BITCOIN

lozzy1965

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.

Lost fiat currency can of course get replaced, so does not have to be lost to 'the system', just to the individual.

I understand that having 100 Santoshis, which then get subdivided down to 1000 Nakamotos results in no change you ones wealth, but I suspect that it will result in psychological inflation because human nature will result on one thinking "I have 1000 of something now whereas I had 100 of something." 

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/inflationarypsychology.asp#:~:text=our editorial policies-,What Is Inflationary Psychology?,is going to increase shortly.

Notwithstanding that, inflation is comprised of many complex factors and having a finite currency, but one which can be infinitely divided down will probably do nothing to prevent inflation, nor would having a finite currency that could not be divided down - but that would bring its own problems!

I agree totally on the point of printing money, I still have this nagging doubt that it is not much of a problem when every government in the whole world prints money that it essentially owes to itself.  It's conjuring money out of nothing I agree, but I'm not nearly clever enough to understand the ramifications of doing so, nor that if we had BTC we would be any better off living through what has happened in the last few years in the world.

Zola.

lozzy1965 said:

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.

Lost fiat currency can of course get replaced, so does not have to be lost to 'the system', just to the individual.

I understand that having 100 Santoshis, which then get subdivided down to 1000 Nakamotos results in no change you ones wealth, but I suspect that it will result in psychological inflation because human nature will result on one thinking "I have 1000 of something now whereas I had 100 of something." 

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/inflationarypsychology.asp#:~:text=our editorial policies-,What Is Inflationary Psychology?,is going to increase shortly.

Notwithstanding that, inflation is comprised of many complex factors and having a finite currency, but one which can be infinitely divided down will probably do nothing to prevent inflation, nor would having a finite currency that could not be divided down - but that would bring its own problems!

I agree totally on the point of printing money, I still have this nagging doubt that it is not much of a problem when every government in the whole world prints money that it essentially owes to itself.  It's conjuring money out of nothing I agree, but I'm not nearly clever enough to understand the ramifications of doing so, nor that if we had BTC we would be any better off living through what has happened in the last few years in the world.

Rampant money printing = currency debasement and in turn rampant inflation. And the never ending hamster wheel.

The media are blaming all the distractions, but it does boil down to excessive money printing and currency debasement. 

Bitcoin naysayers say its going to zero.
The British pound and all fiat currencies are guaranteed to go to zero over time...

lozzy1965

Zola. said:

lozzy1965 said:

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.

Lost fiat currency can of course get replaced, so does not have to be lost to 'the system', just to the individual.

I understand that having 100 Santoshis, which then get subdivided down to 1000 Nakamotos results in no change you ones wealth, but I suspect that it will result in psychological inflation because human nature will result on one thinking "I have 1000 of something now whereas I had 100 of something." 

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/inflationarypsychology.asp#:~:text=our editorial policies-,What Is Inflationary Psychology?,is going to increase shortly.

Notwithstanding that, inflation is comprised of many complex factors and having a finite currency, but one which can be infinitely divided down will probably do nothing to prevent inflation, nor would having a finite currency that could not be divided down - but that would bring its own problems!

I agree totally on the point of printing money, I still have this nagging doubt that it is not much of a problem when every government in the whole world prints money that it essentially owes to itself.  It's conjuring money out of nothing I agree, but I'm not nearly clever enough to understand the ramifications of doing so, nor that if we had BTC we would be any better off living through what has happened in the last few years in the world.

Rampant money printing = currency debasement and in turn rampant inflation. And the never ending hamster wheel.

The media are blaming all the distractions, but it does boil down to excessive money printing and currency debasement. 

Bitcoin naysayers say its going to zero.
The British pound and all fiat currencies are guaranteed to go to zero over time...

We have gone through multiple periods of 'rampant' inflation before.  It's just ridiculous to say this time, or any time, it is "never ending"!
It does NOT boil down to excessive money printing and currency debasement, that is part of it, but a war causing rampant food inflation has something to do with it, so does the necessity to ween ourselves off fuel from dictatorships, so does the fact that we are two years into a world wide pandemic - which, incidentally, is part of the reason for rampant money printing.

This Bitcoin watcher says that none of this would have been any different, and may well have been a lot worse, under Bitcoin.

If you mean fiat will go to zero over time because of inflation, and you think Bitcoin will get rid of inflation, then I remain to be convinced.

Zola.

Price rises were already extremely elevated before Putin invaded, then the US media blamed everything on the "Putin price hike".  It obviously plays a factor, but there is a lot of gaslighting and this is a huge problem, especially post covid. Assets are being propped up by the money printer, something has got to give...

The hamster wheel I am referring to is the never ending inflation in general.  Look at housing, completely out of control, houses, wages etc haven't risen in proportion,  many young people have no chance. 

Thrugelmir

The discussion of sub division reminds me of a great book that every new investor should read. 

How an Economy Grows and Why it Crashes - by Peter Schiff and Andrew Schiff.

Zola.

Ah Peter Schiff, I will maybe check it out....he is a massive Bitcoin critic (probably because he runs a gold business), has been for years,  hundreds of embarrassing tweets with horrible calls about bitcoin going back over ten years, but he is good to listen to in interviews and he is pretty funny. I generally agree with a lot of his overall economic sentiment (with exception to Bitcoin).

His son Spencer is a massive Bitcoin bull, Peter is no doubt hedging his bets through his son

GSP

What’s this Luna cryptocurrency?
Someone I know said it’s crashed from something like $100 to $0.0002!

Imagine investing just £20 at that low figure only for it to rise to the former.
Surely it can’t though?

bugbyte_2

GSP said:

What’s this Luna cryptocurrency?
Someone I know said it’s crashed from something like $100 to $0.0002!

Imagine investing just £20 at that low figure only for it to rise to the former.
Surely it can’t though?

Sorry to say it will never recover to those heights because - correct me if I am wrong - the way it was linked to Tether meant that when Tether crashed several million (billion?) new Luna tokens were created to try and prop up Tether, so unlike Bitcoin where 1 BTC should always = 1 BTC, 1 Luna is now 'worth' several thousand Luna. 

bugbyte_2

* Sorry, I think I meant TerraUSD. Same problem though.

HCIMbtw

bugbyte_2 said:

GSP said:

What’s this Luna cryptocurrency?
Someone I know said it’s crashed from something like $100 to $0.0002!

Imagine investing just £20 at that low figure only for it to rise to the former.
Surely it can’t though?

Sorry to say it will never recover to those heights because - correct me if I am wrong - the way it was linked to Tether meant that when Tether crashed several million (billion?) new Luna tokens were created to try and prop up Tether, so unlike Bitcoin where 1 BTC should always = 1 BTC, 1 Luna is now 'worth' several thousand Luna. 

Actually trillions.. last I heard there was a circulating supply of circa 7 trillion and if it were to recover to $100 based on the circulating volume it would become more valuable than every asset on earth combined xD 

Isn't happening