• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bitcoin

bit coin is 100% a gamble. it is highly unstable and kinda shady. governments are already cracking down on it.
I do believe that the US government has already labeled it a commodity not a currency so that right there was a huge blow
to it. it also makes sense and is consistent with other federal laws that the only organization that can issue currency is
the treasury department. what this also means is that you cannot buy anything with bitcoins. you would have to sell them off for
dollars just like any other commodity.

The governments cracking down on bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are those most afraid of them because they can't control them. Cryptocurrencies have provided safe havens for those hiding cash from their own governments from underground economies. Among those using cryptocurrencies are those dealing in contraband (i.e. illicit drug wholesalers, armaments dealers, pharmaceuticals, even food stuffs in countries like Venezuela where gov't owned store shelves are empty, and so on).

Take a good look out there at how many sites accept bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies for purchases of goods and services. Of course they are in use despite governmental interventions. Even call girls and escort services are advertising they will accept bitcoins. If only Elliot Spitzer had known, he wouldn't have been caught so easily in his black socks.

Every commodity transaction is a gamble, so is every currency trade.
 
I just remembered one advantage for the buyer. If you purchase something online with bitcoin, particularly a digital product that doesn't require shipping, there is no risk of identity theft. There is no third party with your name and credit card or debit card number out there that could be compromised.

That might rely on the digital wallet you've chosen to utilize. How secure is it, along with personal information of registrants? That is what caused the first bitcoin crash, an improperly secured exchange.
 
To start with, looking at a currency as though it's an asset -- or worse yet, a lottery ticket, or a gold mine -- is downright moronic.

Currencies aren't supposed to fluctuate massively in value. No one who actually wants to use the currency should want it to go from $6400 to $8200 in the space of one week. That's an incredible level of deflation, the likes of which defeat its actual purpose as a currency.

For example, imagine that you want to purchase something using Bitcoin. If you used 0.0016 BTC to buy a movie ticket last week, that's the equivalent of spending $10 for it. However, today that same amount is worth $13 -- meaning that movie has effectively cost you an extra $3! And why? Because a bunch of speculators are jumping all over this, hypnotized by a chart that keeps going up.

Similarly, the technical barriers for using Bitcoin are quite high, meaning the only people who will actually use it as a currency are those who are highly motivated to do so, i.e. those who want to move money in a way that is difficult to trace. This basically means people engaged in criminal activity, and the super-paranoid. That's not a good look.

There is no way to know when, or even if, this bubble will burst. There are so few bitcoins, and the supply is so strictly limited, that it can keep going for who knows how long. When it does burst, it will be ugly for some time. And who knows, it could quickly recover (like it did in September 2017), or it could crater.

It is possible that more rational cryptocurrencies will be able to, well, act more like currencies. The more likely outcome, though, is that blockchain technology will separate from currencies, and be used far more widely than cryptocurrencies.

Currency traders make good money on the volatilities of multiple currencies. If you fear bubbles and consequent losses, don't play the market. Avoid tulips at all costs. But keep in mind you don't have to play forward, you can bet against a market. Hedge your bets. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
 
The governments cracking down on bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are those most afraid of them because they can't control them. Cryptocurrencies have provided safe havens for those hiding cash from their own governments from underground economies. Among those using cryptocurrencies are those dealing in contraband (i.e. illicit drug wholesalers, armaments dealers, pharmaceuticals, even food stuffs in countries like Venezuela where gov't owned store shelves are empty, and so on).

Take a good look out there at how many sites accept bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies for purchases of goods and services. Of course they are in use despite governmental interventions. Even call girls and escort services are advertising they will accept bitcoins. If only Elliot Spitzer had known, he wouldn't have been caught so easily in his black socks.

Every commodity transaction is a gamble, so is every currency trade.

Governments can control it via control/regulations of exchanges and in general transacting/converting bitcoins.

Yes, government can never achieve total and absolute control, and individuals can still freely trade the things, but the extent of their control, should they decide to exert it, is certainly enough to be highly material: corporations, businesses and so on will likely not take on the legal/regulatory risk, which would significantly and severely limit the scope, penetration, depth and breadth of Bitcoin use, as well as its value.

A determined government can thereby absolutely do severe damage to the prospects and value of Bitcoin, and its broadbased utility, nevermind many governments of large economies working in concert.
 
That might rely on the digital wallet you've chosen to utilize. How secure is it, along with personal information of registrants? That is what caused the first bitcoin crash, an improperly secured exchange.

Well sure, if you trust a third party with your personal information there is a risk it could be compromised. None of the wallets I have used, online or offline, are connected to my personal information.

Now, exchanges like Coinbase are a little different. Because they are a place for people to convert bitcoin to fiat currency and back, they have to meet certain KYC laws. So if you want to exchange a significant amount then you have to provide ID and banking info.

However, if you aren't comfortable with that then just stick to person-to-person trading rather than dealing with institutional exchanges.

Now, if you want to make it impossible for your bitcoin to be stolen then just store your private keys on an offline computer or create a paper back up of them. There is always a trade off between convenience and security.
 
Currency traders make good money on the volatilities of multiple currencies.
Currency traders also lose their shirts on volatile currencies.

The larger point, though, is that a currency is only useful when it's an actual medium of exchange. If the reason you're interested in Bitcoin is because it's going up and up, you might as well go to Vegas. Speculation destabilizes the currency, and deflates its value, which undermines its utility.

It may take a long time to drive people into more stable cryptocurrencies, but as more speculators pile into Bitcoin, it's inevitable.
 
Governments can control it via control/regulations of exchanges and in general transacting/converting bitcoins.

Yes, government can never achieve total and absolute control, and individuals can still freely trade the things, but the extent of their control, should they decide to exert it, is certainly enough to be highly material: corporations, businesses and so on will likely not take on the legal/regulatory risk, which would significantly and severely limit the scope, penetration, depth and breadth of Bitcoin use, as well as its value.

A determined government can thereby absolutely do severe damage to the prospects and value of Bitcoin, and its broadbased utility, nevermind many governments of large economies working in concert.

Gov'ts can try, but the dark net is still the wild, wild west. China stomped down hard on Bitcoin at the beginning of the summer, basically attempting to put it out of business with regulations and rule of law. The crypto currency markets gave pause for about 3-5 days. The Chinese government fears the economic freedoms associated with crypto currencies. Justifiably. Right now 80% of crypto currency transactions are Chinese.

Don't be seduced into believing the dark net is some mysterious magical back end to the net. Amazon, J&J, Macy's, AliBaba, Bank America, JP Morgan Chase, among many others use the dark net for most transactions, for security reasons.
 
Well sure, if you trust a third party with your personal information there is a risk it could be compromised. None of the wallets I have used, online or offline, are connected to my personal information.

We're basically in agreement. Today, a name and an e-mail address are personal data. I don't believe anyone should be lured into believing anything connected via the net is truly secure.

Most of my equity assets, personal banking and substantial transaction are not done in my own name for security reasons. I use other vehicles, trusts, layers of holding corporations, etc. They never are used for net transactions. However, that doesn't mean those with whom I perform transactions, or institutions I utilize, don't leak just enough of my personal data to make those vehicles vulnerable. I won't stop doing business from paranoia, but it does give me pause to consider the security measures I use.

Crypto currencies are far from mature, and that makes them a tempting target for the nefarious. Having a heightened sense of awareness doesn't hurt the user.
 
Currency traders also lose their shirts on volatile currencies.

The larger point, though, is that a currency is only useful when it's an actual medium of exchange. If the reason you're interested in Bitcoin is because it's going up and up, you might as well go to Vegas. Speculation destabilizes the currency, and deflates its value, which undermines its utility.

It may take a long time to drive people into more stable cryptocurrencies, but as more speculators pile into Bitcoin, it's inevitable.

Currency traders are like commodity traders. Rich on Monday, bankrupt on Tuesday, floating on Wednesday, treading water on Thursday, either wealthy again or out of business on Friday.

The difference between Vegas and crypto currencies, is that Vegas maintains the odds in favor of the house. In the crypto currency world, not even the house can assure its take.

I'm not an investor in crypto currencies. I lucked out because I didn't know what I was doing, and my motivations were not gain. Now I'm learning and I see another set of vehicles I can use for some self entertaining gambling. I never bet more than I can afford to lose, no matter which vehicles I use for gambling. Actually, I view any wager as lost until I cash out and the check clears with a profit.
 
Gov'ts can try, but the dark net is still the wild, wild west. China stomped down hard on Bitcoin at the beginning of the summer, basically attempting to put it out of business with regulations and rule of law. The crypto currency markets gave pause for about 3-5 days. The Chinese government fears the economic freedoms associated with crypto currencies. Justifiably. Right now 80% of crypto currency transactions are Chinese.

Don't be seduced into believing the dark net is some mysterious magical back end to the net. Amazon, J&J, Macy's, AliBaba, Bank America, JP Morgan Chase, among many others use the dark net for most transactions, for security reasons.

I don't have any superstitions about the dark net.

The fact is that if the major economies of the world forbid it (or even just the US and China), Bitcoin is in trouble, because its actual use as a medium of exchange/currency would be severely compromised. One of the most dangerous myths about BC is that it is totally or mostly immune to govt interference and controls.
 
I don't have any superstitions about the dark net.

The fact is that if all the major economies of the world forbid it (or even just the US and China), Bitcoin is in trouble. One of the most dangerous myths about BC is that it is totally or mostly immune to govt interference and controls.

As an investment, absolutely. Large governments outlawing it would affect the value. But as a means of exchange it would remain strong. The problem is such legislation would drive away many of the legitimate users of bitcoin, like me, and it would then primarily just be used for illicit activities.
 
I don't have any superstitions about the dark net.

The fact is that if the major economies of the world forbid it (or even just the US and China), Bitcoin is in trouble, because its actual use as a medium of exchange/currency would be severely compromised. One of the most dangerous myths about BC is that it is totally or mostly immune to govt interference and controls.

Most major economies have no regulations that govern the Dark Net or crypto currencies. Quite the opposite, the dark net is embraced by most governments and economies, and crypto currencies are being used by almost all governments and economies. The Chinese stomped on bitcoin, then introduced a government controlled crypto currency, and no one is buying into it.

If bitcoin was truly in trouble, the price per coin would not be over $8k.

Frankly, you need to do some research, at the least.
 
As an investment, absolutely. Large governments outlawing it would affect the value. But as a means of exchange it would remain strong. The problem is such legislation would drive away many of the legitimate users of bitcoin, like me, and it would then primarily just be used for illicit activities.

Sure; like I said, individuals could use it just fine, but its viability as a large scale/general use currency/medium of exchange for a majority of people would be destroyed (along with most of its value).
 
Most major economies have no regulations that govern the Dark Net or crypto currencies. Quite the opposite, the dark net is embraced by most governments and economies, and crypto currencies are being used by almost all governments and economies. The Chinese stomped on bitcoin, then introduced a government controlled crypto currency, and no one is buying into it.

If bitcoin was truly in trouble, the price per coin would not be over $8k.

Frankly, you need to do some research, at the least.

No, because the conditions for Bitcoin being in trouble haven't come to pass; major economies (or the US in addition to China) haven't yet clamped down on it, but they certainly could, and if they did, then its appeal (and usage) would be about limited to criminals and cryptocurrency enthusiasts.
 
No, because the conditions for Bitcoin being in trouble haven't come to pass; major economies (or the US in addition to China) haven't yet clamped down on it, but they certainly could, and if they did, then its appeal (and usage) would be about limited to criminals and cryptocurrency enthusiasts.

Obviously, you are not informed. China came down hard on bitcoin. The US Congress embraced bitcoin.

You stay away from bitcoin, your problem solved. Many others will continue to lose and make money. In the meantime, every government which has attempted to control the net, has found itself circumvented. Porn is still the number one driver of net usage, everywhere. Even in NK, where fatboy dominates usage all by himself.
 
Obviously, you are not informed. China came down hard on bitcoin. The US Congress embraced bitcoin.

You stay away from bitcoin, your problem solved. Many others will continue to lose and make money. In the meantime, every government which has attempted to control the net, has found itself circumvented. Porn is still the number one driver of net usage, everywhere. Even in NK, where fatboy dominates usage all by himself.

#1: I don't innately hate Bitcoin; in fact I trade it on a consistent basis. The only thing I actively dislike about it is that it is a very handy tool for money laundering/tax evasion/criminality. I think it's insanely risky, overvalued and a speculator's playground more than anything else, and not particularly attractive as a medium of exchange by itself without dynamic pricing and a currency peg/instantaneous conversion due to its incredible volatility, but I don't have any especial desire to see its value destroyed.

#2: The clamp down of major economies on BC is a theoretical scenario that hasn't come to pass, but if it did, yes, without question Bitcoin's value would plummet on a lasting basis and its appeal as a medium of exchange would be destroyed for the general public; denials don't change this; China is only one major economy, not a plurality, and its value would be far higher were China still fully permissive of BC. The value of Bitcoin long term depends on its embrace and use by the general public: if you have no exchanges to go to in major economies, and businesses in those economies are forbidden from taking BC as payment, then the general public will not embrace and use BC, and its prospects are shot.
 
Last edited:
#1: I don't innately hate Bitcoin; in fact I trade it on a consistent basis. The only thing I actively dislike about it is that it is a very handy tool for money laundering/tax evasion/criminality. I think it's insanely risky, overvalued and a speculator's playground more than anything else, and not particularly attractive as a medium of exchange by itself without dynamic pricing and a currency peg/instantaneous conversion due to its incredible volatility, but I don't have any especial desire to see its value destroyed.

#2: The clamp down of major economies on BC is a theoretical scenario that hasn't come to pass, but if it did, yes, without question Bitcoin's value would plummet on a lasting basis and its appeal as a medium of exchange would be destroyed for the general public; denials don't change this; China is only one major economy, not a plurality, and its value would be far higher were China still fully permissive of BC. The value of Bitcoin long term depends on its embrace and use by the general public: if you have no exchanges to go to in major economies, and businesses in those economies are forbidden from taking BC as payment, then the general public will not embrace and use BC, and its prospects are shot.

If there is anything I've learned about criminals using any medium for economic crimes, where there is a will, there's a way.

When it comes to economic theory, I'm concerned with what is not what could be. No one has a crystal ball that works.

When the US dropped the gold standard, economists everywhere predicted the demise of the US $ as a reliable currency. Gold is no longer limited to the arbitrary enforced value of $35 per ounce. The US $ remains the primary currency in the world despite all efforts for a change.
 
If there is anything I've learned about criminals using any medium for economic crimes, where there is a will, there's a way.

Sure, but BC absolutely facilitates criminal activity in a way that would be hard to do otherwise (cash features considerable logistical problems BC doesn't); this is an aside though.

When it comes to economic theory, I'm concerned with what is not what could be. No one has a crystal ball that works.

When the US dropped the gold standard, economists everywhere predicted the demise of the US $ as a reliable currency. Gold is no longer limited to the arbitrary enforced value of $35 per ounce. The US $ remains the primary currency in the world despite all efforts for a change.

I don't think that economist predictions of the demise of the US as a reliable currency was nearly unanimous; inflation yes.

A lot of the speculation and interest, and therefore appreciation in Bitcoin is directly predicated on its future uptake and expansion into the domain of the general public; if you take that away, its value would indeed plummet and remain depressed.

Anyways, the bottom line is, government presents a considerable risk to BC and its value contrary to many who wax on about its invulnerability to govt intervention; one that anyone trading/holding it needs to be acutely aware of.
 
Sure, but BC absolutely facilitates criminal activity in a way that would be hard to do otherwise (cash features considerable logistical problems BC doesn't); this is an aside though.

I don't think that economist predictions of the demise of the US as a reliable currency was nearly unanimous; inflation yes.

A lot of the speculation and interest, and therefore appreciation in Bitcoin is directly predicated on its future uptake and expansion into the domain of the general public; if you take that away, its value would indeed plummet and remain depressed.

Anyways, the bottom line is, government presents a considerable risk to BC and its value contrary to many who wax on about its invulnerability to govt intervention; one that anyone trading/holding it needs to be acutely aware of.

You need to get out more.

During the 30's and 40's of the last century, my grandfather, an upstanding self educated law abiding immigrant here living the American dream, operated a candy store with a soda fountain and ice cream, sandwiches and coffee, egg creams, fountain cokes made with syrup, cherry limeades, and assorted other soft beverages. The local police on the beat would take a break after school let out so they could flirt with the two pretty high school girls behind the counter after school. When he made sergeant, one of those officers introduced his nephew to one of those girls at the local bowling alley exactly two years after he returned from the war, my father. In the back of the parlor behind a closed door guarded by one my grandfather's many nephews, carrying a shotgun, there were two active card tables, one for poker, one for pinochle, the house always got its piece for hosting. The guards were there to protect the patrons from robbers, tho the place was "protected." Behind the card room, another office, operated by a loan shark, bookie, numbers runner. The house always got its piece. In the basement which ran under the building and three adjoining buildings with party walls, could be found my grandfather's grappa and vodka bottling operation. His four cabs exclusively picked up tourists at finer hotels to bring them to speakeasies during the late 20's till prohibition was repealed, delivering his bottled grappa and vodka. Once a week he'd personally use one of his cabs to make a delivery of grappa and vodka, occasionally some real Irish Whiskey, to Gracie Mansion's back door. He kept the extended family housed and fed.

Last month Apple, Inc. shifted its financial headquarters from Ireland to Malta, just beyond reach of the EU jurisdiction. EU officials are muttering criminal tax evasion. Of course determining who is the bigger criminal in this case, Apple or the thieves posing as politicians focusing on a very tempting $300 bil cash reserve is questionable. The EU has been out maneuvered.

Chinese restaurants throughout the US also front for money laundering, labor racketeering, prostitution outcall services, gambling operations, etc. Pizza parlors are notorious for illicit drug distribution networking. You show me a business or an industry, I'll show you how it can facilitate criminal activities.

"Your morality is not my morality." - Anaïs Nin

More than enough of China's middle class, a middle class of 300 million and growing, equal to the US population in size, is using Bitcoin. Next is India's growing middle-class. India is the richest country in the world already, it has no foreign debt, its middle-class almost equals China's in size, tho people worry more about the lack of income distribution in the US, real idiocy. South and Central America's wealthy investors are the ones currently driving Bitcoin prices, because they have no safety in their own currencies, either in value or safety. As China quickly learned, embrace cryptocurrencies or completely lose control of another aspect of your constituency.

You keep doubling down, you keep proving how wrong you are. Bitcoin could go bust, but it won't be because of any governance.
 
You need to get out more.

During the 30's and 40's of the last century, my grandfather, an upstanding self educated law abiding immigrant here living the American dream, operated a candy store with a soda fountain and ice cream, sandwiches and coffee, egg creams, fountain cokes made with syrup, cherry limeades, and assorted other soft beverages. The local police on the beat would take a break after school let out so they could flirt with the two pretty high school girls behind the counter after school. When he made sergeant, one of those officers introduced his nephew to one of those girls at the local bowling alley exactly two years after he returned from the war, my father. In the back of the parlor behind a closed door guarded by one my grandfather's many nephews, carrying a shotgun, there were two active card tables, one for poker, one for pinochle, the house always got its piece for hosting. The guards were there to protect the patrons from robbers, tho the place was "protected." Behind the card room, another office, operated by a loan shark, bookie, numbers runner. The house always got its piece. In the basement which ran under the building and three adjoining buildings with party walls, could be found my grandfather's grappa and vodka bottling operation. His four cabs exclusively picked up tourists at finer hotels to bring them to speakeasies during the late 20's till prohibition was repealed, delivering his bottled grappa and vodka. Once a week he'd personally use one of his cabs to make a delivery of grappa and vodka, occasionally some real Irish Whiskey, to Gracie Mansion's back door. He kept the extended family housed and fed.

Last month Apple, Inc. shifted its financial headquarters from Ireland to Malta, just beyond reach of the EU jurisdiction. EU officials are muttering criminal tax evasion. Of course determining who is the bigger criminal in this case, Apple or the thieves posing as politicians focusing on a very tempting $300 bil cash reserve is questionable. The EU has been out maneuvered.

Chinese restaurants throughout the US also front for money laundering, labor racketeering, prostitution outcall services, gambling operations, etc. Pizza parlors are notorious for illicit drug distribution networking. You show me a business or an industry, I'll show you how it can facilitate criminal activities.

"Your morality is not my morality." - Anaïs Nin

More than enough of China's middle class, a middle class of 300 million and growing, equal to the US population in size, is using Bitcoin. Next is India's growing middle-class. India is the richest country in the world already, it has no foreign debt, its middle-class almost equals China's in size, tho people worry more about the lack of income distribution in the US, real idiocy. South and Central America's wealthy investors are the ones currently driving Bitcoin prices, because they have no safety in their own currencies, either in value or safety. As China quickly learned, embrace cryptocurrencies or completely lose control of another aspect of your constituency.

You keep doubling down, you keep proving how wrong you are. Bitcoin could go bust, but it won't be because of any governance.

This is a whole lot of anecdote and irrelevant partisan aside that does nothing to demonstrate how major economies collectively clamping down on Bitcoin would not be substantially diminishing the size and desirability of its network and negatively impact its price therefore.

I never claimed that Bitcoin would 'go bust' due to government regulation, I said that major economies collectively acting to forbid it would do massive damage to its appeal and thus value which should be readily self-evident.

Do you really think that there would be no or only a minor impairment of BC value if overnight every major economy shut down BC exchanges, banned exchange of BC for currency, and forbade businesses to transact in BC? C'mon, don't be ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
This is a whole lot of anecdote and irrelevant partisan aside that does nothing to demonstrate how major economies collectively clamping down on Bitcoin would not be substantially diminishing the size and desirability of its network and negatively impact its price therefore.

I never claimed that Bitcoin would 'go bust' due to government regulation, I said that major economies collectively acting to forbid it would do massive damage to its appeal and thus value which should be readily self-evident.

Do you really think that there would be no or only a minor impairment of BC value if overnight every major economy shut down BC exchanges, banned exchange of BC for currency, and forbade businesses to transact in BC? C'mon, don't be ridiculous.

Anecdotes are like allegories, they never prove a point, they serve to illustrate.

The current collective net worth, accounting for volatilities, of cryptocurrencies is between $150-200 bil. That doesn't include the value of "smart" contracts in a multitude of worldwide industries being conducted daily with cryptocurrencies. No one can estimate the exponential increase for valuing cryptocurrencies from those transactions. It would be like determining the value of the GDP by examining actual money supply without ratios of cash flow. It cannot be done. Since no one would be willing to jeopardize the entire world economy by halting those transactions, any speculation, any hypothetical for doing so is hot air. Thanks for showing why economist never predict the future, only the past.
 
Anecdotes are like allegories, they never prove a point, they serve to illustrate.

The current collective net worth, accounting for volatilities, of cryptocurrencies is between $150-200 bil. That doesn't include the value of "smart" contracts in a multitude of worldwide industries being conducted daily with cryptocurrencies. No one can estimate the exponential increase for valuing cryptocurrencies from those transactions. It would be like determining the value of the GDP by examining actual money supply without ratios of cash flow. It cannot be done. Since no one would be willing to jeopardize the entire world economy by halting those transactions, any speculation, any hypothetical for doing so is hot air. Thanks for showing why economist never predict the future, only the past.

At present there is only very limited exposure to cryptocurrency in the mainstream, and rightfully so due to its extreme risk and volatility. A worldwide cap of $150-200 bil, or less than a fourth of Apple's market capitalization is essentially nothing in global terms. To use an anecdote as an example, as you're evidently fond of them, my broker only allows 20 : 1 leverage maximum for Bitcoin trades, whereas it can offer up to 400 : 1 for a majority of currency pairs, and that is a relatively high permitted leverage ratio. At the moment, BC can take a dive and the damage would be extremely limited; most people wouldn't even notice.

Personally I don't think it's likely that most major economies at present would act to clamp down or stringently regulate BC (_maybe_ the exchanges), in large part because it's at this point beneath the radar in terms of impact and relevance, China being the exception due to heavy interest as you've noted, prompted by its draconian government and relative tech-savviness of its population.

However, government poses a considerable risk to BC, even if only in the short term (while I think the long term risks increase as governments look more closely at BC and its value/conspicuous tax evasion involvement likewise increases), and any trader or investor who would argue otherwise is committing the cardinal sin of putting their ideology or prejudices before sober and objective assessment of their trading and risk/return calculus.
 
At present there is only very limited exposure to cryptocurrency in the mainstream, and rightfully so due to its extreme risk and volatility. A worldwide cap of $150-200 bil, or less than a fourth of Apple's market capitalization is essentially nothing in global terms. To use an anecdote as an example, as you're evidently fond of them, my broker only allows 20 : 1 leverage maximum for Bitcoin trades, whereas it can offer up to 400 : 1 for a majority of currency pairs, and that is a relatively high permitted leverage ratio. At the moment, BC can take a dive and the damage would be extremely limited; most people wouldn't even notice.

Personally I don't think it's likely that most major economies at present would act to clamp down or stringently regulate BC (_maybe_ the exchanges), in large part because it's at this point beneath the radar in terms of impact and relevance, China being the exception due to heavy interest as you've noted, prompted by its draconian government and relative tech-savviness of its population.

However, government poses a considerable risk to BC, even if only in the short term (while I think the long term risks increase as governments look more closely at BC and its value/conspicuous tax evasion involvement likewise increases), and any trader or investor who would argue otherwise is committing the cardinal sin of putting their ideology or prejudices before sober and objective assessment of their trading and risk/return calculus.

Bitcoin has been around less than two decades. It is thoroughly intertwined in the global economy. $150-200 bil in assets represents $2-3 Trillion in annual transactions. Goldman Sachs founded in 1869 has slightly upwards of $8.6 in equity performs approx $1.2 tril in annual transactions. GS operates in 30 countries. Damage either, the effects on the global economy will be devastating. For every transaction performed by either the waterfalls of subsequent seemingly unrelated transaction that follow, are indeterminable.

Keep doubling down, the hole you dig gets deeper.

The days of governments controlling money became an illusion the day the first electronic transfer of funds was transacted. The only cardinal sins for traders and investors are losing the capital and getting caught in a cheat.
 
Bitcoin has been around less than two decades. It is thoroughly intertwined in the global economy. $150-200 bil in assets represents $2-3 Trillion in annual transactions. Goldman Sachs founded in 1869 has slightly upwards of $8.6 in equity performs approx $1.2 tril in annual transactions. GS operates in 30 countries. Damage either, the effects on the global economy will be devastating. For every transaction performed by either the waterfalls of subsequent seemingly unrelated transaction that follow, are indeterminable.

Keep doubling down, the hole you dig gets deeper.

The problem is much of that transaction value is among individual speculators, criminals and the Chinese and collectively between all three, most of it probably is; Bitcoin hasn't infiltrated into key financial institutions in any meaningful way, hasn't formed the basis of any securitization/derivative chain, and the overall public exposure to BC, unlike with say, the modern banking system, is essentially nil. The impact would be minor to near invisible for most. Turnover by itself means exactly nothing. Maybe one day it will pose the risk of financial contagion or significant collateral damage to the economy, but this is simply not the case in the present.

The only person who has 'doubled down' is you in making such ridiculous assertions; pure projection.

The days of governments controlling money became an illusion the day the first electronic transfer of funds was transacted. The only cardinal sins for traders and investors are losing the capital and getting caught in a cheat.

Having bad or compromised risk management is a cardinal sin because it inevitably leads to losing capital and, as you put it, 'getting caught in the cheat'; to fail to understand or appreciate the impact govt could have on BC is to commit this sin, full stop. You're free to go on thinking that there is no governmental risk to BC, and I'll continue keeping an eye out for such so I don't get caught with my pants down and lose my investment unlike those with their ideological blinders on who would love to believe in the dream of a fantasy currency totally beyond the purview of govt to do anything about.

I'm not interested in discussing this any further; you aren't willing to listen to reason because you've got evidently deep, emotional and ideological attachments to an idealization of BC as some kind of inviolable libertarian rebel yell, rather than its reality.
 
Last edited:
The problem is much of that transaction value is among individual speculators, criminals and the Chinese and collectively between all three, most of it probably is; Bitcoin hasn't infiltrated into key financial institutions in any meaningful way, hasn't formed the basis of any securitization/derivative chain, and the overall public exposure to BC, unlike with say, the modern banking system, is essentially nil. The impact would be minor to near invisible for most. Turnover by itself means exactly nothing. Maybe one day it will pose the risk of financial contagion or significant collateral damage to the economy, but this is simply not the case in the present.

The only person who has 'doubled down' is you in making such ridiculous assertions; pure projection.



Having bad or compromised risk management is a cardinal sin because it inevitably leads to losing capital and, as you put it, 'getting caught in the cheat'; to fail to understand or appreciate the impact govt could have on BC is to commit this sin, full stop. You're free to go on thinking that there is no governmental risk to BC, and I'll continue keeping an eye out for such so I don't get caught with my pants down and lose my investment unlike those with their ideological blinders on who would love to believe in the dream of a fantasy currency totally beyond the purview of govt to do anything about.

I'm not interested in discussing this any further; you aren't willing to listen to reason because you've got evidently deep, emotional and ideological attachments to an idealization of BC as some kind of inviolable libertarian rebel yell, rather than its reality.

Thanks for the chuckles. You have no proofs as to the criminality of bitcoin users, none whatsoever.

Chase now has a bitcoin division, joining Citigroup, Bank of America, Lloyds, Solomon Bros. Investment Banking, Wilfordshire, Tiki Banks, ad infinitum.

All you have made is ridiculous assertions and your own pure projections.

Show me you investment profits, I'll show you mine. No your little political labeling is a sign of your desperation to matter. I am a capitalist, not a politician. Money in my pocket is my attachment. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom