Well, this is an interesting line of thought. Lets take that forward.You may not believe this but I actually am conscious of avoiding car accidents by not travelling by car as much as many people do. It's one of the most likely ways you'll be seriously injured or killed that you can actively avoid.
I take the analogy. As you have already pointed out the need to use banks for custody is more acute where the only direct access to the monetary base is physical notes and coin than where it is encrypted digital. Yet it has also been pointed out that this argument does not apply to the big girls.You may not believe this but I actually am conscious of avoiding car accidents by not travelling by car as much as many people do. It's one of the most likely ways you'll be seriously injured or killed that you can actively avoid.
Apparently its not as you said there was only a 50% chance of it hitting $20,000 ever again and 25% chance of it ever hitting $30K again. Also, you said over about fifty posts in 2018/9 that it would never hit its previous ATH price of $20K. The ATH price then like the one last year was produced in short-lived short-term hype cycle runs, in the first one over a number of days and in the second over a number of weeks...but no matter, use them Duke. Bitcoin will provide you with a new ATH figure to aim at in the future.It is a wonder bitcoin is still more than 50% below its ATH.
This is a fiction. I'm not "excited" or putting champagne on ice or any such other nonsense. The same way as I'm not in a "cult" and I don't think that fractional reserve banking is "the devil". And I understand - I can keep pointing out these things to you and you'll choose to ignore them because you want to construct a certain counter-party to this discussion - that has never appeared here. But you do you Duke.My dear @tecate I see you are really excited at the prospect of the second coming (of the GFC). I shouldn't really spoil your fun but what is happening now is light years different from the GFC and completely less of a threat to the established order, in fact no threat - sorry to disappoint you.
Apologies again for making you put the champagne back on ice - maybe next time.
I mean you raise a consideration I simply haven't given a moments thought to. You seem to think that what's going on right now is only an issue if its as big a crapfest as the GFC? I mean, firstly I think we should wait for the whole thing to play out before you reach for the measuring tape.Both situations are driven by issues with the asset side of the bank balance sheet. Under the GFC it was sub-prime mortgages and silly lending to developers. These were genuine asset failures, and the amazing thing is the system survived, no more amazing than in Ireland where the bank asset failures were astronomical.
This time round we are talking about government bonds - not sub-prime mortgages.
Yes, mark to market reduces the "value" of Government bonds when interest rates rise but what is being missed here is that the market value of the liabilities i.e. deposits is kept at their face value because they are callable at notice. But the interest paid on deposits is very small and a mark to model at today's high interest rates and allowing for average duration of deposits would seriously reduce their value, more than compensating for the loss of (market) value on the assets.
The liquidity problem is never an issue for very long in the fiat world - they just turn the taps back on. So we're in agreement - there's no big problem here (while we keep kicking that can down the road). Here's Agustin giving an indication of how much liquidity is available - that should be enough, right?There is of course a liquidity issue and a possibility of a bank run by the uninsured big girls.
I have full faith in your comment and in their ability to go and shake some more green off the magic money tree. :-DBut this is precisely the sort of situation that Central Banks can handle no problem.
No chance of those big girls following Saylor into bitcoin.
Would you be confident enough to take a stab at the following:
BTC will never see
A. $20k ever again.
B. $30k ever again.
C. $50k ever again.
A. 50% [Achieved]
B. 75% [Achieved]
C. 95%
Israel Seizes Binance Accounts Allegedly Linked to ISIS, Hamas
An Israeli anti-terror finance squad halted suspicious Binance accounts the government says are linked to Islamic State and Hamas, two notorious extremist groups with a history of violence and terrorism, forcing Binance to once again defend its compliance record.
The agency seized some 190 accounts on Binance over the past 18 months, Reuters reported on May 5, citing documents from Israel’s counter-terror authorities. Two of those accounts were tied to Islamic State and others were linked to the infamous Hamas group.
That seems a fair assessment that Crypto is MOST useful for the wrong sort of people, whereas banks are useful for the wrong type of people, but not MOST useful for them.More evidence that banks are useful for the wrong kind of people....
Thank you. A good illustration of how banks are useful for all types of people, but not MOST useful for the wrong type of people.
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?