Bitcoin

[cAPSLOCK]

I guess there are three purposes.

The third would be duping the rubes.

And if you can’t figure out who the mark at the table is….

This is also not true.

I am definitely not the rube the table since I've retired early thanks to Bitcoin. Very early.

And I find that framing insulting, because I haven't ripped anybody off. I haven't even traded. I'm living off of my savings, just like you do, except for that my savings are more effective than yours.

You are starting to piss me off because you're not having a conversation with me.

You are accusing me of crime and deceit.

That's enough. We are done.

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

But back to Bitcoin. Assuming it continues to succeed there will only be 21,000,000 of them. So CURRENTLY there is enough bitcoin for each living human to own about 0.0025 of one (21M/8.5B). That's about $250 currently. For each living human. For their ENTIRE LIFE. Can you see how it could be under priced?

But there is a property of Bitcoin that has never really been seen in an asset. It is practically infinitely divisible. Currently it goes to 8 decimal points. Bitcoinners call this unit a "sat" (after Satoshi). So there are 100 million sats in 1BTC. (so each human could earn 250000 SATS over a lifetime on average) Do we need a more granular Bitcoin because it is being used by so many people? Easy... add a couple zeros. You do not change the limit... but you can make a more liquid unit by simply diving it further.

This, in combination with the fact BTC is hard money and finite is the possible coup de grace for FIAT I believe. This takes care of most of the problems being "solved" by liquidity injections. Except for the bailouts for the rich.

The last piece of the puzzle is velocity. And this is an unknown in my opinion. It is only discussed in theory.

In a world based on hard money there is more incentive to not spend. Keyensians tend to take this to the extreme where you have the rich hoarding and the poor eating bugs out of the trash. But I am not sure it will be that way. We will still need to buy food, shelter, clothing, transportation and other needs. And we will still WANT to buy nice things. But we won't have to constantly be buying plastic garbage, and "playing the markets" or "investing in real estate" to try to keep the value we have in something other than paper that can be diluted by another man on a whim.

The fact that Bitcoin is divisible doesn't change its properties; you are still dealing with a limited quantity of money, which means that it will behave as a commodity. That remains true even if whomever is in charge allows more Bitcoin to dribble out over time. So (as you pointed out), there is a natural tendency to not spend. That leads to a deflationary economy. The incentives that currently drive people to produce would be turned upside down.

Also, Bitcoin wouldn't solve the problem of demand leakages. People are going to save some of their income, and some of that savings is going to be in currency. Savings from income removes demand from the consumption-production-income cycle, no matter what we are using for payment.

 

[Threegoofs]

This is also not true.

I am definitely not the rube the table since I've retired early thanks to Bitcoin. Very early.

And I find that framing insulting, because I haven't ripped anybody off. I haven't even traded. I'm living off of my savings, just like you do, except for that my savings are more effective than yours.

You are starting to piss me off because you're not having a conversation with me.

You are accusing me of crime and deceit and I am not going to keep speaking to you anymore unless you change your tone.

I didn’t accuse you of anything. I merely outlined what Bitcoin is good for.

You can certainly my make money- I have too, because I know that really really stupid shit gets bought by lots of rubes and speculators.

Like Beanie babies, but with the ability to use them to buy fentanyl and avoid taxes.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

The fact that Bitcoin is divisible doesn't change its properties; you are still dealing with a limited quantity of money, which means that it will behave as a commodity. That remains true even if whomever is in charge allows more Bitcoin to dribble out over time. So (as you pointed out), there is a natural tendency to not spend. That leads to a deflationary economy. The incentives that currently drive people to produce would be turned upside down.

Also, Bitcoin wouldn't solve the problem of demand leakages. People are going to save some of their income, and some of that savings is going to be in currency. Savings from income removes demand from the consumption-production-income cycle, no matter what we are using for payment.

I don't disagree very strongly with anything you're saying here. And I think it's going to be very interesting to see how Bitcoin evolves in this regard.

The deflationary aspect of it as a store of value is interesting. And that inevitably makes it appealing to anybody who wants to save some portion of their value in it.

But this may be something that stops it from being able to be a viable currency, I just don't think we know for sure yet. It will be interesting to see it play out. And even if it can't be a currency, it will be the best store of value mankind is ever invented/discovered.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

I didn’t accuse you of anything. I merely outlined what Bitcoin is good for.

You can certainly my make money- I have too, because I know that really really stupid shit gets bought by lots of rubes and speculators.

Like Beanie babies, but with the ability to use them to buy fentanyl and avoid taxes.

Your tagline has the word sophisticated in it. There's nothing about you that has anything to do with that word in my opinion. And like I said, we're done.

I have no desire to continue to be insulted by you.

 

[Threegoofs]

Your tagline has the word sophisticated in it. There's nothing about you that has anything to do with that word in my opinion. And like I said, we're done.

I have no desire to continue to be insulted by you.

I understand.

It’s hard to face the truth and when it conflicts with irrational beliefs, it seems like an insult.

But it’s pretty clear to me that crypto is a nice idea that will never work in practice, mostly because tax evasion and running drug deals are in the top three uses.

 

[Grogu]

So wait...

TL;DR

One thing, though- I never once referred to it as a stunt. That was @Jezcoe and I’m sure he stands solidly behind that. So once you decided to act like a condescending assclown to me in your reply, there is no further discussion. You’re obviously way too wound up and invested in that stuff, so there’s no reason for me to waste my time on your posts on this subject.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

TL;DR

One thing, though- I never once referred to it as a stunt. That was @Jezcoe and I’m sure he stands solidly behind that. So once you decided to act like a condescending assclown to me in your reply, there is no further discussion. You’re obviously way too wound up and invested in that stuff, so there’s no reason for me to waste my time on your posts on this subject.

You may not have read my previous correction to that error that I made, but I apologize for it still.

And I have no need to continue our conversation.

(But it's funny... Seems you DID read it far enough to be offended at least)

 

[BabaVoss]

The technology behind crypto currency is very good and will benefit the financial industry.
This is why big banks are so interested.
The uses for crypto currency itself makes thing easier to hide and much less transparent.
This is why trump and other criminals are so interested.

 

[Jezcoe]

The technology behind crypto currency is very good and will benefit the financial industry.
This is why big banks are so interested.
The uses for crypto currency itself makes thing easier to hide and much less transparent.
This is why trump and other criminals are so interested.

The reason that Trump and the oligarchs are so interested in crypto is because the entire thing operates off of the bigger sucker theory.

Control of crytpo is concentrated into very few hands, counter to the myth that it is decentralized.. it is in fact highly centralized.

The problem is that for it to be useful at the valuation that it has achieved, there has to be a buyer willing to pay to acquire it in bulk.

Sovereign Wealth is the last biggest sucker for these people to be able to cash out and convert their digital assets into useful currency. That is why they are all salivating at the idea of Trump creating a Sovereign Crytpo Reserve.

 

[Jezcoe]

Is this an actual argument? Or some song lyrics written by a Bernie Sanders fan?

First of all "Crypto" is a lot of junk (and most likely a small handful of valuable ideas.. Monero for example.). BITCOIN stands apart from all the meme coins and other penny-stock like garbage. I would be glad to explain the difference but not to someone that has not proven to me they could understand the explanation.

Now.. to expand on your over simplified point FOR you...

I DO think Bitcoin has a risk that the banks/etc may be trying to centralize holdings like they did with gold. But Bitcoin has different tradeoffs than gold which make this very dangerous for the "oligarch". The big corporate holders like Blackrock, Fidelity, Strategy (MSTR), and so on are gathering up giant portions of the limited supply. And MUCH of this is being custodied by third parties with way too much in my opinion being held by Coinbase. This makes Coinbase a honeypot, and if someone could figure out how to steal the BTC held there. OR if Coinbase just started being a fractional reserve (which is illegal for those of you who want to go down the "unregulated" argument) it could be quite bad...

But then there is the other side of this.

Blackrock. Larry Fink has said clearly and several times that he believes Bitcoin is a VERY important part of the future in digital assets. Do you really think that company would kill the golden goose? Their Bitcoin ETF is BY FAR the best performing ETF instrument released by the company that basically invented Exchange Traded Fund products.

IBIT (the Blackrock Bitcoin ETF) this THE MOST SUCCESSFUL Exchange Traded Product OF ALL TIME.

https://www.nasdaq.com/newsroom/5-things-you-should-know-about-ibit-most-successful-spot-bitcoin-etp

View attachment 67569423
^^ Nasdaq saying this.

Could Bitcoin somehow fail?
Of course.

Could it stop being a good investment?
Of course.

Will the Bitcoin price fall precipitously again?
I would bet on it. Because Bitcoin is the purest free market asset currently and ever. It trades 24 hours a day 365 days a year. It is decentralized and no country can control it (so far). If masses of people sell it it WILL FALL in value. And it is a market than can be manipulated like any other. And WITHOUT guardrails (surprise! *I* think this is a good thing). So people can set up shorts, manipulate the market and try to make money that way. But with BTC those people can also go broke faster than they can blink. Because there is no central bank to bail them out. There is no way to print Bitcoin to bail out the big losers.

Do you not think the "oligarchs" realize this? Do you not think Blackrock (er... there's your oligarch) realizes this?

And by the way. I am not a fan of the ETFs. I think they are a rugpull waiting to happen.

Self custody is the way.

But it is hard, and fraught with danger.

Honestly... EVERY real opportunity is... at first.

The major stakes in crytpo is held by the already very wealthy. They are the the one's that have been buying it up because it is an unregulated security that is based on little more than burning electricity.

It isn't a decentralized currency. It is a highly centralized asset that the oligarchs who own a lot of it now want to offload so they can convert it into a useful currency.


Answer me this... if crypto is a way for there to be a libertarian utopian dream of decentralized method of trade that doesn't involve the State... why are all of these rich assholes clamoring for Sovereign Nations to establish Crypto reserves?

 

[cAPSLOCK]

The major stakes in crytpo is held by the already very wealthy.

Proof? I am sure wealthy people hold it just like they hold gold. But bitcoin is held by all kinds of people. It is held by ordinary people in their investment accounts via the many ETFs as well as in self custody.

They are the the one's that have been buying it up because it is an unregulated security that is based on little more than burning electricity.

This sentence does not make sense.

First. Bitcoin is NOT a security. It fails the Howey test for several reasons. In the US it is classed a commodity by the CFTC and SEC and property by the IRS.

Also it is NOT unregulated. Regulations are still being created across the industries that deal with it. But companies like Fidelity would not be involved with it as they are were there significant regulatory risk.

Second... The "very wealthy" don't tend to gather up "unregulated securities" as you put it and then try to dump them on governments as you also try to say below. That's all just crazy talk.

It isn't a decentralized currency.

Actually, yes, it is. And provably so. It is not used as such in most nations that have a stable currency, but nations that do not have stable currencies have pockets of people beginning to use it specifically as a currency. Here is just one story about ask area in Kenya where it has been growing in use as a currency for years.

But I agree that we're not seeing it used as a currency primarily in most places. Instead, it is being used as a monetary store of value. And a quite volatile one as people like to point out. But otherwise, it works much like monetary metals, gold and silver, for example.

It is a highly centralized asset that the oligarchs who own a lot of it now want to offload so they can convert it into a useful currency.

*sigh* This makes so little sense, I don't even know what to say about it

Answer me this... if crypto is a way for there to be a libertarian utopian dream of decentralized method of trade that doesn't involve the State... why are all of these rich assholes clamoring for Sovereign Nations to establish Crypto reserves?

Who are these rich assholes clamoring for Sovereign nations to institute reserves that you speak of? Certainly, there are many ordinary people who own shares in the ETFs or hold Bitcoin themselves that would think that a nation having this type of reserve would be beneficial for the nation and for those that hold the asset.

And nations tend to hold all kinds of assets and commodities in strategic reserves. The United States holds oil, salt, cheese, gold, and many other commodities and is adding Bitcoin to that mix. It looks like.

 

[Jezcoe]

Proof?

The top 1% of bitcoin holders own 90%.

Bitcoin mining is effectively done by very few large scale firms that are heavily capitalized.

Sure… an average person can hold bitcoin… but an average person can also own Coca -Cola stock, but it pales in comparison to the institutional investors and large well capitalized hedge funds.

Bitcoin is NOT a security

It’s not a currency and it functions as a security.

People don’t buy it to spend it… they buy it as a speculative investment

Actually, yes, it is.

it isn’t. The top 1% holds holds 90% of the bitcoin and mining is effectively done by a handful of companies.

It isn’t decentralized… it isn’t effectively a currency.

It is a security that is majority owned by already very wealthy people.

sigh* This makes so little sense, I don't even know what to say about it

What doesn’t make sense. For crypto to be useful it has to be converted into a currency that people will accept. There are a couple of ways of doing this… one can borrow against the perceived value of it or sell it. The large holders selling will tank it’s value as the sell it… not spend it mind you… sell it… unless there is a large whale that buys a ton of it all at once.

That large whale are governments. The buyer of last resort

Who are these rich assholes clamoring for Sovereign nations to institute reserves that you speak of?

Mark Andreesen for one.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

The top 1% of bitcoin holders own 90%.

Wrong.

No, Bitcoin Ownership is not Highly Concentrated – But Whales are Accumulating

We analyze the distribution of Bitcoin across network participants, and show that BTC ownership disperses over time and is much less concentrated than often reported. Meanwhile, BTC supply held by whales has recently increased, suggesting institutional investors are entering.

insights.glassnode.com

It’s not a currency and it functions as a security.

Also wrong. You are like talking to a brick.
You don't get to define what a security is based on how you feel or just repeating the same lie over and over. This is determined by the CFTC.

Here is exactly how the government body in the US that IS responsible for defining what an asset is defines bitcoin.

 

[Jezcoe]

Wrong

That was 2021. Institutional investment into Bitcoin and other crypto has only been concentrated more… not Less.

Also wrong. You are like talking to a brick.
You don't done what a security is based on his you from or just repeating the same lie over and over.

Here is exactly how the government body in the US that IS responsible for defining what an asset is defines bitcoin.

For all intents and purposes it is treated as a security.

It is part of ETF’s… it is traded on what the future value of it may be one day.

The only thing that determines it’s value is the amount of electricity people are willing to burn for it.

What it isn’t… is a currency.

It is bought, sold and traded.

No one seriously spends it.

 

[cAPSLOCK]

That was 2021. Institutional investment into Bitcoin and other crypto has only been concentrated more… not Less.

For all intents and purposes it is treated as a security.

It is part of ETF’s… it is traded on what the future value of it may be one day.

The only thing that determines it’s value is the amount of electricity people are willing to burn for it.

What it isn’t… is a currency.

It is bought, sold and traded.

No one seriously spends it.

By your logic gold is also a security.

Just keep repeating your lies over and over. Im not going in circles with you anymore. HFSP.

 

[Jezcoe]

By your logic gold is also a security.

Just keep repeating your lies over and over. Im not going in circles with you anymore. HFSP.

Gold actually physically exists and is useful.

 

[Threegoofs]

Gold actually physically exists and is useful.

Bitcoin is useful too.

For criminal activity and tax avoidance.

 

[aociswundumho]

For criminal activity and tax avoidance.

You want a world where the government can monitor and possibly tax every single transaction you make, correct?

 

[Threegoofs]

You want a world where the government can monitor and possibly tax every single transaction you make, correct?

No, but I’d rather not have a way to transfer tens of thousands illicitly to avoid the law.

Guess that’s crazy, huh?

 

[aociswundumho]

No, but I’d rather not have a way to transfer tens of thousands illicitly to avoid the law.

How could you do that with the government monitoring every transaction?

 

[cAPSLOCK]

 

[cAPSLOCK]

No, but I’d rather not have a way to transfer tens of thousands illicitly to avoid the law.

Guess that’s crazy, huh?

There's absolutely nothing illicit about transferring value with Bitcoin.

Criminals drive cars too, and they probably even ride the subway. Would you like to get rid of cars and subways as well?

 

[Threegoofs]

There's absolutely nothing illicit about transferring value with Bitcoin.

Criminals drive cars too, and they probably even ride the subway. Would you like to get rid of cars and subways as well?

If the subway and cars were specific vehicles that offered little other utility than hiding criminal activity, then yes.

 

[Bucky]

If people referred to crypto as unregulated securities then I feel that they are being truthful.

When they say it is a currency… that is when I balk at it.

The #1 currency used by criminals is the us dollar.