FYI you still have 38 minutes if you want to take back this post
The Bitcoin (BTC) thread
- Thread starter pants
- Start date
First, you are off topic with your gold pumpening in this thread...
but, sure if you are trying to make a bitcoin and gold comparison, and you are suggesting that gold is better then you might be somewhat on topic, even though a bit of a tangent because you are not even seeming to show that you understand bitcoin in your attempt to present such matter.
Ultimately, gold is likely to be considered similar to a shitcoin or fiat in terms of its investment thesis in comparison to bitcoin. Sure, there may be some guys who have some gold in their portfolios, but is likely largely unnecessary because bitcoin serves a lot of the same functions - and even better than gold in a variety of ways including but not limited to: portability, verifiability, divisibility, scarcity, lack of a need of a third party or practicality.
Sure gold had some increase in value in the past couple of years to help inspire more confidence in it, including its sub March 2020 increase in value... that has retraced quite a bit since August.. and gold is a mature asset, while bitcoin is in an exponential s-curve adoption phase based on metcalfe principles and networking effects.. that does not necessarily make bitcoin better than gold, but causes a short term (maybe even 50 or more years) in which bitcoin will quite likely surpass gold's market cap value by 100x or more.. and therefore causing even greater incentives for guys to be buying bitcoin now.. not many of us are going to give too many shits what happens beyond 50-80 years, anyhow (of course, younger guys have a longer time horizon in terms of their own investment considerations of what might happen further out).
So you can overallocate all that you like to gold, on a personal level, and overall, it has not been doing very well respective to bitcoin in the past 8 years or so .. and sure it is likely to perform decently compared to the dollar in the coming years, but NOT even that investment thesis for gold is guaranteed...
Ok... fair enough that attempting to analyze what might happen in 20 years is a fair investment timeline to consider.. for guys in their 20s, 30s and 40s... maybe even some guys in the 50s and 60s will still care at that time.. perhaps?
You do not have to wait for 2040 in order to profit from investing in Bitcoin. To date, guys who have been investing in bitcoin have done quite well for themselves to date... whether we are talking 7 years, 4 years, 2 years or some other timeline variation of investing in bitcoin and continuing to buy. Of course, the longer the time horizon, the better that BTC has paid off for guys..
You can look at DCAing historically and tweak the timeline for various DCA scenarios. The seven year DCA scenario shows BTC up more than 22x while gold and stocks are only up 39% and 44% respectively in that same time period. Sure play around with other scenarios, but BTC has been outperforming those asset classes and there is no real evidence to demonstrate that BTC is in a worse investment thesis scenario currently as compared with 2013.. furthermore, there is decent evidence to show that BTC's investment thesis is likely stronger today than it was 7 years ago.. so who is going to know exactly what might happen in the coming years.. You surely don't know, Mountaineer, when you are not even seeming to be attempting to grapple with actual bitcoin rather than just spouting out predictions that don't have any seeming basis beyond your opinion.
I will also concede that the past does not guarantee the future, but BTC has some pretty decent price prediction models that remain quite bullish for bitcoin in terms of its ongoing investment thesis... maybe you, Mountaineer, might want to look into the three currently persuasive BTC price prediction models which are: 1) stock to flow, 2) 4-year fractal and 3) exponential s-curve adoption based on metcalfe principles and networking effects. Once you attempt to understand these models and their underlying principles then you might be in a better place to contribute to the thread topic.
By the way, we get a little BTC price movement.. sure more than doubling of BTC price in the past few months, then we get guys coming to the thread that seem to be concerned about investing in BTC.. .and we have seen those kinds of patterns in the past, too.. and BTC has continued to beat the pants off any other investments.. go figure.. if you had failed and refused to invest in BTC versus just taking a modest position of 1% to 10% into bitcoin and having some kind of prudent and reasonable BTC accumulation and/or maintenance strategy.. who would be better off? The BTC accumulators or the BTC naysayers?
FYI you still have 38 minutes if you want to take back this post
hahahahaa
such Mountaineer post is not too likely to age well..
Dude, in two months time the world may suffer from a crippling power loss (check WEF). BTC will be worthless then. Looking at the direction the world is headed I don't think we'd be around in 20 years.
That is quite pessimistic, Mountaineer.
I surely would prefer to live and to plan for the future rather than taking extreme measures that pretty much give up upon life...
But, hey, your results may vary, and guys are surely free to take their own approach to these kinds of matters, including planning for doom and gloom rather than attempting to make their own situation better no matter which direction things might go.
Personally, I am not ready to give up on attempting to enjoy my life in whatever way it goes, yet. Of course, in any situation there can be a mixture of easy times and hard times, and there can be some futility to some actions, too.
But, there also seems to be some ability for guys to attempt to improve their own situation by planning for the future through prudent and reasonable present actions, whether you are only able to stack away $5 per week or if you are a bit more of a baller and you can stack away $1,000 per week... There is variance, but just because you might currently be a $5 per week situation does not mean that you will not potentially be able to put yourself in a better position with ongoing persistence.
$5 per week of stacking sats seven years ago would still put you at $42k-ish in accumulated value today.. which is not a bad little financial cushion if you end up believing that you might want to tap into it.. or just keep letting it build and ride and surely starting at $5 might allow you to increase in the future, and maybe at some point you end up getting to $20 or $50 per week... Ongoing building can surely pay off, even in seemingly dire times.. and that remains my perspective, even in these times.
Last edited:
A simple thing :
BTC has to be "mined" . A person wanting to use BTC needs to get interested or to be taught by someone how it works. Admit it , you have to be a bit of geek to understand the ins and out of BTC.
Cash is way more simple. Everyone in the world understands what cash is.
If something is not easy to understand , it is at best something for investment or for speculation , but it can never become the norm.
I am reluctant to put a lot on it , because simply I will be taxed if i ever profit from it and make big profit.
I am sure there are sophisticated ways to hide , but the platform can simply know that xxxxxxx54498498 (your key) sent that many bitcoins in that period.
I can only struggle to put back all this amount on my bank account without being questioned/taxed.
Which actually makes me believe that having cash is much better.
Last edited:
I am not going to admit it.
There are various levels of understanding of Bitcoin, just like with any other thing that we might use in our daily lives.
Some 16 year old chick might have no damned clue about how a car works, but she still is able to drive it. Sure guys might be more geeky, but there are some guys who have no clue about how cars work on a technical level.
You can start out with third party custodians, and maybe that is even preferable to getting exposure quickly, and maybe after getting a bit of a stake in BTC, whether that is $1,000 or $10k or $20k, that level of exposure might inspire learning more about various other ways to hold BTC and to transact in it. I doubt that I need to argue these points because you have hardly even made any kind of convincing case on the surface, Louis.
By the way, there are a lot of people who have no fucking clue how cash works either, but sure, if they work for 10 hours and they earn $20 hour, then the get $200 etc etc.. but that does not mean that they understand the whole cash system or what might make one form of cash more valuable than other forms of cash. Actually, probably parts of the world that earn in other forums of cash get better intuitive ideas about variations of cash values than do those who earn dollars, and they might see their local cash devaluating against the dollar and then a preference for dollars and maybe even a preference to spend their local currencies more quickly than dollars (to hang onto their dollars), but then they get exposure to bitcoin and then they see that Bitcoin holds its value even better than the dollar so they might not even be very educated but they get ideas about which forms of currency to hold (the one more likely to retain value) and which one to spend first (the one more likely to lose value), and these are Gresham's law principles that some people learn intuitively once they are exposed to varying kinds of currencies, including bitcoin.
Hey Louis,
I see that you edited your post after I had posted mine.. or at least I did not see the edits until after I had posted, so here is my supplemental response to your edits.
Sure, in principle that sounds correct, but first, bitcoin is not merely speculation, even though speculation has historically been a decently sized part of bitcoin, but it is not the ONLY thing going on in bitcoin. so your facts about bitcoin seem to be a wee bit off, Louis... which cause you to come to the wrong conclusions, even though your logic might be acceptable in this instance.
That sounds like a pretty lame reason. Yes, you are correct that in some jurisdictions, your being taxed would trigger upon cashing out.
So let's say that you had $1,000 in 2015, and you were considering investing in Bitcoin or keeping the value in dollars and earning 6% (presuming you could get 6% somewhere).. Bitcoin's prices were around $250 at that time (which would be 4 bitcoins), so you could save your value in dollars and earn 6% per year which would end up resulting in nearly $1,400 after 6 years, or you could place it in bitcoin, and 6 years later your 4 bitcoins would be worth close to $80k (assuming that BTC reaches $20k at some point).
What a bad problem to have. Your gains on the bitcoin would be $79k, so you have to pay taxes on those gains. Seems like you have not thought this through very well in terms of your still being ahead, even though you ended up paying taxes on your profits. But hey, whatever, you can come to whatever choice that you want based on your measurements of actual/potential costs and benefits.
You do not necessarily need to hide.. if you are talking about paying taxes.
Sure there are other reasons to want privacy, and there may also be other ways of transacting privately, too.. but I doubt that any of those should inspire guys to fail and refuse to invest in bitcoin and to try to learn about whether bitcoin might provide guys more options or NOT... maybe guys will conclude differently on these points, but would be a shame if guys just write off bitcoin based to some lame and inadequate considerations of the matter.
I suppose.. if that is what you choose, then so be it. You choose $400 profits versus $79k profits because you feel that you cannot deal with being questioned or taxed on your profits? Actually you don't even need to be questioned.. just pay the taxes.. and no one will question you, right?
Hey, I am not saying that there are NOT difficulties in this world, and even having a lot of money is not necessarily easy, and surely hiring consultants and accountants could be complicated too, but sometimes it is necessary to consult or even have someone to make sure that the papers are correct.. so guys may well vary, also, to the extent that they do their own papers or they hire the assistance of others in regards to some of these matters.
I see that you edited your post after I had posted mine.. or at least I did not see the edits until after I had posted, so here is my supplemental response to your edits.
Sure, in principle that sounds correct, but first, bitcoin is not merely speculation, even though speculation has historically been a decently sized part of bitcoin, but it is not the ONLY thing going on in bitcoin. so your facts about bitcoin seem to be a wee bit off, Louis... which cause you to come to the wrong conclusions, even though your logic might be acceptable in this instance.
That sounds like a pretty lame reason. Yes, you are correct that in some jurisdictions, your being taxed would trigger upon cashing out.
So let's say that you had $1,000 in 2015, and you were considering investing in Bitcoin or keeping the value in dollars and earning 6% (presuming you could get 6% somewhere).. Bitcoin's prices were around $250 at that time (which would be 4 bitcoins), so you could save your value in dollars and earn 6% per year which would end up resulting in nearly $1,400 after 6 years, or you could place it in bitcoin, and 6 years later your 4 bitcoins would be worth close to $80k (assuming that BTC reaches $20k at some point).
What a bad problem to have. Your gains on the bitcoin would be $79k, so you have to pay taxes on those gains. Seems like you have not thought this through very well in terms of your still being ahead, even though you ended up paying taxes on your profits. But hey, whatever, you can come to whatever choice that you want based on your measurements of actual/potential costs and benefits.
You do not necessarily need to hide.. if you are talking about paying taxes.
Sure there are other reasons to want privacy, and there may also be other ways of transacting privately, too.. but I doubt that any of those should inspire guys to fail and refuse to invest in bitcoin and to try to learn about whether bitcoin might provide guys more options or NOT... maybe guys will conclude differently on these points, but would be a shame if guys just write off bitcoin based to some lame and inadequate considerations of the matter.
I suppose.. if that is what you choose, then so be it. You choose $400 profits versus $79k profits because you feel that you cannot deal with being questioned or taxed on your profits? Actually you don't even need to be questioned.. just pay the taxes.. and no one will question you, right?
Hey, I am not saying that there are NOT difficulties in this world, and even having a lot of money is not necessarily easy, and surely hiring consultants and accountants could be complicated too, but sometimes it is necessary to consult or even have someone to make sure that the papers are correct.. so guys may well vary, also, to the extent that they do their own papers or they hire the assistance of others in regards to some of these matters.
I don't see how... even if there was something like that, it's not going to take out the entire blockchain, right?
C'mon man... we all know whatever happens, cash ain't gonna win.
Yep.. Mountaineer seems to be somewhat out of touch with reality. Seems to me, but what do I know?
Many of us who have been studying investment techniques and strategies for a while (whether bitcoin or other assets) appreciate that guys should not be investing or not investing in assets based on outlandish scenarios but instead more realistic scenarios.
So, of course, each of us can add up all of the risks and all of the potential benefits and then come to an allocation decision - whether that is 1% to 10% or some other allocation, and of course, if guys end up putting high weights to outlandish scenarios, then they might end up investing less and even zero.. but still does not seem to justify anywhere close to zero, even though some guys might come to that kind of conclusion (which would likely be their loss and their choice to gamble with their investment portfolio rather than attempting to be reasonable and prudent in their approach).
What good is electronic money if you can't access it 'cos the power is out? What is going down and up in price then? I'm just saying that BTC has no intrinsic value. If the power grid is down a bottle of vodka is worth more than 100 bitcoin. During the Balkan war you could buy a gun for such a bottle.
You Don’t Have To Worry About Bitcoin’s Reliance On Utilities
The Bitcoin network might consume electricity and connect to the internet, but it is more robust than any single utility on earth.
bitcoinmagazine.com
This recent article seems relevant to the thread right now.
Quoting the end of the article:
"Bitcoin might get destroyed in a cataclysmic event that would end the world as we know it. But that sounds like an argument for Bitcoin, not against it. We can sit here and think up wondrous scenarios that would destroy any system or institution regardless of how fantastic and unlikely they may be. If that’s what it takes to defeat Bitcoin, then I’ll take it every single time.
What’s more robust than a form of money that will survive unless the Earth itself is destroyed along with it?"
In that case fiat other than cash (and that only for probably a week or two at most) is worthless also. Supposedly a nationwide power grid shutdown in the US would be expected to kill 90% of the population within a year.
That was the Dan Tapeiro interview. It is bizarre the hatred of gold among many of the hardcore bitcoiners since both are in favor of sound money principles - gold is insurance to preserve wealth during currency debasement, bitcoin is an asymmetric bet on a new financial system.
Gold has been ignored by mainstream investors, partially due to anti-gold propaganda from Keynesians, also because it's not needed in a disinflationary environment. That will change as the long term debt cycle comes due.
In terms of the 'wall' of money for BTC - market for BTC is 400 billion now, compared to 400 trillion in global assets. For now, all we need is 1% of global assets to flow into bitcoin for it to 10x, that can come from forward looking less conventional hedge funds, some rogue states, and retail interest among the geeks.
We do not need a wall of money to affect BTC price for this run. Once BTC is in the Trillions, then an order of magnitude more money will be necessary to further increase the market cap.
BTC has a 12 year history so it's a lot more risky than gold but more upside. Gold won't lose 90% but BTC very well could. BTC could 10x easily in a year or two but gold can't do that absent massive inflation, social chaos, and dollar breakdown.
Are you also anti-cash? Or pro central planning? Just curious.
I wouldn't be surprised about a dip. They happen a few times, and have recently, before it climbs to higher and higher levels. By the way, ALL investments do that. Ponzi schemes do not do that.
Ever heard of Michael Saylor? Stan Druckenmiller? Square, Inc.? Subsidiaries of Chase have it
There will be a crypto index for the NYSE released in 2021 ...
"Beginning to think"?
I hope more people think like you while I
I wouldn't be surprised about a dip. They happen a few times, and have recently, before it climbs to higher and higher levels. By the way, ALL investments do that. Ponzi schemes do not do that.
Ever heard of Michael Saylor? Stan Druckenmiller? Square, Inc.? Subsidiaries of Chase have it
There will be a crypto index for the NYSE released in 2021 ...
"Beginning to think"?
I hope more people think like you while I
Long term, sure...
Just listening to an interview on the Kaiser report with some institutional money guy though, and he said something interesting...
"I'm a fiduciary. [Clients trust me with their money]. So if I'm going to invest in something, I have to understand it. I don't understand bitcoin... I don't understand how it can have a value of close to $20K..."
Just think how many institutional guys think that way. And it's not their money. Plus they have senior guys above them who understand it even less, carry the buck, and who would have to approve the investment.
A few big names coming out in support isn't going to change that too quickly.
It's one thing to risk your own money on something you understand, it's totally another to risk someone else's money on something you don't, AND put your nuts on the line to persuade your old money boss it's a good idea.
I saw that Keiser Report interview, too. It was with Michael Pento.
No cure for a gold craze (E1627)
On this episode of Keiser Report, Max and Stacy look at heavy gold-buying in Turkey causing fiat currency woes
The interview with Pento is the second half of the show... which is the usual Keiser report format. He tends to spend the first half (about 15 minutes) ranting about various topics with Stacy and the second half (15 minutes) interviewing a guest.
Pento has been on Keiser report many times, and I actually felt that Max was being a bit unfair to Pento to be putting him on the spot like that.. and even Max's framing the question in terms of Pento's necessity to exercise due diligence by learning more about bitcoin.
I agree with you, barrythecyborg, that there continue to be quite a few traditional money guys who are continuing to have trouble wrapping their heads around bitcoin - and since about 2014, I have been having trouble wrapping my head around why some of these traditional institutional investor guys are having so many difficulties. I do understand that historically, they have had fewer investment vehicles in order to get anything into BTC, but even GBTC has been there for them since about 2014 - though GBTC has always had a kind of quasi-monopoly causing a premium that could have been turning off some traditional institutional investors.
I do understand that traditional institutional investors do need vehicles in and out of bitcoin and they also need some kinds of size of the whole addressable market and some signs that other traditional investors are entering the game.. which does seem to be happening quite a bit more in recent months, relatively speaking.. especially with some of the recent hoopla around the Saylor entrance into bitcoin and his fairly articulate investment thesis that he has been spreading around various mediums... so the material and the rationale is becoming available.
I guess our definition of "crazy risks" is a bit different. I'd bet most agree that raising your hand to the IRS saying "yes, I own crypto!" is a crazy risk. Becuase that's exactly what happens when you go through KYC.