Limited supply and security aside, the public ledger could do wonders for government spending transparency. Can you imagine if you could build a dapp for US expenditure? It would tear down misconceptions about spending and people might be able to see where the money actually goes.
Which is why this will never happen. The government already publishes expenditures on what is publicly disclosable. Defense and other classified spending is not disclosed for obvious reasons. Crypto wouldn't do anything to increase public transparency beyond what is already transparent, and it's not a suitable currency because it can't keep a stable value, so crypto really represents all the worst use cases for a government. |
|
|
|
Everyones hasn diferent beliefs about money and wealth. See for example 35 different ways of thinking about it here: https://daringtolivefully.com/powerful-beliefs-about-moneyOne famous author, not my favourite, yet an influential one is Robert Kyosaki. In his book "Rich Dad, Poor Dad", he examines two different beliefs and states that those believes will shape your success. ... Your turn to think ... (EDIT: These are NOT my beliefs, at least not necessarily, is just a list to think. Is not the list by Robert K. either.) I don't totally agree with statement 3. Having money is achieved not only due to luck. But money is acquired through combination of hard work, perseverance and luck. And everything is based on God's plans. I agree with statement 4. As much as possible spend our money wisely and save for emergency purposes. This would help us to prevent from having debts. For statement 6, I don't think we don't exert efffort to be succesful. Successful bitcoiners have spend their time and effort to acquire what they currently have.The only difference with crypto and our regular job is Crypto's income is higher than our regular job. So our effort really pays off. Lastly, it doesn't matter if you have big or small income. What plays a big role is the proper budget and spending wisely. This is through prioritizing the needs over the wants and stop being a compulsive buyer. The key for being rich is to value every money spent It makes perfect sense for me to dedicate part of my income to invest. For example, depending on the month and my other needs, I normally reserve 5% to 10% of my earning to invest in crypto or other. I also save a high portion of my income (generally around 15%) but I invest in assets that produce additional income or represent a share of a business that creates profit and a recurring cash stream, that is real estate and stocks. Investing in crypto does neither, it's just speculating on an asset price that may go up and may go down, and that makes it no different than gambling. I don't gamble with my savings, it's far too risky and defeats the purpose of saving in the first place. |
|
|
|
The government has already started there action they are being worked on blockchain technology and planning to release their own cryptocurrency, and as you already know government can invest a huge amount of funds To pump that cryptocurrency in the market. Hate to say that but the government will try a lot of tactics in order to defeat the cryptocurrency world. By the way, I live in India and Indian government has made a new rule that every Bitcoin a has to pay some amount of tax in order to use Bitcoin and other altcoins inside India.
Agree. As governments work towards launching digital currencies of their own, Bitcoin and the rest of the cryptocurrencies in existence will continue in an upward trend for years to come. Due to the recent popularity and massive user support towards Bitcoin and altcoins, I believe that it will be nearly impossible for any government to try and take down these blockchains. As it is said in the mainstream world, if you can't beat them, join them. They'll try to tax the pioneer cryptocurrency but their efforts won't prevail as it is hard to track down every single Bitcoin user residing within their region for tax purposes. Nevertheless, there is a very bright future for Bitcoin as central banks and governments have realized its true potential. It should only be a matter of time before governments either join the revolution or be left behind as countries which adopt the blockchain technology would be the ones that'll take the lead in the mainstream world. Just my opinion  This is silly. Governments don't need to launch cryptos to have a digital currency. The USD, for example, is already a digital currency because far more USD exist electronically in bank ledgers than it does in physical currency. This is a natural result of fractional reserve banking, in that more money is created through loans than through the Fed. A significant amount of monetary assets (including money) exists as debt obligations. But in short, the USD is already a digital currency. The US is not going to create a crypto to compete with Bitcoin, or for any other reason. |
|
|
|
in these days bitcoin had a strong rise, but the other coins seem to be standing at the stake, is there a reason?
do you think that the whole market can be resumed? or will most of the altcoins fail in these months? sorry for my english=)
With a few exceptions, altcoins largely trade in lockstep with Bitcoin. When Bitcoin is thriving, alts are thriving. When Bitcoin is crashing, alts are crashing. This may be because so much of the trading volume of alts is denominated in Bitcoin, so market cap as a function of trading volume by definition means that the value of alts falls as Bitcoin falls. However, it is also likely that when money flees Bitcoin, it also flees altcoins and isn't solely a function of being denominated in btc. |
|
|
|
Everyones hasn diferent beliefs about money and wealth. See for example 35 different ways of thinking about it here: https://daringtolivefully.com/powerful-beliefs-about-moneyOne famous author, not my favourite, yet an influential one is Robert Kyosaki. In his book poor dad, rich dad, he examines two different beliefs and states that those believes will shape your success. What of these do you agree with? What other beliefs do you have about money? 1 - Millionaires are greedy, that is why they become millionaires. 2 - Company managers just want to use the workers to make themselves rich and others poor. 3 - Having money is a question of luck, if not of "gods grace". 4 - Debt is always bad. 5 - To make money, you just need to have a great idea nobody thought off. 6 - Cryptos are the way to make money and be successful without having to put effort into it. 7 - To become rich I just have to believe in Bitcoin because many people have become rich doing that. 8 - To become rich I just have to be more clever and streetwise than everyone around to get my share of the cake. Your turn to think ... (EDIT: These are NOT my beliefs, at least not necessarily, is just a list to think. Is not the list by Robert K. either.) First, I believe the book's proper title is Rich Dad, Poor Dad. Beyond that, the author is a bit hackey for my tastes. His advice is overly simplistic and just generally not very good or insightful. He starts with a good premise - that financial education is a worthy goal - but doesn't instill any particularly useful education or methods of thinking about wealth. Further, the book isn't very well sourced, and some critics have noted that it's extremely unlikely that some of the scenarios described in the book ever actually happened. |
|
|
|
I think one of the billionaires in U.S or probably in China. If this was an corporation account then they can't easily sell their bitcoin because it's a joint account in just one btc address, one reason why people love blockchain is because it's very transparent.
No billionaire is going to put a billion dollars of their wealth into crypto. That's absurd. That amount of crypto can't even be accumulated this quickly, so it wasn't new purchases. It is probably an exchange or mining operation that already owned the coins and consolidated into one address for any number of reasons. Spend a little time on a blockchain explorer looking at where the funds came from for this address. It seems most likely this is an exchange or some type of gambling book based on the number of range of payments both in and out. |
|
|
|
Do oil tycoons deserve their wealth, or people who bought shares in early web based start ups such as amazon? There are countless examples of people getting rich from being in the right place at the right time or for backing the right horse. Of course they deserve it.
In as much as "luck" is a thing, nobody deserves or doesn't deserve the luck they have. If you're lucky and invested in bitcoin when it was under a dollar, do deserve to have millions of dollars now as a result of that luck? No. But you don't not deserve it either. I'm completely agnostic about it, because luck is just a categorization of a group of meaningless events that we assign a good or bad value to. The question of whether you deserve something hinges on an accomplishment. If you built a business, you deserve the success that comes from a successful business. You created it. Nobody investing in Bitcoin created their wealth, they just got "lucky" and they neither deserve it or don't deserve it. It just is. |
|
|
|
The Dutch Tulip Mania is one of the most famous bubbles of all time, for the scale of the bubble, the scale of the collapse, and probably including the seemingly obvious nature of the bubble considering the extremely limited functional utility of tulips. Bitcoin has now surpassed the multiples of value appreciation at the height of the Tulip Bubble (and by a wide margin). While this itself is not proof that Bitcoin is a bubble or that a collapse is imminent, it's worth considering if there's a lot more risk buying at this price (currently bouncing around $17,000) than anyone on these boards seems willing or able to recognize.  Thoughts? Commentators in the media are discussing the rapid growth of bitcoin, the price of which has surpassed the $ 10,000 mark. Most agree that bitcoin is a bubble, and the only question is when the bitcoin bubble bursts. On the BBC, the author immediately admits that he personally enjoyed the growth of bitcoin profitable. In April 2016, he bought 0.17 bitcoins for $ 87, and in 18 months, his purchase was worth 1713 dollars. The author stipulates that most of all it resembles a bubble of a new generation - the "tulip fever" of the era of high technologies. However, despite this similarity, bitcoin has so far demonstrated enviable stability. During his rapid growth there were several cases when it seemed that he was about to fall in price. But whenever experts threatened that the bubble would soon burst, the currency simply slowed down for several days, after which it resumed. During this race, the author notes, bitcoin has lost the main property of the currency: it is no longer used as an intermediary for exchange. A couple of years ago there was a lot of talk about how you can spend bitcoins. Some shops, pubs and cafes accepted payment in this currency, and it was considered fashionable. But now no one wants to spend it, because it seems to everyone that it is more profitable to wait until it is more expensive. In addition, transactions with bitcoin have become much more difficult than before, because the cost of transactions also increases, and the authorities of many countries treat them with caution, suspecting them as a sign of money laundering. The main factor overshadowing the future of bitcoin is the energy cost of mining new ones. According to some estimates, the production and registration of new bitcoins now consumes as much electricity in a year as it takes to supply Ireland in the same year. Therefore, the higher the price of bitcoin, the less stable it looks from the point of view of both the economy and the environment. In this regard, the author concludes, referring to folk wisdom, it is important to monitor what the big financial players say. While they abuse investors buying bitcoins, for stupidity, like JP Morgan Chase in October, everything is fine. As soon as they begin to say that there is a future for crypto-currencies, this will be a signal that it's time to sell. Zoom out on the price chart a bit and identify which part has demonstrated any stability, let alone enviable stability, which I would peg to a high standard. In the past 30 days, the price has halved from $12,000 to $6,000 and then rebounded to near $12,000. Nothing about those price movements or the time scale they happen on suggests any bit of stability to me. |
|
|
|
Currency (money) is just a representation of value that exists in the world (value = goods/services) so the worth of money is how much money exists divided by how much value exists.
This seems so wrong that I can't believe anything else that you wrote. Basically, you are saying that there is money sitting around somewhere that represents the value of the house I bought. That can't be true. Not sure what your hang up is about it. Most "money" that exists is digital, so if you're thinking there has to be physical currency sitting somewhere to represent the value of your house, that's not necessarily true. You don't pay your mortgage in cash, it's done by electronic transfer or check, and the latter is a physical analog to electronically move money through a series centralized ledgers. In that sense, the digital fiat system we have isn't any different from bitcoin but for the fact that it's centralized instead of decentralized. But it's still true that the value of your house is represented by the digital fiat in existence. |
|
|
|
Go big or go home. That’s the motto of one mysterious investor who put his chips on the table, buying close to $400 million of the No.1 digital currency, bitcoin. The purchase comes as cryptocurrencies are making a comeback after a dreadful start to 2018. Major digital currencies lost as much as 50% to start the year as growing regulation and security fears crippled the market, seeing traders bail on their positions. However, the tide has turned. The price of bitcoin BTCUSD, +7.89% has increased more than 60% since trading under $6,000 on February 6, pushing back above $10,000, helped by signs of growing recognition of digital currencies from officials in Washington. “Not sure who that big buyer was but many have bought this dip and have added since the rebound and additional regulatory clarity in the U.S. and Asia,” Alex Sunnarborg, Founding Partner of Tetras Capital said. The unknown trader with the bitcoin address 3Cbq7aT1tY8kMxWLbitaG7yT6bPbKChq64 purchased the coins between Feb. 9 and Feb. 12, taking his bitcoin balance from 55,000 coins to more than 96,000.  (Link to image: https://ei.marketwatch.com/Multimedia/2018/02/16/Photos/NS/MW-GD955_bitcoi_20180216113501_NS.png ) The transaction, which was blasted all over social media and online chat forums emboldened bulls who had argued that $6,000 was a bottom. “In the meantime, the $400 million whale is fuel for the Telegram channels where traders lay out their conspiracy theories,” said Jeff Koyen, president of 360 Blockchain USA. “However, I am willing to believe that, seeing bitcoin bottom around $6,000, Wall Street smelled blood and jumped back in,” he said. With bitcoin back above $10,000, the owner of the address is closing is on the bitcoin billionaires club. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/anonymous-trader-buys-400-million-of-bitcoin-2018-02-16I think most will interpret this as insider trading: "someone with $400 million to burn and big connections to powerful and important people has insider knowledge about bitcoin's future and is calling a bull market." Looks like this could represent the latest uptick in btc value. No clue on who is buying in. With the way things have been going, I wouldn't be surprised if it were Jamie Dimon buying up all the BTC he could get his hands on. How does one have "insider information" on bitcoin? It's not a company, everything is open source. There is no trader who has access to nonpublic information because bitcoin isn't a centralized operation that makes public disclosures of information. Further, how do we even know this is a trader? It seems far more likely that it's an exchange or some type of gambling house. Anyone who purchased that much Bitcoinat one time would move the price far more than any price move over the last week. These coins were more likely already controlled by this person and consolidated to one place for whatever reason. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is a pioneer in blockchain technology, the first cryptocurrency. It represents a vision of a possible future of freedom without regulatory control of third parties. All alternative cryptocurrencies are somehow related to bitcoin!
elektronny as a matter of song, і високою the price of біткоін a point even істи to take into account сьогоднішнє pozhennya 80 kg comma then I think that with me and many Social I will supply that I seek a very large price for crypto currency fed in comparison with other coins. Bitcoin is so much special than the other coin because of its high volatility that gives as a huge opportunity on buy and selling process and it really works as a great asset of gaining an extra amount of profit.I believe that bitcoin can really rise in the near future and it can really give as a huge amount of profit. Any crypto is volatile, and over certain stretches of time, most cryptos undergo more volatility than Bitcoin. Further, volatility isn't even a good thing for a currency to have. You don't want your currency to have an unknown value because it can't be used for commerce or savings then. If people can't predict what their money is worth, it's useless as money. |
|
|
|
I don't know what banks you're talking about reducing withdrawal terms or engaging in crackdowns as they go into insolvency. The banking sector is thriving in the US and bank profits have been high for several years. The banks are healthy in that they routinely pass stress tests and even the most at-risk banks have improved to the point where the Fed is approving expanded dividend and capital repurchase plans. Derivatives remain a systemic risk, but that has nothing to do with Bitcoin. There are Bitcoin derivatives as well (futures are derivatives).
I don't see he connection between Bitcoin and national debt. If the economy was denominated in btc, it would still be possible to have a national debt. That wouldn't solve anything. The fact that the government any control Bitcoin is why the economy will never be denominated in btc. Pretty sure it would be a bad idea anyway. We left the gold standard because it hampered economic growth.
European banks limiting withdrawals as they face insolvency and also cutting the maximum amount under which insurance protects depositors accounts are threads which have been made in this section over the past 6 (?) months. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-14/eu-eyes-capping-deposit-withdrawals-when-banks-are-found-failinghttps://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-12-15/europe-s-sovereign-bank-doom-loop-can-t-be-brokenI guess my claim of banks limiting insurance is questionable as it depends on which country we're referring to. There was an article posted in this section not long ago regarding some banks cutting depositor insurance. In searching for these links I realized its difficult to find sources via search engine for negative news on the economy. This reminds me. There used to be a website called http://www.eudebtclock.org which used to keep track of total EU debt(in trillions). I think they got shut down last year in 2017. Where things get interesting is, if someone tries to find out how many trillions the EU is in debt via search engine. Its very hard to find the total amount of debt listed in trillions of euros. Its listed as a percentage of GDP or whatever assorted statistic. But the total amount of debt -- its almost as if an attempt has been made to scrub and censor the data from the internet. Bank stress tests don't do anything. That aspect of regulation has been subverted and gamed the way credit rating agencies have been. They didn't prevent the 2008 economic crisis. They fail to prevent economic crisis in greece or any other nation. Banks should not be expanding their programs due to concerns over the economy. Danger posed by bank derivatives to anything in bitcoin given the ridiculous monetary amount of exposure banks are subject to. There are banks who have 4 times the GDP of the united states in derivatives exposure. $70-$80 trillion per bank in worst cases. Bitcoin derivatives: insignificant in comparison. Bitcoin contributing to economic stability could revolve around the concept of the competition bitcoin gives banks driving innovation, progress and industry advancement. It could also help to preserve wealth should the dollar crash which would help in the event of a recovery, etc. I'm not up on the status of EU banks. US banks are much improved health-wise from 2008, but the problem is they were "too big to fail" before, and they only got bigger as they used government loans to snap up failing rivals in 2008 and are now much more of a systemic risk than they were in 2008. Stress tests are the best gauge we have for measuring preparedness, and banks regularly failed them in the years after 2008 in the US and the government required reforms because of them. The fact that they pass them now shows improvement. Again, I don't know how things are in the EU, but Greece is a perfect example of a country that can't fix itself because of an ingrained culture of tax evasion and an overly large welfare state. Bitcoin, an instrument that can't keep a stable value hour to hour, isn't going to be a bastion of stability if the USD fails. I just can't see how that would work. One thing for sure, if the US doesn't stop running ridiculous deficits, it's going to end up like Greece. The problem isn't unforeseeable, but no politicians here have the political will to take a common-sense approach to fiscal discipline and the American public is far too stupid as a whole to demand accountability. We want wants fulfilled now. Low taxes, big government programs, bloated military, foreign interventionist wars forever. In a word, ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Losses shouldn't be take heartfully. We should use it as a lesson and also a weapon so it wouldn't happen again. We must learn ahead. Losses is part of trading, but it doesn't mean to make you quit.
This is the correct mindset when trading, when you lose you must try to learn from the experience but you must try to avoid to make that the focus of your next trades, each trade needs to be done because the market tells you there is an opportunity to make money if you try instead to try to be smarter than the market then you will lose even more money as a result. There is no science to trading crypto. People use technical analysis or momentum trading as if these are tangible, reliable things that can be counted on to perform in patterns. They're not. For the most part, patterns self-correct because any pattern can be exploited, and the first to exploit it lessen the impact of the pattern until it doesn't exist anymore. At that point, any "pattern" that persists is just a coincidence. |
|
|
|
|
Does it matter if they deserve it or not? The question is a bit boring. Who cares? Deal in facts. They have it, end of story. I happen to believe there is no small number of people who lucked into their vast crypto fortunes, and so what if they did? Do we obsess over whether lottery winners deserve to win the lottery? Same concept pretty much, there are quite a few people who made huge gains in crypto and they might as well have won the lottery for how lucky they were.
|
|
|
|
As of the time of posting, the market took a dip. Maybe some who bought at below 7k took their profit. Good news for those who bought low. But bad for those who just bought it recently. This proves that the market is very unpredictable. Just always buy with what you can afford to lose so whatever happens nothing will hit your head.
Speculating on why the price does what it does doesn't seem very fruitful. There are so many people chasing get-rich-quick schemes in crypto that the price is going to remain volatile because they're investing more than they can afford to or is rational and then making knee-jerk and emotional decisions when the price swings dull their appetites for the amount of risk they bit off. |
|
|
|
I always saw Bitcoin like a gold alternative but better, since you can carry it and move it around without being stopped and put to prison on every border if you tried to escape your collapsing government.
As far as debt goes, technically it's possible via payment channels. Just like on Poloniex people ask for coins to get loans, you put them there and they pay you back with an interest, but done right, decentralized with payment channels. I think the lightning network will make it possible to make passive income by decentralized loans. Of course im not sure how that would work in practice since there must be some kind of collateral but we'll see.
What has caused the massive collapses has been uncontrollable debt, they print too much money, and the debt never stops growing, at some point it becomes a bit of a joke. Having a finite supply doesn't mean there isn't people out there willing to put their bitcoins somewhere so people can get loans. There could be not enough offer for people wanting to get loans tho, this is all very difficult for me to theorize since I don't know how it would work in practice.
In any case, other cryptos could be delivered for that, the challenge is how to do it in a decentralized way.
Gold wasn't a suitable currency instrument either, which is why the whole world has abandoned gold-based currency. It limits economic growth because it can't be produced at will. Currency (money) is just a representation of value that exists in the world (value = goods/services) so the worth of money is how much money exists divided by how much value exists. When value increases faster than the money supply, you have deflation (money increasing in value) and when the money supply increases faster than value, you have inflation (money decreasing in value). The trick is to marry the currency growth rate and economic expansion so money stays mostly stable, and this is the job of the Fed. It cannot be accomplished with a decentralized, uncontrollable currency, which is why crypto is never going to replace fiat. Economic growth depends on taking stored value (savings) and loaning it to someone who will create something new of value to repay the debt with interest. This is sustainable because the new thing of value increases the overall amount of value in the world, which did not exist previously, and justifies the increase of the money supply (the loan). A crypto-based system would inhibit this, and inhibit economic growth, because the money supply cannot be increased. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin's price nine months ago was $1,000 and now the price is $12,000. How is the increase of 1200% a bubble?
Why do you compare tulips that no one need for living with a payment system? Does not make any sense in my opinion!
Because Bitcoin is a wanna-be payment system that sucks at payments. It can't keep a stable value and is susceptible to bouts of extreme unusability when it can't handle all the transactions waiting to be confirmed. Nothing about Bitcoin is essential, just like nothing about tulips during that particular mania was essential. The mass hysteria over tulips and Bitcoin and the blind faith that it will make you rich are the same. |
|
|
|
1) The economy is already stable. There is nothing to stabilize.
2) Why would bitcoin have any effect on the economy when it's such a minor blip in terms of nominal value compared to the overall economy?
3) Why would bitcoin have any effect on the economy considering it's an unstable store of value and a transactionally-limited currency?
4) What interest does a bank have in using Bitcoin, as opposed to Ripple (a crypto created for use by banks) or when they're only really interested in blockchain, and not even Bitcoin's blockchain, but a private one for internal use?
Answering these last three questions should help you determine that the answer to your question is that Bitcoin doesn't work with traditional banks to stabilize the world economy. Nor should anyone expect it to.
Hi thar. I don't want to step on your toes by responding to your post with a dissenting view. But if you want a different perspective, I can supply.  For example, the concept of the economy being stable. There are current risks posted by investment banks with trillions of dollars in derivatives exposure. We saw this in 2008 with subprime mortgage derivatives wrecking the global economy. Bank bailouts began in 2008. They are still ongoing in 2018, as far as I know. Banks are limiting the degree to which insurance covers accounts, reducing withdrawal terms and engaging in other crackdowns as they go deeper into insolvency. There are many dangers and threats to economic stability lurking about which go unrecognized and unmentioned which bitcoin could provide an alternative to. Bitcoin provides economic stability in the form of it not being threatened by the EU being $16 trillion in debt or the USA having a deficit of $21 trillion. Its not that difficult to think of ways in which bitcoin and crypto currencies in general can contribute towards a more stable economy. Similar might be said of those other points you made. I don't mind someone responding. That's the whole point. I don't know what banks you're talking about reducing withdrawal terms or engaging in crackdowns as they go into insolvency. The banking sector is thriving in the US and bank profits have been high for several years. The banks are healthy in that they routinely pass stress tests and even the most at-risk banks have improved to the point where the Fed is approving expanded dividend and capital repurchase plans. Derivatives remain a systemic risk, but that has nothing to do with Bitcoin. There are Bitcoin derivatives as well (futures are derivatives). I don't see he connection between Bitcoin and national debt. If the economy was denominated in btc, it would still be possible to have a national debt. That wouldn't solve anything. The fact that the government any control Bitcoin is why the economy will never be denominated in btc. Pretty sure it would be a bad idea anyway. We left the gold standard because it hampered economic growth. |
|
|
|
|
1) The economy is already stable. There is nothing to stabilize.
2) Why would bitcoin have any effect on the economy when it's such a minor blip in terms of nominal value compared to the overall economy?
3) Why would bitcoin have any effect on the economy considering it's an unstable store of value and a transactionally-limited currency?
4) What interest does a bank have in using Bitcoin, as opposed to Ripple (a crypto created for use by banks) or when they're only really interested in blockchain, and not even Bitcoin's blockchain, but a private one for internal use?
Answering these last three questions should help you determine that the answer to your question is that Bitcoin doesn't work with traditional banks to stabilize the world economy. Nor should anyone expect it to.
|
|
|
|
The most common answer to this question will be to hoard and to wait for the correction to reduce or elimate your potential losses. <You only lose money, when you sell at a lower price than what you bought it at, right> My suggestion to reduce potential losses, might sound a bit controversial, but it might just work in the current environment. What I have noticed lately, is that the price is dropping within a $500 margin daily and then recovers. <lots of mini crashes and mini corrections> So in theory, If you were one of the people who bought coins at say $18 000, and IF you sold now at say $9000, you would have lost more or less $9000. <Some people panic and sell at a loss> My suggestion : Use these daily crashes to your advantage. Buy more coins when the price falls with $500 and sell when the price goes up with $500 again. After trading fees, your profit will be anywhere between $450 to $490 per coin/day. Take the profit, put it aside and repeat this strategy until you have chipped away at the potential loss that you would have made. Day 1 - $9000 Day 2 - $8550 Day 3 - $8100 Day 4 - $7650 Day 5 - $7200 Day 6 - $6750 Day 7 - $6300 Day 8 - $5850 Day 9 - $5400 Day 10 - $4950 Day 11 - $4500 Day 12 - $4050 Day 13 - $3600 Day 14 - $3150 Day 15 - $2700 Day 16 - $2250 Day 17 - $1800 Day 18 - $1350 Day 19 - $ 900 Day 20 - $ 450 Day 21 - $ 0 In 3 weeks, you can eliminate any possible losses, if you follow this example. This is definately not a guaranteed recipe for success, but given the current situation, this might just work.  Any time an identifiable pattern emerges, the market is efficient enough to eliminate it. There are faster, smarter, and better capitalized traders than anyone here on these boards, and they will effective price out an identifiable pattern long before you have a chance to identify one. (And this assumes trading works in predictable patterns, which it doesn't anyway.) So the only conclusion is that any pattern you think you've identified or are relying on is just a coincidence, and your reliance on it is a huge gamble. If it works out, it's because you got lucky. It's far more likely that you're going to burn yourself with stunts like this. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
