BITCOIN

User232002

bugbyte_2 said:

You: You and Scottie are trying to pump bitcoin on this forum!!!!!
 
Eh? I don't think I have accused you of pumping bitcoin. This is however a good example where you write one thing, in this case calling people idiots for not doing whatever you do and end up somewhere completely else.

Haha. You're correct. It was Hexane who made the original statement. However, you still quoted my reply and waded in, so heres the correction:

Hexane: You and Scottie are trying to pump bitcoin on this forum!!!!!
Me: If we were trying to pump BTC, we'd be telling people to buy BTC instead of NS&I in a variety of other threads. 
You: Now you are telling people not to buy NS&I!!!!

The original point had nothing to do with NS&I sir and whether they are or are not a good investment (spoiler, they aren't). The point was that we aren't trying to pump anything. Comprehension test.

-----------------

I notice you didn't reply to any of the other points I made with some of your indisputable facts. Cat got your tongue? Of course, its quite hard to reason against factual debate when your argument is mainly based on dogma and emotion.

User232002

Michael121 said:

You forgot dividends in both comparisons vs gold and FTSE100, also picked FTSE100 over all share, i wonder why that is.

Hilarious.

FTSE 100 since 2000: 11%
SPY since 2000: 200%
FTSE all Share since 2000: 35%

Oh gosh. Yes, that is a great counter point which is completely terminal to the point I raised. Clearly I was misrepresenting the facts in order to present a biased argument. For gods sake, do you guys even know what intellectual honesty & integrity is? 

Gold is up like 500% or something ridiculous, so even with your compounded dividends you're not outperforming it.

And I need to point out here that I don't think gold is better than the indices or is a better investment. I just think its hilarious when something as moronic as gold can outperform the markets over that period of time, particularly when many would say that the last two decades have been pretty damn awesome economically. It really speaks volumes about the quality of equities.

I wonder at what point do we just accept that the S&P is a ponzi because everybody has been blindly buying the index for the last 3 decades. The stock market is meant to function as an efficient capital allocator, but its been broken for some time. 

RolandFlagg

Super video today from Coin Bureau for experience Crypto investors and Newbies alike.

I do hate the terrible negative thumbnails that Youtubers use, but that is unfortunately due to them working out that negative thumbnails get about 3x the views of positive views. 
But if you look past that, the content in the video is excellent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuAEfdv_BeM&ab_channel=CoinBureau

Oh BTW...over 5 years..

FTSE 100 up 3.86%
BTC up 3,500%

If BTC goes down 5% in a day that is the price you pay for a highly volatile risk asset.
If the FTSE goes down 5% that's your 5 year profits wiped out.....

Aegis

RolandFlagg said:

Oh BTW...over 5 years..

FTSE 100 up 3.86%
BTC up 3,500%

If BTC goes down 5% in a day that is the price you pay for a highly volatile risk asset.
If the FTSE goes down 5% that's your 5 year profits wiped out.....

Assuming someone actually bought just the FTSE 100, their 5-year return would be 26% (using the Vanguard FTSE 100 Acc fund), not 4%.  You are confusing capital return with total return, i.e. ignoring dividends.

Malthusian

Aegis said:

You are confusing capital return with total return, i.e. ignoring dividends.

Yay, I earned another 3% in worthless paper government sheeple tokens. Woo. Go me. Party hat / streamer emoji.

To us dividends matter because compounded real growth over 30-odd years is the difference between being able to retire and being able to comfortably retire. To bros they don't because if their investments earn average 0.25% in dividends over the next month they will still have to put on a cardboard hat in the morning.

Quoting different indices won't bridge the fundamental gap between people who think that the average return of Bitcoin is the return experienced by someone who bought some in 2010, held to the present day and then cashed in, i.e. literally nobody (200%pa or whatever) and the average return across all hodlers (nil).

Michael121

darren232002 said:

Michael121 said:

You forgot dividends in both comparisons vs gold and FTSE100, also picked FTSE100 over all share, i wonder why that is.

Hilarious.

FTSE 100 since 2000: 11%
SPY since 2000: 200%
FTSE all Share since 2000: 35%

Oh gosh. Yes, that is a great counter point which is completely terminal to the point I raised. Clearly I was misrepresenting the facts in order to present a biased argument. For gods sake, do you guys even know what intellectual honesty & integrity is? 

Gold is up like 500% or something ridiculous, so even with your compounded dividends you're not outperforming it.

And I need to point out here that I don't think gold is better than the indices or is a better investment. I just think its hilarious when something as moronic as gold can outperform the markets over that period of time, particularly when many would say that the last two decades have been pretty damn awesome economically. It really speaks volumes about the quality of equities.

I wonder at what point do we just accept that the S&P is a ponzi because everybody has been blindly buying the index for the last 3 decades. The stock market is meant to function as an efficient capital allocator, but its been broken for some time. 

Could have compared vs 2012 and then gold would be basically flat. 

Thrugelmir

darren232002 said:

Thrugelmir said:

That was an exceptional event which has yet to run it's course. The great unwinding is yet to follow. 

Interest payments on US debt currently stand at $420BN per year on a 0.25% interest rate. US GDP is twenty odd trillion, but federal tax receipts are $4T per year. 

If the Fed owns the stock then the interest paid is simply an accounting book entry. 

bugbyte_2

Quite a good article on the climate problem around Bitcoin. 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jan/30/how-do-we-solve-bitcoins-carbon-problem

Quite balanced I thought. (sorry for bringing it up but it is quite important to some of us who don't want our kids to cook to a crisp).

Highest rated comment:

Quantum computing might sort it all out within a few days, first by mining the 3000 or so remaining Bitcoins, then by stealing the largest wallets of those who don't have quantum computers. I expect it'll all be worthless within hours of the first theft.

Next highest rated comment

Appears to be awfully expensive to keep the idiots happy.

Adyinvestment

bugbyte_2 said:

Quite a good article on the climate problem around Bitcoin. 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jan/30/how-do-we-solve-bitcoins-carbon-problem

Quite balanced I thought. (sorry for bringing it up but it is quite important to some of us who don't want our kids to cook to a crisp).

Highest rated comment:

Quantum computing might sort it all out within a few days, first by mining the 3000 or so remaining Bitcoins, then by stealing the largest wallets of those who don't have quantum computers. I expect it'll all be worthless within hours of the first theft.

Next highest rated comment

Appears to be awfully expensive to keep the idiots happy.

I would be looking at other industries before worrying about Bitcoin burning your kids.

To put Bitcoin's energy usage into context see the below, and also be aware that your concerns have already been acknowledged by the industry and could be at zero (possibly negative) within 10 years...you can't say that about the other industry's shown

Figure 11: Bitcoin versus other industries — yearly energy use, in TWh

User232002

"At 0.08 % of global CO2e emissions, removing the entire mining network from global demand would not amount to anything more than a rounding error"

"Currently emissions are created by Bitcoin mining, but this needn't to persist. Bitcoin will be 100% renewable when power generation is 100% renewable. The focus should be on building out renewable power generation, not on stifling the development of monetary technology."

"By re-directing the conversation from sources of energy to uses of energy, you are cherry picking where to focus environmental policy based on political bias."


But sure, keep ignoring the facts and listening to those 'highest rated comments' that don't even know how many bitcoins are left to mine, couldn't explain what a qubit was if it hit them in the face, how many qubits would actually be needed to hack the BTC network and why the current level is orders of magnitude off where it needs to be to do so, plus the fact that quantum resistant algorithms are gonna be easier to develop than quantum computing is.