Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
I think you are on the wrong pitch. We are playing senior hurling here.
Bitcoin in a hyperbolic bubble
- Thread starter Duke of Marmalade
- Start date
- Status
What about Christine lagarde's comments last week again referencing bitcoin's use in crime and money laundering, she warned retail investors that they could lose all their money and that authorities are going to step in and make it much more difficult to hold it as an asset or at least strip away all the attributes that make it an asset. Of course bitcoin is closely associated with the technology boom and its acceleration in 2020 . Anyone investing in Tesla or the FAANGS is also probably investing in bitcoin as diversification because they regard it as "digital gold".
If there is another tech crash which many people now think is impossible but could happen when the "real" economy springs back to life after the end of corona lockdowns. In that scenario would bitcoin be regarded as an "alternative" asset diversified from tech or another overvalued tech asset?
In March 2020 during the initial corona panic, bitcoin crashed just like Tesla and the other speculative Tech assets it didn't hold its ground. Of course then just like Tesla its had a spectacular performance. But the point is that bitcoin is not really diversified from speculative tech.
If there is another tech crash which many people now think is impossible but could happen when the "real" economy springs back to life after the end of corona lockdowns. In that scenario would bitcoin be regarded as an "alternative" asset diversified from tech or another overvalued tech asset?
In March 2020 during the initial corona panic, bitcoin crashed just like Tesla and the other speculative Tech assets it didn't hold its ground. Of course then just like Tesla its had a spectacular performance. But the point is that bitcoin is not really diversified from speculative tech.
Last edited:
Was thinking my straight bat was feck all use. They were right when they said it was a mixture of hockey and murder.
Here are her comments - LINK. Have a listen again as I think there's a misunderstanding. She clearly refers to a desire for greater regulation. However, there's nothing explicit re. 'making it much more difficult to hold it'. With regard to 'stripping away all attributes that make it an asset', that's simply impossible. No individual or government has that power over bitcoin as such attributes are inherent characteristics of the asset itself.
On her comments re. bitcoin and money laundering, two things:
1. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Lagarde is a convicted criminal. If you carry out a bitcoin transaction, that transaction is signed (cryptographically) by you. Take out your wallet and pull out a €5 note and you will see that your €5 promissory note bears the signature of a criminal.
2. Whilst at a more embryonic stage, bitcoin was utilised by those who frequented the legendary darkweb marketplace, The Silk Road, more recent studies have found that only 1% of bitcoin transactions are illicit. Law enforcement authorities prefer bitcoin to cash as it provides them with so many traceable data points.
Cash has always been the means of exchange of choice of criminals. Meanwhile ....$330,904,834,105
That's the figure that banks have paid over the past 10 years in fines related to money laundering and manipulation. Bear in mind that it's still very much worth their while as they're just paying cents on the dollar for the epic levels of money laundering activity they continue to engage in....ergo the actual amount of money laundered has to be immense relative to the fines paid.
It's rich of Lagarde to try and tar and feather and to do so without presenting any evidence. She disingenuously alludes to it - yet she doesn't present with anything substantive/conclusive. Here's Economist Daniel Lecalle and his take on Lagarde's condemnation of bitcoin -> LINK
Governments will want to tax it - so regulation will be required for that. If the thought is that they will smother it, she alludes to the problem there. It would need every single government on the planet to agree on that. Governments move much slower than technology. Secondly, when do they ever all agree in unison? I think its highly unlikely we will see that. In the meantime, there is a solid case to be made that bitcoin has reached escape velocity already. Bitcoin is niche - but it's moving out of that niche. As of November 2020, over 30 million bitcoin wallet addresses with active balances existed. You then have more people exposed via the likes of Grayscale, Square and Paypal. If your direct action as a politician/public official harms them, that could be a political own goal.
We're also assuming above that regulation could be negative. It can also be positive. Outside of FATF (which seems unworkable) and Steve Mnuchin's antics, US regulation has been positive for crypto more recently. It may be that they're cognisant of the innovation that's emerging from that sector and are choosing to nurture it rather than kill it.
Insofar as there's cross over between the profile of folk who piled in on the likes of Tesla, etc and bitcoin - sure. However, there are other cohorts like gold bugs and libertarians, etc. More recently there are the first movers in the institutional space such as company treasurys (MicroStrategy & Square), pensions (Mass Mutual), Family Offices & RIAs. Earlier this week, the Mayor of Miami expressed an interest in holding bitcoin within the city's treasury fund.
Is there a need to make a distinction between tech crash or general markets crash ...they're probably one and the same thing at this point in any event? If the conventional market crashes, I believe bitcoin is going down with it. However, in those market conditions, traders need to cover loses on leveraged postions, and ordinary investors need to put hands on funds to cover other losses. They don't care where it comes from. For that reason, gold took a dive (-30%) in the aftermath of the 2008 crisis - only to recover later. Have a look at the thread Brendan started in March ('Why is Bitcoin 'Digital Gold' Crashing Right Now') and you'll see that gold took a dive (-13%) in that case also. It responded but only after taking an initial hit. Bitcoin did the same - but suffered a greater correction as its available to be traded 24/7 and it's the much lesser proven asset.
I was concerned all through 2020 that another conventional market correction was coming - but no sign. Anyone credible seems to agree that the markets don't reflect actual economic reality. If bitcoin is to catch up with what happened with the conventional markets, then some commentators believe it needs to reach a figure of $55,000. I'd imagine some fine day, conventional markets have to correct - but who can call/time that? I could never answer the question and still can't and so exhausted with that, I take it back to my current conviction in bitcoin as an asset....ergo, if xxxx hits the fan and I'm caught unaware, I'm going to continue to hold the asset over the longer term.
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
I paid $10 for my hero Nouriel Roubini's fortnightly webinar. These were the topics he covered yesterday.
Wonderful stuff. I liked the bit where he trashed this institutional interest meme. Quoted some institutional guy who predicted a couple of weeks ago a price of $400k but has now put his target for 2021 as a fall to $20k. Chancers the whole lot of them.Roubini Webinar said:
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
Dukey, I know Dr. Doom provides you with confirmation bias p0rn but if you think I'm kicking myself for bringing him to your attention, that's definitely not the case. There is nothing that Roubini has brought up that hasn't been discussed here already - he has nothing new to add. Secondly, you rate him but just listening to him its clear that he has no objectivity whatsoever in assessing the merits or otherwise of decentralised currency. If he owes me commission tell him that I'll accept it in USDT.@tecate I have you to thank of course. Are you sure you don't get some sort of fees as Roubini's agent
Nothing wrong with critiquing the crypto sector re. market manipulation so long as the same standard is applied to the conventional game. Today we have Robinhood and the big money banning outsider trading (ref. Gamestop.AMC, etc). It seems there's nothing wrong with how the game is played until the little guy gets on the upside of it.
And then you have practices like this.
And then you have practices like this.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
I tried to pay with Marmalade Coins but the guy is so neurotic about crypto he wouldn't accept even them. Anyway it hit my digital BoI credit card statement today for €8.43.
That's about 0.000324 satoshis, better you use fiat though, those satoshis will be worth a lot more before long.
The shenanigans exposed in the Game Stop affair mentioned by @tecate are just the tip of a melting iceberg I reckon.
Get out now Duke while you can.
So Elon Musk, the richest guy in the world (give or take ten billion or so), has edited his Twitter page with #bitcoin symbol.
He tweeted the following, "In retrospect it was inevitable".
Whats going on here? What could he be possibly signaling to 40m + followers?
He tweeted the following, "In retrospect it was inevitable".
Whats going on here? What could he be possibly signaling to 40m + followers?
Last edited:
Younginvestor93
Registered User
- Messages
- 130
He means he is going to put bitcoin on balance sheet of Tesla and SpaceX. Other companies will follow suit. Bitcoin will rise to the moon, potentially mars also.
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 356
I wouldn't necessarily take Elon's twitter that seriously. His twitter bio might be "#bitcoin" now, but it was also recently "Former CEO of Dogecoin" for a while. Seriously.
Very true, it is afterall only his Twitter account. All the same, he has it there for a reason.
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 356
Oh yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he bought bitcoin, or has held some for a long time, or never buys any and is just amused by it, and I wouldn't read much into his twitter to determine what the case is.
I'm pretty sure in the past he just randomly tweeted "bitcoin" as a one word tweet, and I can only guess he did it for the amusement of seeing what effect he could have on the market by doing so.
I'm pretty sure in the past he just randomly tweeted "bitcoin" as a one word tweet, and I can only guess he did it for the amusement of seeing what effect he could have on the market by doing so.
Allpartied
Registered User
- Messages
- 487
There is a well known adage that when the shoe shine boy is buying stocks, that the bubble is ready to burst.
Has everything turned around?
Nowadays the shoe shine boy is first in and it might be the case that when " the financial world" starts buying, it's time to bail out.
To my knowledge, bitcoin is the first and only time that wall street has been front run on a new financial asset. It depends on what your thesis is on bitcoin and whether there's something tangible there or not. Mine remains that over the longer term, it has much more to accomplish. That doesn't mean that there won't be volatility in both directions along the way.
Last edited:
- Status