threat to the $ and € is unlimited money-printing based on a stagnant, permanent policy decision of 2% inflation target.

I should have recorded the original tired and emotional rant which was right out of the Big Short copy book.
The thread as per usual has drifted into farce.

 

[WolfeTone]

I should have recorded the original tired and emotional rant which was right out of the Big Short copy book.
The thread as per usual has drifted into farce.

As yes, it was a bit of a rant indeed, so I edited it.

But the drift into farce started long ago at every corner you skip over ever inconvenient realities that stands in front in you.

BOHA, criminality, Tether, the Russian conspiracy, economists and central bankers endorsing bitcoin, institutional investors adopting bitcoin, the magic money trees that you store so much of your faith in, ....I could on, but hey, I need to be mindful of ranting.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@WolfeTone Nevertheless your "true feelings" and those of your fellow traveller @tecate bare stark comparison with the clinical unemotive contributions of @NoRegretsCoyote. It is clear that bitcoin means much more to the two of you than a mere technical breakthrough. It fuels your fantasy of undermining the Pax Americana which underpins the remarkable advance in the human condition that we in America's orbit are now enjoying.
Heck there is me being sucked into this silly OTT morality tale. In future I will try and behave like @NoRegretsCoyote, possibly restricting myself to giving him "likes".
Let me begin by reiterating that the fact that the Norwegian Oil Fund is indirectly exposed 6 parts in a million to bitcoin does not suggest to me a positive answer to the question posed by your thread.

 

[WolfeTone]

It fuels your fantasy of undermining the Pax Americana which underpins the remarkable advance in the human condition that we in America's orbit are now enjoying.

This is silly.
As I understand it, the largest volume of buyers and transactions of bitcoin is with American people. The notion that they are trying to undermine the 'American dream' - as that is what you are talking about - is daft.

What they are doing, is trying to restore, sustain, and maintain this 'American dream', but they are conscious of some, imbalances, structural deficits (to put it mildly) within the economic and social systems of the gool 'ol USA.
This is always the case, and will probably always be, just as it is human nature to pull and push these imbalances in one's favour. Bitcoin is a way for anyone and everyone to push or pull against economic and societal imbalances (perceived or real).

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

This is silly.
As I understand it, the largest volume of buyers and transactions of bitcoin is with American people. The notion that they are trying to undermine the 'American dream' - as that is what you are talking about - is daft.

I wasn't talking about Muskie, Saylor et al. I was talking about you and @tecate.

The Americans have weaponised money. You think that they are doing good with this? I certainly don't. A couple of years ago, they locked Iran out of international banking - against the wishes of the Europeans. They didn't care - they just acted unilaterally.
Next up....give us an example of how sanctions have really been a force for good in the world? There isn't one! Have you talked to anyone from a sanctions-hit country? ...because I do all the time. In Venezuela, they have a shortage of all manner of things including medical equipment, drugs, etc. A family member of a friend of mine died in Venezuela last year because of a lack of a very basic drug. That death would not have happened had there not have been sanctions. It's one of countless cases of the real effects of sanctions.

In case you think this was in the context of some other high-falutin' debate @tecate clarified the matter.

Discussed exclusively in the context of bitcoin.

Unfortunately I failed to record your own late night words of wisdom on the subject.

 

[WolfeTone]

I wasn't talking about Muskie, Saylor et al.

Oh I get it, if non-Americans buy bitcoin to protect themselves against moribund CB monetary policy its all part of the Russian/NK axis to destablise America and Western culture as we know it.

But if Americans buy bitcoin, that's a whole new thing! Totally different!

In case you think this was in the context of some other high-falutin' debate @tecate clarified the matter.

I think, inherent in @tecate comment is that when an empire becomes too powerful they can be prone to do some bad things. And let's face it, despite the wonders of an amazing country and people like the USA, they tend to some pretty awful things on the global stage also.
I think ideally, is that it would be great if the USA were to aim to keep all the good stuff that they are great at doing and producing, and try to minimise the nasty stuff they get up to. I don't tecates view on this would be too dissimilar to mine, or millions of other Americans for that matter.

 

[tecate]

@WolfeTone Nevertheless your "true feelings" and those of your fellow traveller @tecate bare stark comparison with the clinical unemotive contributions of @NoRegretsCoyote.

There's a career in standup awaiting you, Dukie...(although probably a dead beat circuit of comedy clubs replete with airborne rotten apples).

It is clear that bitcoin means much more to the two of you than a mere technical breakthrough.

If by that you mean that I'm encouraged by the force for good that decentralised crypto/blockchain can be in the world, then that's correct.

It fuels your fantasy of undermining the Pax Americana which underpins the remarkable advance in the human condition that we in America's orbit are now enjoying.

Comments were made exclusively re. sanctions - in the context of bitcoin. There was no other commentary on anything else that gives your comment above legitimacy - let alone that anyone should find a grain of truth in it.

Let me begin by reiterating that the fact that the Norwegian Oil Fund is indirectly exposed 6 parts in a million to bitcoin does not suggest to me a positive answer to the question posed by your thread.

And let me reiterate that the whole premise of Wolfie starting this thread was to mull over the notion that nation states - through their CBs and Sovereign Wealth Funds - would begin to accumulate bitcoin. All your posts highlight is that process has already begun. It's also encouraging to hear that it seems there isn't any legal impediment to the NTMA holding bitcoin on its balance sheet afterall.

Unfortunately I failed to record your own late night words of wisdom on the subject.

I hate to disappoint, your Dukeness. I hope the above will suffice.

 

[NoRegretsCoyote]

It is clear that bitcoin means much more to the two of you than a mere technical breakthrough.

I was quite wrong on bitcoin by the way. I heard of it as long ago as 2009 when I think it was a dollar a bitcoin and wished in hindsight that I'd bought a few.

I didn't think that a currency without state backing would ever engender mass trust. A decade on and it's clear that it has a non-zero value.

It is clear to me now that bitcoin does have a use as a means of exchange for wholesale drugs and weapons trading. The currency risk is worth taking as it is a lot simpler than sending suitcases of cash around the world.

Otherwise bitcoin seems to be something that a lot of people can project all sorts of bizarre thoughts on to. I don't really understand this, but it has probably driven some of the value too.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Oh I get it, if non-Americans buy bitcoin to protect themselves against moribund CB monetary policy its all part of the Russian/NK axis to destablise America and Western culture as we know it.

But if Americans buy bitcoin, that's a whole new thing! Totally different!

I am not talking about Americans or non-Americans I am talking about YOU and @tecate.
I'll remind you again.

The Americans have weaponised money. You think that they are doing good with this? I certainly don't. A couple of years ago, they locked Iran out of international banking - against the wishes of the Europeans. They didn't care - they just acted unilaterally.
Next up....give us an example of how sanctions have really been a force for good in the world? There isn't one! Have you talked to anyone from a sanctions-hit country? ...because I do all the time. In Venezuela, they have a shortage of all manner of things including medical equipment, drugs, etc. A family member of a friend of mine died in Venezuela last year because of a lack of a very basic drug. That death would not have happened had there not have been sanctions. It's one of countless cases of the real effects of sanctions.

Really, you are getting as stubborn as your mentor. No more from me on this particular aspect.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

I was quite wrong on bitcoin by the way. I heard of it as long ago as 2009 when I think it was a dollar a bitcoin and wished in hindsight that I'd bought a few.

I didn't think that a currency without state backing would ever engender mass trust. A decade on and it's clear that it has a non-zero value.

It is clear to me now that bitcoin does have a use as a means of exchange for wholesale drugs and weapons trading. The currency risk is worth taking as it is a lot simpler than sending suitcases of cash around the world.

Otherwise bitcoin seems to be something that a lot of people can project all sorts of bizarre thoughts on to. I don't really understand this, but it has probably driven some of the value too.

Agree with that. I don't think the limited medium of exchange utility you cite justifies a $2trn crypto market cap. But there are other sources of demand most notably speculative. Again I don't think they are in any way sufficient to sustain the $2trn market cap long term.

If Elon Musk were to change his mind I would say we would get a 50% mark down overnight. In the context of this particular nation state taking a crypto stake, it surely wouldn't dare take that sort of risk whether it is within its mandate or not.

 

[WolfeTone]

I am not talking about Americans or non-Americans I am talking about YOU

Yeh, so you keep saying. Perhaps you read up on what Saylor has to say about bitcoin. In particular his views on gold, US Dollar and violence.
I think you will find that his own thoughts are closer to @tecate views than you are trying to make out.

But its not unlike to shift the goals when your narrative is bereft of any insight outside your own base BOHA bile.

Better you say no more on bitcoin.

 

[tecate]

It is clear to me now that bitcoin does have a use as a means of exchange for wholesale drugs and weapons trading. The currency risk is worth taking as it is a lot simpler than sending suitcases of cash around the world.

Are you aware of any weapons deal financed via bitcoin? The same question re. wholesale drugs trading as I would imagine that it would represent a poor medium in its current form given that there's a high potential for such transactions to be traced from point of origin to final destination.
The US dollar is the medium of choice for illicit transfer of value in the world. Where cash doesn't suffice - the international banking sector is more than happy to facilitate this lucrative activity. Meanwhile, studies have been carried out which have found that only 1% of bitcoin transactions are related to illicit activity.

Otherwise bitcoin seems to be something that a lot of people can project all sorts of bizarre thoughts on to. I don't really understand this, but it has probably driven some of the value too.

By all means, feel free to expand on what to your mind are 'bizarre thoughts' in this instance.

I am not talking about Americans or non-Americans I am talking about YOU and @tecate.
I'll remind you again.

Indeed you were as per post #145.

If Elon Musk were to change his mind I would say we would get a 50% mark down overnight.

In that circumstance, I don't think the news would be welcomed but I also think there would be little material change in the price as a direct consequence.

In the context of this particular nation state taking a crypto stake, it surely wouldn't dare take that sort of risk whether it is within its mandate or not.

We've already identified two sovereign wealth funds who have put bitcoin on their balance sheets (either directly or indirectly). I think there needs to be further development in the bitcoin market - and a further expansion of market cap - and then these funds will incorporate bitcoin into their investment mix.

 

[Firefly]

Comments were made exclusively re. sanctions - in the context of bitcoin. There was no other commentary on anything else that gives your comment above legitimacy - let alone that anyone should find a grain of truth in it.

I suppose we've all become a little better at wearing masks over the past year, but occasionally they do tend to slip..

 

[tecate]

I suppose we've all become a little better at wearing masks over the past year, but occasionally they do tend to slip..

Very much the empty statement Firefly unless you have the wherewith-all to justify it (or at a minimum, explain to us all what it even means. I would suggest that as a basic starting point). The use of bitcoin by sanctions-hit countries came up in discussion here a couple of years ago already. I commented on the inequity of sanctions then - as I have now (in the context of bitcoin, of course). I've been very clear and consistent in what I've stated. Meanwhile, all you have done is cast aspersions in a cryptic manner. I'd suggest you either refrain from such commentary or clarify such comments definitively.
Whilst I'm on, you also stated that I'm a communist in one of your posts yesterday. I invited you to cite one of my 1,200+ posts that provides the backing to that statement. All we've gotten in response is.....***CRICKETS****

 

[WolfeTone]

I suppose we've all become a little better at wearing masks over the past year, but occasionally they do tend to slip..

Is this another of your cryptic identity parades on show again?
You left out your customary trademark .

 

[Firefly]

Are you aware of any weapons deal financed via bitcoin? The same question re. wholesale drugs trading as I would imagine that it would represent a poor medium in its current form given that there's a high potential for such transactions to be traced from point of origin to final destination.
The US dollar is the medium of choice for illicit transfer of value in the world. Where cash doesn't suffice - the international banking sector is more than happy to facilitate this lucrative activity. Meanwhile, studies have been carried out which have found that only 1% of bitcoin transactions are related to illicit activity.

Enter, yet again, Whataboutism, that sacred Russian tactic. Oh dear, has the mask slipped again?

 

[WolfeTone]

@Firefly may I ask you some questions?

Do you think nation states will start to acquire bitcoin? If yes, do you have timeframe, even a guess of when they will?

If no, do you think they are missing an opportunity to acquire a valuable assest?

 

[Firefly]

@Firefly may I ask you some questions?

Do you think nation states will start to acquire bitcoin? If yes, do you have timeframe, even a guess of when they will?

If no, do you think they are missing an opportunity to acquire a valuable assest?

Not a fiddlers, how about you?