Absolutely not. As you yourself say, there is no real historical reference point as to how long it will take for something like this to unravel. When the price of something is based purely on speculation, it becomes very difficult to even guess, as there are so many vested interests with large sums of money to lose. In my opinion, the crazy speculative volatility itself rules it out as ever being a means of payment that can be widely adopted, or as a real store of value for any sane person. For all its apparent technological advances, there is literally nothing that Bitcoin can do that can't be done with the currency that we use now. I can't see any situation where I would want to use a bitcoin to transact, although I'm not a criminal.If adoption continued for another 3, 5, 10 years (and market cap. went up with that proportionately), does this change anything for you?
Ok, but If I've been told on this board continually that its a ponzi/pyramid, etc. - we've had ponzi's and pyramid's before. What makes this different? Why would it not pan out in the very same way? I've been told by some that it's the 'mother of all bubbles'..but show me the 'bubble' that inflates and deflates and has done so on about 5 occassions already. Would it not have been 'found out' after the first bust?Absolutely not. As you yourself say, there is no real historical reference point as to how long it will take for something like this to unravel.
When the price of something is based purely on speculation, it becomes very difficult to even guess, as there are so many vested interests with large sums of money to lose.
I agree that it takes a bit of getting the head round and it very much is volatile. However, there's a logic to the volatility. If you have a global asset whose supply is fixed starting out from baseline and going through various iterations of adoption - combined with a difficulty in how it is priced (because it's not like any other asset that exists already - albeit probably closest to a commodity ), then to me it's entirely rational to expect it to be volatile. Have a look at the volatility of gold when the gold standard was dropped in the '70's.In my opinion, the crazy speculative volatility itself rules it out as ever being a means of payment that can be widely adopted, or as a real store of value for any sane person.
It's a common mistake around these parts. Bitcoin is a global asset. If you solely consider it in terms of what it can or can't do for you today in Ireland, then you're not going to end up with a complete view of its actual utility. And by the way, that doesn't in anyway mean that anyone in Ireland can't find a use case for it today - or won't find an even greater use case for it tomorrow.For all its apparent technological advances, there is literally nothing that Bitcoin can do that can't be done with the currency that we use now. I can't see any situation where I would want to use a bitcoin to transact,
Another common and incorrect assumption. There's plenty of recent data that shows illicit use as no more than 2% - far less than the conventional system.although I'm not a criminal.
Firstly, that everything is in a bubble is symptomatic that there's something seriously wrong with the conventional system - but nobody wants to address that. Run a search for Carl Icahn's recent comments - where he said that the most recent advances in his wealth have not come about because he's a genius but because the conventional system is both broken and inequitable.What we do have are many situations to point to where the price of a stock or tech has been hyped to the max, pushing prices to ridiculous levels, and the lad that told me the other day that he bought 15k of bitcoin and literally has no idea even what it is, will invariable be the one to lose the most.
I've exited the market on three occasions over the course of what is now just shy of a decade. I'd prefer not to - but if there's wild over-exuberance then its difficult not to. Regardless of what some others may claim here, I don't run with a blind faith approach. When the facts change, my position will change. However, all I've seen over the past 5 years of discussion here is bitcoin growing by every conceivable metric. My thesis on bitcoin is intact. If that changes, I intend to change with it. I've diversified quite a lot over the past 18 months - spreading the risk beyond digital assets. However, I'm still heavily weighted towards digital assets (not just bitcoin) - which is something that I'm happy with and not something that would suit most.At what point will you dump your bitcoins tecate ? or is your faith so profound that you're willing to lose everything ?
Anyone applying that methodology simply doesn't understand how bitcoin mining works. The cost of mining follows the price not the other way round. If the price of bitcoin goes up the incentive to "mine" goes up and so the amount of electricity spent in finding the answer to the SHA puzzle goes up, and all vice versa.The common pricing methodology for Bitcoin is to tie it to the cost of energy to produce,
Anyone applying that methodology simply doesn't understand how bitcoin mining works. The cost of mining follows the price not the other way round. If the price of bitcoin goes up the incentive to "mine" goes up and so the amount of electricity spent in find the answer to the SHA puzzle goes up, and all vice versa.
Within 2 or 3 halvings the release of new bitcoins will be almost irrelevant, and of course in 2140 it will become totally irrelevant. Price is always an equilibrium between supply and demand but in the case of mined supply there is zero sensitivity to price. The supply of mined coins is 6.5 per 10 minutes completely irrespective of the price.
For physical gold it is a bit more complex. Obviously if gold became very cheap to mine that would bring down its price. With gold the price is to a certain extent the equilibrium between the utility demand for it and the cost of new supply from mining which can mine more or less gold unlike btc which always mines the same amount. This is not in any way the case for bitcoin.
Massive news for BTC!!!
Wexford’s first Bitcoin ATM installed at Gorey shop
GOREY has welcomed its first Bitcoin ATM machine at the XL Shop and Asian/Brazilian store on Gorey’s Main Street.www.independent.ie
ATM machines do not dispense cash
No need to apologise...I commend your work ethic. If you have applied the same dedication in your real job, you must have a stellar career@Firefly : It's 1am local time - I do apologise for once again being in breach of your working hours directive.
Yet he says:ATM machines do not dispense cash
Yeah, I'd imagine he's talking about BTC and not the delusion Jon Stewart mentions in the clip above.Yet he says:
"As soon as we can we definitely will buy Bitcoin from the machine as when it’s in flourish, you can get good money from it”.
Presumably he's talking about the price of Bitcoin and not the ATM
Oh good God no! Highly unqualified - no M.Sc. in Finance or business luncheons here.No need to apologise...I commend your work ethic. If you have applied the same dedication in your real job, you must have a stellar career
You’re better than that with your usual links. I watched the full interview. This extract was shamefully cut and paste by the cult to further their credo. The cult’s high priests must obsess at creating this propaganda.@Duke ...I guess I won't be getting an answer to that question then! Oh well!
Otherwise, to your tar and feathering above, over to Jon Stewart & the former Kansas Fed CEO, Thomas Hoenig ->
https://twitter.com/x/status/1493308649254449152
I also watched the complete interview - and your claim isn't valid. The suggestion is that the excerpts have been devised to misrepresent. That's not the case - and what you go on with doesn't demonstrate otherwise.This extract was shamefully cut and paste by the cult to further their credo.
And as you already know, your comment is wayward. There is no CEO for bitcoin. There is no Lagarde or Bailey or Powell. Those are your high priests. Bitcoin monetary policy is transparent and can't be tampered with. This is Trumpism from you (deflecting precisely the criticism that falls at the door of the conventional system).The cult’s high priests must obsess at creating this propaganda.
That's also clear from the excerpts and it doesn't in any way detract from the evident takeaways from the interview. Everyone knows Jon Stewart isn't involved in monetary policy but he may have one or two years experience interviewing people perhaps.In the full interview the interviewer reveals his total naivete.
You're deliberately misconstruing the direction of his query. You did the very same thing a year ago when I asked why can't they just print off whatever we owe the state in taxes this year and accept that as payment? Stewart's line of thought was to question the unbridled printing of money.He asks why don’t the Fed print dollars and buy back the US debt from China and Europe and then tear it up. Indeed that can be done. What Jon misses is that instead of owing the bonds the US would then owe the dollars.
So called “printing” of dollars is the US government borrowing. The owners of the dollars have a faith that they will be repaid.
Unless you can direct me to the person in the US government who's going to write me that $100 cheque, then I have no such faith. I'm not religious like you Duke - I don't have faith.The owners of the dollars have a faith that they will be repaid.
Whether there are folks prepared to pay X for bitcoin in the future relates to adoption. It's got nothing to do with faith. Bitcoin's monetary policy is rules based - and everyone knows the rules - not just the elites. With fiat, you don't know from one minute to the next what interest rate will be set - or the motivation behind those decisions and who it may benefit most.The owners of bitcoin have faith that there will be folk in the future prepared to pay them for their valueless digital entries (with dollars, they hope) just as they have done.
Indeed, why don't they? Maybe that gives a clue to the (near) universal faith in developed democracies in their currency.You're deliberately misconstruing the direction of his query. You did the very same thing a year ago when I asked why can't they just print off whatever we owe the state in taxes this year and accept that as payment?
Sure, why stop at 10%. Take a leaf out of bitcoin and let it drop 40% in 2 months. The reality is that US dollar cash investment (i.e. plus deposit interest) has beaten inflation over the last century.Complete BS Duke. In real terms if the $1000 dollars I've been carrying around in my pocket for the past 12 months is worth 10% less, who's going to write me a cheque for the $100 of buying power that has disappeared?
Ahh! I'm beginning to understand your lack of faith. You want a father figure you can trust to honour your dollars. Strange since you seem to drool at the lack of any central father figure for bitcoin.Unless you can direct me to the person in the US government who's going to write me that $100 cheque, then I have no such faith.
All debt is based on faith. Admittedly no faith is required to believe that a digital entry on a blockchain ledger is a digital entry on a blockchain ledger. One large dollop of Hope is required to hope this is a long term store of value.I'm not religious like you Duke - I don't have faith.
And in that interview we got it from the horses mouth. It's a FAITH - BASED system! The former Kansas Fed President acknowledged that and you yourself acknowledged that around 18 months ago when you said that you'd have to have faith in the ECB and the decisions it took.
The first pre-requisite for an entity to be subject to "monetary policy" is that it is money. Cult high priest John Kelleher concedes that it has not yet reached that status.It's got nothing to do with faith. Bitcoin's monetary policy is rules based - and everyone knows the rules -
It's well you may ask the question. You and I are both left wondering as regards how much (money printing) was too much. You told me you didn't know where the line was.Indeed, why don't they? Maybe that gives a clue to the (near) universal faith in developed democracies in their currency.
Sure, why stop at 10%. Take a leaf out of bitcoin and let it drop 40% in 2 months.
You can go with smoke and mirrors this way and that - it doesn't change the facts - here's a graphical representation of the buying power of the US dollar over time ->The reality is that US dollar cash investment (i.e. plus deposit interest) has beaten inflation over the last century.
So nobody is going to write me that cheque for the missing $100 of buying power it seems. We've all had our pockets picked then. Thanks for confirming.Ahh! I'm beginning to understand your lack of faith. You want a father figure you can trust to honour your dollars. Strange since you seem to drool at the lack of any central father figure for bitcoin.
You mean that fiat monetary policy is faith-based. Bitcoin's is not. It's rules based and it's monetary policy today, next month/year, decade is already known. You couldn't tell me how many dollars or euros have been issued today - let alone, tomorrow, next month, next year, etc.All debt is based on faith.
We weren't talking about bitcoin's progress in establishing itself as a store of value - but this is the only mechanism you have in order to deflect away from what arose from Stewart's interview with the former Fed President....i.e. that by its very design, fiat money is faith based. It's monetary system is faith based. Fiat is the real ponzi and the real cult.One large dollop of Hope is required to hope this is a long term store of value.
I'm a few timezones away Duke and I can smell the desperation coming off that fairytale from here!Actually if you watch the clip again you will note that Jon teased the guy that it was a fake. He responded by saying it was faith based. Jon rolled around laughing as he thought he said it was fake based.
Ah, it doesn't have a monetary policy? Say the following out loud, Duke:The first pre-requisite for an entity to be subject to "monetary policy" is that it is money.
Alexa here @tecateNow ask Alexa again - this time without covering your ears.
Alexa here @tecate
The price of a latte in bitcoin increased by 40% from November to January according to my latest info. I'm a humble gal but my bean counters tell me this is an annual inflation of hundreds of per cent. Not as bad as Zimbabwe fiat.
Of course there's no slight of hand - that's why the metrics used to measure inflation were swapped out going back a few years and why I'm hearing that they're looking at doing something similar once again. That's why in another latin country recently, the smoothie I bought from a national chain in November cost X and in January, it was X+30%. That's the real world - not CPI.@tecate It is the stated aim of the ECB/FED to target inflation of 2% p.a. Over 100 years that is effectively reducing it to zero. Of course that is worse than gold. No sleight of hand here.
If we're honest, traditionally ordinary people in Ireland have not had access (alongside the requisite knowledge) to any other store of value aside from property. Can you post a link to a statement from any of our Ministers of Finance warning the populace not to use euros as a store of value? Maybe Lagarde has told us that? Do you think that most ordinary people even understand inflation properly? And if you're going to start claiming that keeping yer yoyos down the post office beats inflation (as you've tried previously) - I'm sorry but I've no intention of hearing you out a second time on that.But if it is your choice to use $ or € as a store of value, for which it is not intended, in fact together with interest (underpinned by Central Banks) it actually has kept its value.
We've been talking about a minimum 10% of personal wealth being summarily vapourised due to fiat monetary policy and you want to know where the scam is?Where's the scam?
You want to throw out facts once again. Over the course of the past 13 years, bitcoin has appreciated 214% pa against the global reserve currency. Totally open about their intentions? Pull the other one. See above - point to a statement from any central bank of your choosing calling on citizens NOT to hold their savings in sovereign currency. Just ONE example will do. You have a plethora of CBs to choose from.If bitcoin had intrinsic value, like gold, well of course it would accrue value versus fiat just as Central Banks aimed that it would and were totally open about their intentions.
What on earth are you talking about. Your buddy might have written an article about bitcoin - but all his energies are spent on working on a project that has nothing to do with bitcoin. Meanwhile, we had folks on here in early 2018 saying we'd never see $20k again - you were amongst them. I'd worry about your cognition if you think that someone making a price prediction or speculating on its future price as part of an informed and considered article he put together and that YOU brought to this discussion - you're now considering to be a 'scam'.Now when a high priest of the cult (JK) predicts a price of €515k per btc, well the stench of scam is overpowering.
And if it doesn't, then you'll be proven right and I'll be proven wrong. In 2018, you (amongst others) assured us that it was done for and would never see $20k again. Not only has that confidence waned, but confidence in its demise is so weak - that if I give you a multi-decade timeline, you can't tell me when is a reasonable timeframe by which the digital asset will either be validated or invalidated as a store of value. To say that doesn't come across as sure-footed is understating it.If only, she fantasised, it could have intrinsic value.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?