BitCoin

ExremelyCautiousSocialist

John_G_Jones wrote: »

That’s not a discount, and no-one in finance uses that TLA to describe historic highs. We say historic highs.

Why do you think that the historic high means anything, and what do you think it being cheaper now means? Tulips are at a tiny fraction of historic high levels now, as are shares in the South Sea company, and Zimbabwe dollars come to that. By your reckoning all must be a screaming buy now?

What about banking stocks? I was given a very large amount of Citi stocks when they were at $480 and they are now at $65, are you suggesting that I should be buying more?

This thread is about bitcoin, everyone in bitcoin uses the term ATHs.


The point about it being 85% down was in conjunction with the other stuff mentioned, like large emotional reactions and negatives in the media. Tulips and south sea not mentioned daily on forums as a potential place to put your money, not relevant. If you did mention tulips and south sea you aren't going to get about 10 people get their knickers in a twist over it within 2 hours = Bullish sign in market psychology. Same as the large emotional responce you get in housing over the years.



If you are going to move the goal posts and context each time its pointless trolling.

ExremelyCautiousSocialist

eskbanker wrote: »

ruperts was postulating crypto becoming more mainstream, not considering it a contender to catalyse the end of the world as we know it! Don't you think it discredits any sensible discussion about crypto if potentially wider use is wildly extrapolated into governments losing power and countries becoming obsolete?

ruperts post said take over as preferred currency that is different from becoming more mainstream.


You could have speculated what you think would happen if we all use crypto worldwide as #1 choice. Very easy to point the finger at what my imagination comes up and say it sucks without offering your own.

Malthusian

ExremelyCautiousSocialist wrote: »

The point about it being 85% down was in conjunction with the other stuff mentioned, like large emotional reactions and negatives in the media. Tulips and south sea not mentioned daily on forums as a potential place to put your money, not relevant.

Bitcoins are only mentioned daily on forums full of bagholders. They are already stacked up on Bitcoins and are hoping to offload them to a bigger sucker, not buy more.

So that doesn't help them. The context in which people are talking about Bitcoins is "When do you guys think Bitcoin will go up to $20,000 again so I can cash out at a profit?" not "Man, I'd sure like to pay $20,000+ for a Bitcoin."

As for the old story about Bitcoin becoming mainstream / preferred currency / whatever, no-one has yet managed to explain away the contradiction between the idea that Bitcoin will rocket in value by becoming a mainstream currency, and the fact that Bitcoin cannot become a mainstream currency if it keeps rocketing in value.

Deflation (i.e. a currency rocketing in value) is fatal for any economy. No economy can therefore exist long-term if it uses a currency that rockets in value (= is subject to severe deflation). As a currency cannot exist without an economy is like blood without a body, a currency that keeps rocketing in value is a long-term impossibility.

eskbanker

ExremelyCautiousSocialist wrote: »

ruperts post said take over as preferred currency that is different from becoming more mainstream.

You're omitting one tiny but crucial letter, ruperts actually said "becomes a mainstream preferred currency", not the preferred currency [universally].

ExremelyCautiousSocialist wrote: »

You could have speculated what you think would happen if we all use crypto worldwide as #1 choice. Very easy to point the finger at what my imagination comes up and say it sucks without offering your own.

OK then, I think they'll need to build fourth, fifth and sixth runways at Heathrow to accommodate all the porcine take-offs and landings, and sales of umbrellas will mushroom....

ExremelyCautiousSocialist

Malthusian wrote: »

Bitcoins are only mentioned daily on forums full of bagholders. They are already stacked up on Bitcoins and are hoping to offload them to a bigger sucker, not buy more.

So that doesn't help them. The context in which people are talking about Bitcoins is "When do you guys think Bitcoin will go up to $20,000 again so I can cash out at a profit?" not "Man, I'd sure like to pay $20,000+ for a Bitcoin."

There probably is a decent % of bagholders annoying a ton of guys on forums but that doesn't tell full story of large emotional freak out to me. If you mention bitcoin in anyway you will often find a large freak out by a certain %. Apparently Bitcoin is fundamentally screwed + going to die so nothing to worry about but im going to freak out anyway. Then you watch what the media is saying.



I reckon its worth a shot with a small % of funds at this level maybe slowly buying through 2019, thats my plan. Do i want price to go up, yeah. Do i also want more adoption, yeah. Do i think the technology can help society, yeah.

ExremelyCautiousSocialist

eskbanker wrote: »

You're omitting one tiny but crucial letter, ruperts actually said "becomes a mainstream preferred currency", not the preferred currency [universally].

Not that much in it. He also said 'take over'.

eskbanker wrote: »

OK then, I think they'll need to build fourth, fifth and sixth runways at Heathrow to accommodate all the porcine take-offs and landings, and sales of umbrellas will mushroom....

Nice.

danm

Question to those who have argued you cannot ‘invest’ in bitcoin - presumably the same is therefore true of commodities like gold?


There is no reason why a metal dug from the ground with a specific chemical make up should be worth so much money......it doesn’t generate wealth or make profits,

ExremelyCautiousSocialist

Malthusian wrote: »

As for the old story about Bitcoin becoming mainstream / preferred currency / whatever, no-one has yet managed to explain away the contradiction between the idea that Bitcoin will rocket in value by becoming a mainstream currency, and the fact that Bitcoin cannot become a mainstream currency if it keeps rocketing in value.

Deflation (i.e. a currency rocketing in value) is fatal for any economy. No economy can therefore exist long-term if it uses a currency that rockets in value (= is subject to severe deflation). As a currency cannot exist without an economy is like blood without a body, a currency that keeps rocketing in value is a long-term impossibility.

Assuming it became a preferred currency volatility should decrease based on huge overall market cap. Volatility is larger in percentage terms the smaller the market cap. Its a bit of a chicken egg problem.

masonic

ExremelyCautiousSocialist wrote: »

This thread is about bitcoin, everyone in bitcoin uses the term ATHs.

I agree. All Time High is the appropriate term to use for the highest something has ever, and will ever, reach.

ExremelyCautiousSocialist

masonic wrote: »

I agree. All Time High is the appropriate term to use for the highest something has ever, and will ever, reach.

Panties all in a twist.