jamest wrote:

Cito di Pense wrote:

jamest wrote:
There are less than 20 million bitcoin in the whole world.

Nevertheless, the minimum price of a bitcoin is 0. The minimum price of the 1962 Topps Bobby Hull card is still pretty good.

With investments, you just never know which way...

Bitcoin is currently trading at about $3600. It can either go to zero or to the moon. Heads I lose several thousand; tails I'm going to the moon.

Heh, funnily enough, the thought crossed my mind that I should comment about there being a 50/50 chance. I didn't, though... but now feel that it is the right time.

LucidFlight wrote:Heh, funnily enough, the thought crossed my mind that I should comment about there being a 50/50 chance. I didn't, though... but now feel that it is the right time.

I have it on good authority...

Wiktor wrote:And YES NO answers have always 50/50 probability of being correct when one of them CAN be correct.

LucidFlight wrote:

jamest wrote:

Cito di Pense wrote:

jamest wrote:
There are less than 20 million bitcoin in the whole world.

Nevertheless, the minimum price of a bitcoin is 0. The minimum price of the 1962 Topps Bobby Hull card is still pretty good.

With investments, you just never know which way...

Bitcoin is currently trading at about $3600. It can either go to zero or to the moon. Heads I lose several thousand; tails I'm going to the moon.

Heh, funnily enough, the thought crossed my mind that I should comment about there being a 50/50 chance. I didn't, though... but now feel that it is the right time.

On the surface it may appear like a 50/50 chance. However, given the ever-improving blockchain system and the decentralised nature of cryptocurrency, along with the ever-crumbling fiat monetary system, my opinion of the odds is something like 10/90 in favour of the moon.

The article I linked to earlier is a must-read, I think. I'll link to it again below, but read these bits if nothing else:

Since the Great Financial Crisis, the U.S. monetary base has expanded from $875 billion to $3,637 billion between September 2008 and November 2016 Thus, currently the U.S. is a country with high debts, low ability to repay those debts with its central bank abusing the reserve currency status and acting like a printing press to fund US government’ deficits.
The dollar has lost 92 per cent of its value since its issue in 1913 (since US Fed was created) and the U.S. has currently been increasing the supply of dollars at a rate of 13% per annum. This could be a leading indicator of a currency on the brink.

Every fiat currency has ended in devaluation and eventual collapse, right from the Roman Empire in the 1st century AD to modern times. The domino effect of these collapses has led to large wipe outs of masses’ wealth as well as economic hardships for the nations. The above incidents show that it takes years for a bubble to form, as they are built due to the gradual increase in monetary bases over the years. But it takes just about a year (or few) to pop, creating chaos till the time “new order” is adopted.

As these events are “black swan” events, they are often overlooked by investors due to “normalcy bias”. But, whenever these events play out again they give little chance to protect wealth. The resultant resets are painful and generally lead to a wipe out of a large proportion of wealth of general population.

The examples above serve to show that, historically, fiat systems are arbitrary, unstable and will fail. Presently, monetary policy is not a science – it is based on people’s faith in their currency and estimates and predictions. As mentioned earlier, printing more currency does not result in an actual increase in wealth. This ‘currency debasement’ has been one of the main reasons for financial collapses in the past.

https://multi-act.com/evolution-of-mone ... cy-system/

As I said, I've also considered investing in actual gold so have been doing a bit of reading about it. I've just stumbled upon the following article about gold price history and something I read has just startled me:

Defense of the gold standard helped cause the Great Depression. A recession began in August 1929, after the Federal Reserve raised interest rates in 1928. After the 1929 stock market crash, many investors started redeeming paper currency for its value in gold.

The U.S. Treasury worried that the United States might run out of gold. It asked the Fed to raise rates again. The rise in rates increased the value of the dollar and made it more valuable than gold. It worked in 1931.

Higher interest rates made loans too expensive. That forced many companies out of business. They also created deflation, since a stronger dollar could buy more with less. Companies cut costs to keep prices low and remain competitive. That further worsened unemployment, turning the recession into a depression.

By 1932, speculators again turned in money for gold. As gold prices rose, people hoarded the precious metal. They sent prices up even higher. To stem the redemption of gold, President Franklin D. Roosevelt outlawed private ownership of gold coins, bullion, and certificates in April 1933.

Americans had to sell their gold to the Fed.

In 1934, Congress passed the Gold Reserve Act. It prohibited private ownership of gold in the United States. It also allowed President Roosevelt to raise the price of gold to $35 an ounce. This lowered the dollar value, creating healthy inflation.

https://www.thebalance.com/gold-price-history-3305646


That reminds me of a snippet from the document in my previous post regarding the history of fiat, which wasn't mentioned:

By late 1720 prices in Paris were nearly twice of what they were compared to a mere two years earlier. This was mainly due the increase in paper currency circulated. Total money supply was four times larger in livre terms than gold and silver coinage previously used. Not surprisingly, people began to lose faith in the paper currency and started conducting payments in gold and silver. The speculators started to sell their shares and invest in real estate and precious metals. The Banque Royale and Compagnie des Indes were united and the buy-back of shares was announced to support stock prices that had declined to 5000 livres by December 1720 compared to their peak at 18000 livres in the January of the same year. During 1721, share price had dropped to 600.
“During Sept-1720, Compagnie des Indes was allowed to make house searches for precious metal and confiscate them. Carrying pearls, diamond and gems was forbidden.”
In the following years, the French state was a beneficiary of the crisis. The total debt of 2 billion livres from 1715 remained the same, but most of it was in pensions with a 2% interest rate – a significant improvement of public debt. Most of public’s wealth (an estimated 80%) in pensions, company shares, bank notes or bank accounts had been lost.

https://multi-act.com/evolution-of-mone ... cy-system/

These are the levels to which our governents and banks will go to fuck us over when the shit eventually hits the fan. Most of you think I'm being stupid by investing in decentralised cryptocurrency, but with the dark clouds that I see forming above the horizon and with history to draw upon for wisdom I feel strongly that you should reconsider having all of your eggs locked within a centrally controlled basket.

When the shit really hits the fan you can kiss the internet goodbye.

Insofar as you're being naive (stupid is your word, not mine), it's in thinking that governments couldn't regulate cryptocurrency rather than thinking that governments could regulate gold.

There is no form of currency which has a value independent of your fellow human beings. None. There's no commodity that does, there's no asset that does. This is not a reason to invest in some specific thing, it's a marketing pitch.

Cito's tip about Vodafone is a case in point. Vodafone generates profits, which are distributed to the investors. Bitcoin doesn't do that. Vodafone has a balance sheet of assets, which include real estate, intellectual property, buildings and machinery. Bitcoin doesn't have that.

The speculative value of gold is underwritten by the demand for gold as a fabrication material for electronics and jewellery. The speculative value of Vodafone shares is underwritten by the demand for a share of dividends and the ownership of land, buildings and profitable trading brands. The speculative value of Bitcoin is not underwritten. Yes, you could win, but you're gambling. And you're gambling based on some frankly ludicrous arguments and "probability" assessments.

ETA: If government collapses and "the shit hits the fan" numbers on a computer ain't going to help you. Even tulip bulbs would be little help. Potato and carrot seeds are the way to go. If you want something lower yield, but more adverse condition resistant I believe turnips are pretty good in British soil and weather, historically speaking.

(typos)

Meanwhile you might want to check just how safely your bitcoins are stored. In 2014 Mt. Gox, which handled over 70% of global bitcoin transactions filed for bankruptcy after it lost 850,000 of its customers' bitcoins somehow. It wasn't the only oops. Here is a list of other major bitcoin disappearances.

Minor ones are legion, but costs run easily into eight digit territory every year. The favourite method is to encrypt your already encrypted wallet, then ask for a small ransom to decrypt it for you. The 'wanna cry' virus made many people cry for that reason.

Thommo wrote:Insofar as you're being naive (stupid is your word, not mine), it's in thinking that governments couldn't regulate cryptocurrency rather than thinking that governments could regulate gold.

That thought has crossed my mind already, I just have no idea how they could do that with an intangible and decentralised global asset?

There is no form of currency which has a value independent of your fellow human beings. None. There's no commodity that does, there's no asset that does. This is not a reason to invest in some specific thing, it's a marketing pitch.

Cito's tip about Vodafone is a case in point. Vodafone generates profits, which are distributed to the investors. Bitcoin doesn't do that. Vodafone has a balance sheet of assets, which include real estate, intellectual property, buildings and machinery. Bitcoin doesn't have that.

We are comparing currencies here, not companies which generate income. I haven't invested in a company, but a currency. There is no intrinsic value in any fiat currency, a point you don't seem to grasp.

The speculative value of gold is underwritten by the demand for gold as a fabrication material for electronics and jewellery.

Most of the demand and value in gold is as a hedge against fiat currency. I'd like to invest in some, though given my previous post I'm seriously reconsidering that idea.

The speculative value of Vodafone shares is underwritten by the demand for a share of dividends and the ownership of land, buildings and profitable trading brands. The speculative value of Bitcoin is not underwritten. Yes, you could win, but you're gambling. And you're gambling based on some frankly ludicrous arguments and "probability" assessments.

Again, what you are talking about here is irrelevant since the discussion should only be a comparison of currencies.

ETA: If government collapses and "the shit hits the fan" numbers on a computer ain't going to help you.

Unless all governments collude to permanently shut down the internet, the capacity to use cryptocurrency for transactions will remain. You can purchase an ever-increasing amount of goods on the blockchain these days using cryptocurrency.

Heirloom seeds will be big. If you've the land, heirloom livestock. Otherwise guns, ammo, antibiotics, tobacco, alcohol, opiates, diesel fuel. In the U.S., pre-64 silver coinage. Depending on how collapsed we actually get a big sailboat might be a good idea, or some defensible land up in the mountains somewhere.

Hermit wrote:Meanwhile you might want to check just how safely your bitcoins are stored. In 2014 Mt. Gox, which handled over 70% of global bitcoin transactions filed for bankruptcy after it lost 850,000 of its customers' bitcoins somehow. It wasn't the only oops. Here is a list of other major bitcoin disappearances.

Minor ones are legion, but costs run easily into eight digit territory every year. The favourite method is to encrypt your already encrypted wallet, then ask for a small ransom to decrypt it for you. The 'wanna cry' virus made many people cry for that reason.

Yep, if you buy crypto always choose the 'hard wallet' option. Never have an online wallet. I purchased a ledger nano S, but you can actually generate a paper wallet for free.

If anyone here is considering buying, I know how to purchase bitcoin whilst legitimately avoiding Coinbase fees. Give me the nod and I'll send you a pm.

laklak wrote:Heirloom seeds will be big. If you've the land, heirloom livestock. Otherwise guns, ammo, antibiotics, tobacco, alcohol, opiates, diesel fuel. In the U.S., pre-64 silver coinage. Depending on how collapsed we actually get a big sailboat might be a good idea, or some defensible land up in the mountains somewhere.

The bear market is nearly over for crypto. Plenty of bears up in the mountains though, I hear.

jamest wrote:
The bear market is nearly over for crypto. Plenty of bears up in the mountains though, I hear.

... and in darkest Peru ...

jamest wrote:

Thommo wrote:Insofar as you're being naive (stupid is your word, not mine), it's in thinking that governments couldn't regulate cryptocurrency rather than thinking that governments could regulate gold.

That thought has crossed my mind already, I just have no idea how they could do that with an intangible and decentralised global asset?

Like China already does, for example?

jamest wrote:We are comparing currencies here, not companies which generate income. I haven't invested in a company, but a currency. There is no intrinsic value in any fiat currency, a point you don't seem to grasp.

No, we're talking about investment and speculation. You bought bitcoin not as a means of exchange, but as a risky vehicle for increasing your capital. A point you don't seem to grasp.

I don't hold Sterling (or indeed Dollars or any other currency) because I believe Sterling will appreciate in value, the Sterling I possess I do not claim will make me profit (by virtue of being Sterling). I have it because I need to be able to go to the shops and buy potatoes and carrots, and I need a means of exchange that the shop will honour. Sterling has worked quite well at that, bitcoin does not.

jamest wrote:Again, what you are talking about here is irrelevant since the discussion should only be a comparison of currencies.

Why do you think that? Is this not an alternative investment you could have made? You're banging on about gold which isn't a currency but rather a commodity, at some length, in a thread which you originally resurrected on the grounds it was not about bitcoin or currency. Why the need for a spurious rationalisation?

jamest wrote:Unless all governments collude to permanently shut down the internet, the capacity to use cryptocurrency for transactions will remain. You can purchase an ever-increasing amount of goods on the blockchain these days using cryptocurrency.

Ever-increasing? Doubtful.

The volume of bitcoin transactions, and the range of available goods is miniscule compared to any major currency. As a currency bitcoin's uses are very limited. Not that this really has much meaning in terms of the chance that you will later be able to sell the bitcoins for a profit (in whichever of these fiat currencies you decide you dislike least).

Thommo wrote:

jamest wrote:

Thommo wrote:Insofar as you're being naive (stupid is your word, not mine), it's in thinking that governments couldn't regulate cryptocurrency rather than thinking that governments could regulate gold.

That thought has crossed my mind already, I just have no idea how they could do that with an intangible and decentralised global asset?

Like China already does, for example?

Well, in a communist country where most of your citizens are too skint to travel and/or are seemingly too afraid to suffer the wrath of their government's archaic ideals, that sort of thing can have a significant effect. However, as stated, single governments are not going to nullify a global phenomenon, ever, even a country as large as China (evidently). Bitcoin et al are going to be in business so long as the majority of countries are not colluding to close the internet. Fact. And if they are, then the shitest form of dystopia will have won the day. 1984, a prophecy fulfilled.

Certainly that kind of scenario has the potential to destroy cryptocurrency, I agree, but if we get to that point then wave goodbye to all forms of freedom and expression, not least wealth.

jamest wrote:We are comparing currencies here, not companies which generate income. I haven't invested in a company, but a currency. There is no intrinsic value in any fiat currency, a point you don't seem to grasp.

No, we're talking about investment and speculation. You bought bitcoin not as a means of exchange, but as a risky vehicle for increasing your capital. A point you don't seem to grasp.

I've stated several times that I'm aware of the risk, yet you have failed to connect to anything that I have discussed or linked to which includes the facts that:

1) Fiat has no intrinsic value and ALL currencies since the beginning of time have eventually crumbled.
2) The US $ is close to crumbling.
3) We are on the verge of a major financial shitstorm. Don't take my word for it, do your own research.
4) During such shitstorms, governments will collude with banks to do whatever it takes to sustain centralised power. They'll even rob their citizens if they have to. I have provided evidence of such in previous links. You've conveniently ignored it.

Perhaps, instead, read some recent history about how the banks nearly bankrupted The West about a decade ago (they certainly bankrupted themselves). What happened? The governments delved into their reserves and/or borrowed more money to give to the banks in order to sustain the status quo. Essentially, the peasants were the ones to suffer.

Is crypto a risk? Absolutely, since I cannot guarantee that some dick like Trump won't seek to undermine its decentralised perfume to the masses. As you say, China has attempted to do so already, and Trump surely proves that capitalists can be more stupid than communists.

Is crypto a good concept? Absolutely, for those of us looking to free ourselves from the shackles enforced upon us.

Will fiat crumble? It's always done so and shall do so again.

There's a concept called normalcy bias mentioned in one of the links I've provided. You, Sir, are under its spell.

I don't hold Sterling (or indeed Dollars or any other currency) because I believe Sterling will appreciate in value, the Sterling I possess I do not claim will make me profit (by virtue of being Sterling). I have it because I need to be able to go to the shops and buy potatoes and carrots, and I need a means of exchange that the shop will honour. Sterling has worked quite well at that, bitcoin does not.

This goes to the heart of what I've been discussing. Once fiat crumbles, inflation doubles+ daily. Carrots become the prices that ipads were, a month previous. Your fiat wealth will rapidly dissolve to nothing.

You simply do not appreciate THE RISK involved in choosing to keep the whole of your wealth associated with centralised fiat, especially at this dark financial time, Sir.

For the final time, I urge you and anyone here to grab one or two of your eggs and invest them in another basket. Just one or two. If it makes you feel any better, the top 5 crypto players went up in price today an average of about 12%.

That doesn't happen to stock that is fundamentally doomed, ladies and gents. Especially in a savage bear market!!!!!!

I'm not telling you these things to gain a thumbs-up. I'm telling you these things because I've been researching them intensely since September and now understand the future potential of both cryptocurrency and fiat. I genuinely don't want anyone here to suffer, so do yourselves a favour and just secretly invest a small amount of your money. Bitcoin, or Ephereum, or EOS, perhaps IOTA, would be my tips. Be wary of investing in Ripple XRP though. It's designed to make life easier and cheaper for banks and is essentially centralised. Don't go there, would be my advice.

Why do you think that? Is this not an alternative investment you could have made? You're banging on about gold which isn't a currency but rather a commodity, at some length, in a thread which you originally resurrected on the grounds it was not about bitcoin or currency. Why the need for a spurious rationalisation?

Investing in stocks & shares is fundamentally an extension of investing in fiat. Incidentally, some gold coins are still legal tender here within the UK. That was one of the reasons I was considering buying them: their buying power after fiat hits the fan. I still might, dunno. That article I linked to about gold has put me off.

The volume of bitcoin transactions, and the range of available goods is miniscule compared to any major currency.

Of course it is, but we're looking to something new becoming the future here.
Time for a cold shower, Thommo.

jamest wrote:This goes to the heart of what I've been discussing. Once fiat crumbles, inflation doubles+ daily. Carrots become the prices that ipads were, a month previous. Your fiat wealth will rapidly dissolve to nothing.

When fiat is garrotted, only carrots will drive Fiats. If the carrots are well-cooked, will they become legal tender? Me, I'm hoping ducats will come back into style. Or Ducatis, or something.

My interest in gold has persisted and I've just now discovered something which might be potentially interesting to some of you: a mastercard which uses GOLD as its primary medium of exchange. I.e., you register, receive your mastercard, deposit your fiat which is then converted to gold at its present value (which is stored somewhere in Switzerland). When you eventually use the card, you don't actually pay the fiat charge but the amount of gold that this translates to at that moment in time. So, for example, the price of gold is currently close to £1000 per ounce so if your bill at [say] the restaurant is £100, your actual bill on the card will be 0.1 ounces of gold. That amount of gold will be deducted from your account.

The great advantage of such a card is that it protects you from currency inflation. For example, let's imagine that the shit has hit the fan and your fiat is now in meltdown. So, you go to that restaurant again but this time the bill is [say] £200 for the same meal which you had 3 months ago (the meal costs you twice as much). Meanwhile, gold is a hedge against such calamities so let's assume for the sake of simplicity that its price has doubled within that timeframe. You're now presented with a bill for £200 but now the price of gold is £2000 per ounce, so in effect you'd only be paying the same 0.1 ounces of gold that you did the previous time you used this card to pay for the meal. I.e, the price of the meal has not increased if you use this card.

There are of course some small fees associated with the card/account. However, on face value It's a very interesting concept to me and I'm going to sleep on it as it's quite late now. However, I would be interested to hear any comments here from intelligent members before diving in. The particular company/card I'm discussing is linked below. Cheers.

https://glintpay.com

so they get to use your money while you gamble on gold ....prdent prudent

Macdoc wrote:so they get to use your money while you gamble on gold ....prdent prudent

The point was that fiat is almost certainly about to hit the fan, so investing in gold has always been another option for me other than crypto. Since we're rapidly heading towards a situation in which fiat/stocks crash, it's a no brainer that you should convert your fiat assets to alternative currencies asap. If you don't like crypto, then go for gold. And if you do choose gold, then watch your tax regulations.

I'm almost certainly going to apply for this card and input sufficient money within my account to pay for my everyday transactions as I'm convinced that gold will consistently outperform fiat within the next half-decade (at least).

I have no idea what the regulations/rules are in Canada or Australia (or anywhere) regards taxes, but here in the UK it only makes sense to join Glint with a view to saving money on transactions if you envisage that your fiat will soon shit the bed, which I do.

My present plan, other than investing a significant amount of my wealth into crypto, which I've already done, is to join Glint and arm my card with a few thousand. I might also purchase a couple of thousand gold sovereigns.

What I won't be doing is leaving most of my money in the bank and trusting the value of the British £. Nor will I be investing in stock-related investments at this time, since their values are also contingent upon fiat values.

At the end of the day, my capital is fluid due to my mindset being fluid. I'm new to this financial shite as I've never had significasnt money to substantially invest in anything until recently.

I'm going to play the game, now that I finally have some chips, since I have no desire to work for a pittance until I die doing something which I don't want to do. Never did, but you gotta pay the bills somehow.

Well you may have a case to hedge against Brexit but ...good luck.

I'm new to this financial shite

yes you are

For the record I have registered with Glint and have deposited and subsequently converted £1000 into gold. Will be getting my mastercard next week (it's effectively a prepaid card), whereby whatever I purchase with it will cost me the price of gold per ounce, not the price the vendor states. I must confess, I love the concept so much that I've today registered the missus also.

The beauty of this card is that you shouldn't use it until fiat crumbles and gold gains ground against it. Just keep it for such times. Certainly, don't use Glint as a means to buy and sell gold as you'll be hit with CGT, certainly here within the UK.

I'm still unsure whether to buy physical gold coins also, as I'll avoid taxes when I sell. The problem is that there are commission/postage fees to consider. Alternatively, ISAs are the way to go, but then the trading platform screws you with its own fees.

I'll keep researching.