BITCOIN

Zola.

No longer? Who has once claimed ever it was stable? Certainly no one here. Strange point to make. 

Returns since 2009 are 11,095.63%.  But yeah, lets focus on the 30% crashes lol...

HHarry

Zola. said:

No longer? Who has once claimed ever it was stable? Certainly no one here. Strange point to make. 

Returns since 2009 are 11,095.63%.  But yeah, lets focus on the 30% crashes lol...

Zola. said:

https://www.cityam.com/warren-buffetts-berkshire-hathaway-dumps-visa-and-mastercard-stock-and-buys-1bn-in-bitcoin-fintech-nubank/

Watch what they do, not what they say. 

A number of people have suggested BTC is a store of wealth - which surely means that some stability would be a bonus.

And there’s no point focussing on the stellar return of 11,095% since 2009.  Precious few regular people will have benefitted, and no-one getting in now is going to match that over the next 13 years.  But plenty of people could still be hit with a -30%.

Malthusian

Zola. said:

No longer? Who has once claimed ever it was stable? Certainly no one here. Strange point to make.

Except for the guy who literally just 12 hours before your post said Bitcoin was the "risk off asset", apparently seriously. (FAOD, a few pages back when I said that Bitcoin was stable and it's sheeple currency that fluctuates like crazy, I was being facetious.) Considering the only way to make money from Bitcoin is good timing, that could have gone better.

That's on top of an entire thread of people claiming that Bitcoin is a store of value and the currency of the future. Which is a prophecy that has been preached since 2013 when the get-rich-quick crowd got interested.

Returns since 2009 are 11,095.63%.

Name three people who sold Bitcoin in 2022 that they mined or bought in 2009.

HCIMbtw

Malthusian said:

Zola. said:

No longer? Who has once claimed ever it was stable? Certainly no one here. Strange point to make.

Except for the guy who literally just 12 hours before your post said Bitcoin was the "risk off asset", apparently seriously. (FAOD, a few pages back when I said that Bitcoin was stable and it's sheeple currency that fluctuates like crazy, I was being facetious.) Considering the only way to make money from Bitcoin is good timing, that could have gone better.

That's on top of an entire thread of people claiming that Bitcoin is a store of value and the currency of the future. Which is a prophecy that has been preached since 2013 when the get-rich-quick crowd got interested.

Returns since 2009 are 11,095.63%.

Name three people who sold Bitcoin in 2022 that they mined or bought in 2009.

There's really no point in arguing over whether people make or lose money.. We can choose periods for significant gains or declines on a lot of assets and in this regard your challenge to name 3 people is almost entirely irrelevant, there are some legacy wallets that still hold and a person may also move there money around different wallets making it hard to determine the original time a person might've owned the asset. I believe some people do try track this through platforms like Glassnode though, if you are interested in this information feel free to research it and let us know. 

We also have to be careful about taking what somebody else has said and applying that as an argument to a person who has not made that point (and might not share the opinion). People invested in crypto assets are would you believe it capable of independent thoughts and opinion. 

In one sense I do consider BTC 99% stable, I have exactly the same amount of satoshis I originally bought and there will only ever be about 14 million BTC in circulating. Why do I say 99%, because the asset is actually deflationary, and the circulating supply will eventually decline as wallets and coins get lost over time. 

Over a longer period of time these BTC/satoshis grow in relative value as debasement and inflation eat at fiat currency.. BTC is the risk off because it cannot be manipulated in this way. 

Sure it doesn't mean the asset is not affected by sentiment, whales, leverage, call and short options markets all impact it.. but this is short term noise and long term this is irrelevant as adoption increases and FIAT currencies are debased, BTC remains fixed, finite, infinitely divisible, efficiently transactable and self custodial. 

I think it is absolutely irresponsible not to have any in a portfolio. 

lozzy1965

HCIMbtw said:

Malthusian said:

Zola. said:

No longer? Who has once claimed ever it was stable? Certainly no one here. Strange point to make.

Except for the guy who literally just 12 hours before your post said Bitcoin was the "risk off asset", apparently seriously. (FAOD, a few pages back when I said that Bitcoin was stable and it's sheeple currency that fluctuates like crazy, I was being facetious.) Considering the only way to make money from Bitcoin is good timing, that could have gone better.

That's on top of an entire thread of people claiming that Bitcoin is a store of value and the currency of the future. Which is a prophecy that has been preached since 2013 when the get-rich-quick crowd got interested.

Returns since 2009 are 11,095.63%.

Name three people who sold Bitcoin in 2022 that they mined or bought in 2009.

There's really no point in arguing over whether people make or lose money.. We can choose periods for significant gains or declines on a lot of assets and in this regard your challenge to name 3 people is almost entirely irrelevant, there are some legacy wallets that still hold and a person may also move there money around different wallets making it hard to determine the original time a person might've owned the asset. I believe some people do try track this through platforms like Glassnode though, if you are interested in this information feel free to research it and let us know. 

We also have to be careful about taking what somebody else has said and applying that as an argument to a person who has not made that point (and might not share the opinion). People invested in crypto assets are would you believe it capable of independent thoughts and opinion. 

In one sense I do consider BTC 99% stable, I have exactly the same amount of satoshis I originally bought and there will only ever be about 14 million BTC in circulating. Why do I say 99%, because the asset is actually deflationary, and the circulating supply will eventually decline as wallets and coins get lost over time. 

Your bank securely holds your wealth currently.  If you lose your login details you don't lose all your money.  The natural progression of the highlighted statement is that BTC will gradual disappear to nothing!

HCIMbtw said:

Over a longer period of time these BTC/satoshis grow in relative value as debasement and inflation eat at fiat currency.. BTC is the risk off because it cannot be manipulated in this way. 

Oh but it can. Who is to say that there won't be greater and greater subdivisions, particularly as the number of BTC's go missing over time and the 'value' goes up. That is essentially the same as inflation!  Nakamoto's anyone?

HCIMbtw said:

Sure it doesn't mean the asset is not affected by sentiment, whales, leverage, call and short options markets all impact it.. but this is short term noise and long term this is irrelevant as adoption increases and FIAT currencies are debased, BTC remains fixed, finite, infinitely divisible, efficiently transactable and self custodial. 

I think it is absolutely irresponsible not to have any in a portfolio. 

Fixed, yes.  Finite, yes - even more so, it will be diminishing as people lose their wallets!  Infinitely divisible, yes - which gives it the possibility of being inflationary and is a little like governments printing money!  Effectively transactable, debatable - you can move it about easily but actually buying things with it, not so much.  Self custodial, yes - but probably won't be so much if and as it becomes more widely adopted.

So far all Bitcoin is is another asset class for people to speculate on.  It has certainly failed as an alternative currency - I believe even some pro BTCers have conceded this.  It is certainly not a store of wealth yet

I guess that makes me irresponsible!

Zola.

Bear in mind the infinitely divisible in terms of units does not equal more bitcoin. You are just making smaller slices of a pizza...

Also to propose this extra decimal point divisibility there would have to be wide spread agreement to make such changes. I.e. miners and independent nodes running this new update. 

Its easy to say bitcoin has failed to be a store of wealth in the middle of a crash... lets see what happens when the market recovers to pre war/covid/inflation/supply crunch levels, or even just at the next halving shall we?

For those arguing bitcoin has no value, shouldn't it be zero right now in the middle of such a cluster**** of a world economy?  We are entering peak fear... surely it should be much lower? What happens when the world turns itself around?  Heres an interesting site of all the times people have said bitcoin is over: https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/

We are also seeing high profit making tech companies with their stock prices cut in half, so to bash bitcoin alone is tribal and a bit ignorant, in my humble opinion

lozzy1965

My comments aren't really intended as BTC bashing, I was merely pointing out some of my opinions vs the post I was replying to,  but it certainly hasn't proven anything yet.  There are very wealthy people 'invested' in its success and I never underestimate the ability of speculators to prop up and even push through their speculations.  Ironically, precisely the kind of people BTC was set up to thwart are probably the kind of people helping it along at the moment!  Money for the masses outside of the unhealthy control of the whims of the wealthy? 
Notwithstanding that, the value of something is in its potential, and people still see potential there, which is why it isn't valued at zero.  Not even by me.

Malthusian

I should have guessed that even the question "how many people are left who mined / bought Bitcoin in 2009, haven't cashed out already, and have therefore actually experienced returns of 10,000%+" would be rejoined with "do your own research on Glassnode bro".

lozzy1965 said:

Your bank securely holds your wealth currently.  If you lose your login details you don't lose all your money.  The natural progression of the highlighted statement is that BTC will gradual disappear to nothing!

More like lumpily disappear to nothing. 900,000 Bitcoin disappeared when Satoshi Nakamoto forgot their keys, 230,000 odd disappeared when OneCoin inventor Ruja Ignatova was given a concrete overcoat.

Fiat currency gets lost as well, but not 1% of the entire money supply that will ever exist in one go.

But you are broadly correct. Mathematically it is a certainty that eventually all the Bitcoins will be lost (if the Sun burns for long enough). At that point the last bro standing to not forget their private keys will win the game, and be crowned Gilgamesh 2.0, owner of the entire world.

In all seriousness, lost coins are not logistically a problem. Only a problem for their owners. If the dwindling supply of Bitcoins started to make transactions impractical (the Triganic Pu problem), the holders could vote to subdivide them again.

Subdividing a currency is not printing money (not in the fiat currency sense). Minting a load of bronze asses and saying that 2 asses = 1 silver sesterce is not printing money. Minting new sesterces made of tin covered in silver foil and saying that 1 tin sesterce = 1 silver sesterce is printing money.

The point of printing money is to make governments richer at the expense of their creditors (by reducing the real value of their debt). If you subdivide the currency everyone has exactly as much as they had before.

Zola.

Malthusian said:

I should have guessed that even the question "how many people are left who mined / bought Bitcoin in 2009, haven't cashed out already, and have therefore actually experienced returns of 10,000%+" would be rejoined with "do your own research on Glassnode bro".

lozzy1965 said:

Your bank securely holds your wealth currently.  If you lose your login details you don't lose all your money.  The natural progression of the highlighted statement is that BTC will gradual disappear to nothing!

More like lumpily disappear to nothing. 900,000 Bitcoin disappeared when Satoshi Nakamoto forgot their keys, 230,000 odd disappeared when OneCoin inventor Ruja Ignatova was given a concrete overcoat.

Fiat currency gets lost as well, but not 1% of the entire money supply that will ever exist in one go.

But you are broadly correct. Mathematically it is a certainty that eventually all the Bitcoins will be lost (if the Sun burns for long enough). At that point the last bro standing to not forget their private keys will win the game, and be crowned Gilgamesh 2.0, owner of the entire world.

In all seriousness, lost coins are not logistically a problem. Only a problem for their owners. If the dwindling supply of Bitcoins started to make transactions impractical (the Triganic Pu problem), the holders could vote to subdivide them again.

Subdividing a currency is not printing money (not in the fiat currency sense). Minting a load of bronze asses and saying that 2 asses = 1 silver sesterce is not printing money. Minting new sesterces made of tin covered in silver foil and saying that 1 tin sesterce = 1 silver sesterce is printing money.

The point of printing money is to make governments richer at the expense of their creditors (by reducing the real value of their debt). If you subdivide the currency everyone has exactly as much as they had before.

It's an irrelevant question though - you could make that point against any stock like Tesla, doesn't really matter and is a straw man argument...  sure "late comers" maybe wont get as parabolic runs as the 2010 folks, but thats not to say that they wont make signifiant gains in the future. This thing is only 13 years old but has been decades in the making. 

Money is determined by collective agreement on value and its properties. Let's not forget that representatives from 40 developing countries all met in El Salvador yesterday to discuss Bitcoin.   if you don't think that counts for anything, your head needs a wobble.  

HCIMbtw

Malthusian said:

I should have guessed that even the question "how many people are left who mined / bought Bitcoin in 2009, haven't cashed out already, and have therefore actually experienced returns of 10,000%+" would be rejoined with "do your own research on Glassnode bro".

Name me 3 people who bought into any asset of your choosing in 2009 and sold in 2022

The easiest would be to try look for property sales I suppose, no idea how I would try find somebody invested in a particular share or index fund 

It's such an irrelevant question as to not even warrant a researched response 

The asset has grown by that much, money has come into it, whether people were there originally or not... I mean.. justify the value in your question