I can't believe people are making threads about this.
As long as bitcoins has excisted, prices have gone up and down. It's in the nature of bitcoin. If supply is larger then demand, then the price will drop until demand is larger then supply, when the price will rise again.
You shouldn't convert you bitcoin. Just hold on, and wait until the price will rise again (which will happen).
Bitcoin has not moved this large this fast. These price swings are ridiculous even by bitcoin standards. It dropped $1800 in about 7 days, and mind you that's a larger drop than bitcoin has been worth for the vast majority of its life. A 35% drop (roughly) in a week! We've seen that kind of drop before on a percentage basis (rarely though), but never that magnitude in terms of dollars. And now this morning, bitcoin surged about $900 in 4 hours. Again, a larger price movement in four hours than what bitcoin has been worth for the majority of its life. These movements don't correlate to supply and demand for the coin, but people speculating/gambling/flipping the currency. Chalking this up to "oh, that's supply and demand for ya" is overly simplistic to the point of being semantically true and of zero value. This bounce actually has the potential to harm, as it's just training a lot of monkeys on these boards that anytime it goes down, that means it's about to go up, so sink all your money into it. That's not how it works, and you're taking on a huge risk you don't even understand in thinking it is. |
|
|
|
This is why i ask, why bitcoin is rising and dropping her worth and what is the value of the bitcoin in the year of 2013? And when the bitcoin start ?
The people saying bitcoin is trading related to supply and demand, while not inaccurate, are being overly simplistic. Nearly everything trades according to supply and demand, so knowing that isn't particularly useful. If you're asking why it is currently experiencing these wild price swings (drop of $1800 in a week, or roughly 35%; or shockingly a rise of roughly $900, or roughly 30% in just a few hours!), you cannot chalk that up to supply and demand. There are complex mechanics at work here and I doubt anyone professing to have the answer as to why swings of this magnitude are happening (which are large even by bitcoin volatility standards), actually knows themselves. There are millions of dollars being made right now on these price movements, and anyone who knows why it's happening isn't going to tell you and lessen their take of the profit. This is just an example of why this type of "investing" (read that as speculating) is risky and not for people who don't understand traditional investments, let purely speculative stuff like crypto. |
|
|
|
Why not just print dollars? It should not be done because if people would just print dollars, every would just print it and there would be no empowerment. Nobody will be rich and nobody will be poor if we would all just print dollars. People would be lazy and not work because they don't have to work hard for money because they would just print dollars. And it would be a chaos if that happened.
We "print" dollars all the time, but it's mostly digital creation and is done by the banking system, not ncecessarily the Fed. Fractional reserve banking allows banks to loan 90% of deposits out, and that's how most of the new dollars in the economy are created. As long as the loaned money is being used to create more products and services in the economy that the market as a whole desires, everything is fine, as the loans (which are just a representation of value) are paid back with the new value that has been created. Essentially, value creation has to match dollar creation, otherwise you get a large amount of inflation whereby each dollar represents less value. |
|
|
|
now this bitcoin has a lot to use as a place of investment
but I want bitcoin as a front investment who have done it
let's share with me how to invest with bitcoin for the future
I follow many methods to invest in bitcoin. First what ever I earn online, I invest it in to bitcoin and ETH. I have been investing in bitcoin since long, but recently started with ETH seeing the technological superiority as a payment processor. However, I am not a short term investor, I think of long term investment. Probably for another 5+ years. So for me, bitcoin's current price is low for investment and after the recent dip, it gave me the chance to average out my buying price. Secondly, I am a trader as well. I mostly trade during the weekends and don't use many pairs to trade. I mostly trade around bitcoin and USD pair. Whatever I earn from trading, goes in to my savings. I have a day job, so I am not dependent on my bitcoin earnings. So whatever I earn goes straight in to my savings for the future. Interested in what you see in ETH as a technologically superior payment processor? Are you talking about confirmation times or processing fees, or something else entirely? I don't often hear ETH touted on strength as a payment processor, usually bulls for ETH are talking up smart contracts or the applications that are built on top of the Ethereum network. I think there are plenty of coins that are improvements over Bitcoin in terms of fees and processing time, but none have the scale or ubiquity, and for now, that's more important. |
|
|
|
The blocks in BTC are full, filled with about 2000 transactions each block.
The one full block on the BTH chain had 37K transactions. That means the BTH blocks can store in a little more than an hour what BTC blocks needs nearly a day for.
Whether the BCH pool is invulnerable or not, only time will show. But it clearly has a better chances to do so.
Taking away hashpower is another cause that leads to the same problem, but I think it needs to be dealt with separately.
That would be a simplistic comparison. The blocks in BCH are around 8 MB, where as with the implementation of Segwit, the blocksize is around 2 MB in BTC. So it means that 4x of transactions can be stored in BCH. But the blocks are much slower to find there... I don't think that the BCH blocks are slower to find. I am checking the Bitcoin Cash Blockchain (in blockchair.com), and I could see new blocks being mined every 5 minuets or so. On on the other hand, Blockchain.info is showing new Bitcoin blocks only once every 20 or 25 minutes. That’s good for the survival of bitcoin cash. I guess miners are very much interested into this coin and if they keep supporting it, this coin will pump high but currently, it is at very bad price. As far as bitcoin cash and bitcoin comparison is concerned, I don’t think so this kiddo coin can ever be able to stand next to bitcoins. How is it at a very bad price? They manufactured this coin out of thin air and it's maintained a multi-billion dollar market cap since inception, which ostensibly means they manufactured billions of dollars worth of value out of thin air and based on nothing. And there has been enough buying activity to support this valuation for weeks now. I wouldn't at all consider that a "bad price." It's damn near a miracle, and pretty fortunate for anyone with BCash that they haven't been crushed by a wave of sellers. They certainly manufactured this coin out of thin air But it is the same with essentially any coin out there (wtf, even fiat is created basically out of thin air nowadays). Apart from that, I can't possibly agree that this coin has actually created billions of dollars worth of value. If people tried to cash out all their Bitcoin Cash tokens that would likely crash the price below a few million dollar market cap. Therefore, it is not a real value, it is no more than some fancy numbers with no connection to reality, pretty much like Bitcoin's market cap (or even less than that) Market cap is funny like that in that it purports to represent a theoretical value that wouldn't hold up in certain situations, like total liquidation. But it's the best metric available, and a standard for all asset valuations. It's "paper" value just like a stock is a "paper gain" or "paper loss" until it's sold and realized. I understand your point in saying it's not a "real" value, but it's no less applicable than any other asset valuation, and even if you take the position that all asset valuations suffer the same flaws, then at least that's consistent and a point of comparison. The fact that you wouldn't be able to liquidate the market cap value out of BCash doesn't affect market cap a comparison tool to compare it to how much its worth relative to Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
And here we go again:
I'm curious if there is still anyone who is doubting that miners are making full use of the opportunity to earn more profits by moving their hashpower to and fro. Note that the BCash hashrate has dropped almost to zero, i.e. virtually no one is mining this coin presently (obviously till the next difficulty adjustment). By the way, people are massively buying up litecoins right now, the price has risen a whopping 20% within mere 12 hours today and continues to rise. It kinda looks folks are not quite happy with the miners' abuse of power and choose just to walk away from Bitcoin. Any Bitcoin, for that matter
I certainly concur with your analysis about the purposeful targeting of mining, but I don't think it's intended to be abusive. It's just following the money. When it's more profitable to mine BCash, that's where a sizable group of miners go. When they run the difficulty up to the point where it's more profitable to switch back to Bitcoin, they do. I don't see anything currently that suggests it's intending to be abusive rather than intending to optimize income. Indeed, this is what you would expect from any rational being They are just following the scent of money, there is nothing inherently wrong in that (everybody and his dog do basically the same anyway). But, first, don't forget that it is damaging Bitcoin. That would most certainly mean even slower confirmation times and higher fees. In fact, it means just that, which has already been sort of proven (especially when the whole bunch starts mining the alternative Bitcoin). And, second, recall how and thanks to whom Bitcoin Cash came about Slower confirmation times are self-regulating, so at most it would be a problem only two weeks in duration before solving itself. Higher fees I'm not sold on as a consequence, as it should also have a self-regulating mechanism to it in that mining difficulty doesn't directly equate to higher fees, only a large queue of unconfirmed transactions competing for limited block space would push transactions fees higher. I certainly don't trust the any mining cartel, whether it be one operating on Bitcoin, BCash or one that switches back and forth, and it has nothing to do with the currency they choose and everything to do with the fact that any sufficiently large group of people become protectionist and use their collective power to their own self-interests. Unless BCash folks are actively sabotaging the Bitcoin network in some fashion, benignly mining on their own chain or attempting to make their own system better doesn't affect Bitcoin much except for potential loss of customers, and that's entirely Bitcoin's own fault. |
|
|
|
It is yet to be announced that bitcoins would be used worldwide as in many parts of the world ,bitcoin introduction is too much necessary then we can apply it.We need media to join hands with us for the promotion of bitcoins.
There wouldn't be any broad announcement any more than there was for the dollar. Nobody controls the international currency market, so there's no authority to deem anything an international currency. It just kind of happens. Whatever currency is the most sought after worldwide is an international currency because its sought out worldwide. Nobody announces it to be so first. Actually it depends on how we judge it because there is no proper of fixed definition of international currency, bitcoin is not regulated by the government so we can call it anything we want to, but for me it is already an international currency. That was kind of my point. If you're waiting for an "announcement" that bitcoin is an international currency, it's never going to come, because there is no authority that makes such proclamations. A currency is just an international currency or it is not, and the means of determination is consensus (wide-scale use). However, to me, bitcoin is not nearly ubiquitous enough to be an international currency. Yes, now that you have mentioned it, I am actually chuckling. Who is gonna pass such law legalizing bitcoins in whole world and making it international currency ? If this ever happens, I can see the oneness of all countries in the sense of money at least. I am just sure about one thing; it will be used by all countries one day. I'm not confident enough to make that prediction. To be adopted wide-enough for it to be considered "globally adopted" would require a significant uptick in the current adoption rate. I suppose it is competing against time in the sense that it would need to achieve that before it became obsolete or supplanted by a more innovative or better designed cryptocurrency. There's far too many obstacles in the way of becoming truly global to take for granted that it ever will, beyond the niche role it occupies now. |
|
|
|
When Jamie Dimon warns against bitcoin, it’s usually a good time to consider buying some Yesterday, Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, told a conference that he thinks the cryptocurrency bitcoin is a “fraud” and “not a real thing.” He declared that the open-source protocol would eventually “close.” He even went so far as to warn his employees that if they were caught trading bitcoin, they would be fired “in a second” for their “stupidity.” https://qz.com/1076254/bitcoin-btc-price-mostly-rises-after-jamie-dimon-warns-against-it/I find this quite amusing  To be honest, i like when bigwigs try to scare people away. This speaks a volume about how they see bitcoin. When Jamie Dimon, one of the world's most respected bankers and investors (you forgot to add), warns against bitcoin, "it's usually a good time to consider buying some" based on what? Just to be a contrarian? Because such a shallow logical basis for making an investment decision is a terrible investment thesis. Also, your post is dishonest. Dimon did say that people who buy bitcoin are stupid, but more importantly he said he would fire anyone at the investment bank because trading in bitcoin is against JP Morgan Chase's rules. I understand that mistake was a limitation based on a poor primary source, but you should actually look up his actual quote on the matter, because this website purposefully misrepresented it. Speaking at a conference in New York, the boss of America’s biggest bank said he would fire “in a second” anyone at the investment bank found to be trading in bitcoin. “For two reasons: it’s against our rules, and they’re stupid. And both are dangerous.” He added: “The currency isn’t going to work. You can’t have a business where people can invent a currency out of thin air and think that people who are buying it are really smart." He's not wrong. The utility of bitcoin and its value do not correlate well, but since we're in a market economy, I suppose that ultimately doesn't matter. That's one crucial area where Dimon can prove to be wrong. If everyone gets on board believing that a worthless trinket (let's call it bitcoin) is really valuable, then it is. It doesn't necessarily matter that it was created out of thin air or if everyone buying it is an idiot. If the demand to own it is there, it is valuable, reasons be damned. |
|
|
|
It could happen quicker- adoption can grow exponentially until basically everyone is using it.
Compare Bitcoin to the internet and think of how fast we went from "What is the internet?" to every man woman and child carrying an internet accessing device on them 24/7. First thing they do when they wake up? Check their internet connected device. Last thing they do before bed? Check their internet connected device.
We went from "What is this internet you're talking about?" to overwhelming adoption in relatively no time at all.
If you assume that Crypto is actually better than fiat, which all of us on this site certainly do, chances are it's only a matter of time before it is used more than fiat.
I think that's an overly optimistic analogy. Bitcoin is interesting, but in no sense is it as revolutionary as the Internet was to the pre-internet world. I don't even think Bitcoin is an overall improvement over fiat, only a niche improvement in very select instances. I'm not entirely convinced bitcoin prices above $4000 aren't a bubble. |
|
|
|
No matter how good bitcoin is, it would never replace fiat, specially Dollar, remember that printed money has been around for centuries, and printed money makes banks richer because of the fees, so you really think bitcoin will replace it? do you think the banks will let it happen? no way...
Bitcoin has so low fees to send money instantly to another country, like $1 per transaction (aproximately), if you wanna make a bank transaction to another country then the fees are like $30.
This is one of the reasons why bitcoin could never replace banks and fiat money, because of banks.
Fees aren't exclusive to banks. If Bitcoin became the dominant currency, there would still be financial institutions, especially for lending purposes, and anywhere there's a financial institution there's going to be fees charged for services. So Bitcoin isn't going to eliminate all financial services fees. The only financial service it could eliminate outright are companies like Western Union that charges no fees to transfer money. |
|
|
|
maybe you can added chat room,like another site dice,because it will be more attractive and make look friendly site.not much faucet site have chatroom,maybe you can make it happent and the first one
I for one hate those sites with chat rooms. They make the site heavy and not very attractive to me. I absolutely love the fact that FreeBitco.in is clean and clutter-free. FaucetHub/FaucetGame are good examples how a faucet/gaming experience is hindered by clutter. At first I thought it would be a good feature, but I actually agree with you on second thought. I've never seen a site with a trollbox that isn't a cesspool of beggars and vulgar trolls. In that regard, it would actually harm the site I think to enable that kind of interaction. |
|
|
|
Ridiculously, she is not a debtor, she can bankrupt a minimum of 50 countries, which allocated funds for help. The country with the most developed economy, even the dollar when there was still no euro, was the main currency of many countries. But the points of view of aggression and submission to oneself, this is its worst quality.
America is not a debtor? Because that's demonstrably wrong. America is one of, if not the biggest, debtor nation in the world. America has a chronic inability to balance its budget, necessitating borrowing money from people, institutions and nations that have surplus money and are looking for a "safe" place to park them to mitigate inflationary risks. In no possible sense can America be said not to be a debtor. I'd rather say it is arguably right It doesn't really matter if Murrica is technically the largest debtor on the block. We should always face the facts without bias or prejudice (at least, as much as possible). And the first fact is that the US national debt is denominated in the same US dollars that the US government (the Fed, more specifically) happens to print. So this debt is entirely nominal. The second fact is that this debt (at least, the part which is held by foreign holders like the Gulf sheikhs, Japanese banks, Russian oligarchs, and Chinese nouveaux riches, to name a few) is not a debt at all. It is in fact a sort of toll that these nations pay to Murrica for being allowed to be what they are. It is just a handy and useful misnomer but we are not to be deceived into that shit, right? You're just actively looking for reasons to disagree now. The debt is not nominal. Anyone with a cursory understanding of economics understands that printing money to pay off the debt would tank the currency, thereby destroying the value that's supposed to be repaid, and probably tanking the world economy in the process since so much of the world's saved value is denominated in the currency that would thereby be destroyed. Every nation that's tried to pay off their national debt by printing money has found out how not nominal the debt turns out to be. And even if you want to persist in that notion, it's still a debt, which by definition makes America a debtor nation. Your second point isn't even intelligible. |
|
|
|
Today, I am getting a notification asking me to enable 2-FA. I don't have it enabled yet, but I did get a deposit recently, so this begs the question. Is there a global notification asking everyone to enable 2-FA or am I being asked to enable 2-FA, because I have a certain balance in my account. Please let me know. If it's because of my balance, then I understand. If it's a global thing, is there some threat I am unaware of?
I've seen a prompt recommending 2FA before in my account, but nothing that was required. I think it's just a recommendation that appears in everyone's account. It's a best practice to protect you, but it's optional. Obviously, not using 2FA opens you up to risk, especially if you have a significant balance. |
|
|
|
Government have to legalize and regulates bitcoin as currency immediately. Bitcoin can protect the country from American financial policy, bitcoin and other virtual currency pose a direct threat to the status of the U.S. dollar as the world's currency. The other currency used by developing ccountries actually benefit most from the emergence of alternative currency. Leakage of tax revenues can occur if the public transactions in cash in large portion, by using bitcoin will increase the tax income because all of bitcoin transactions are recorded.
The interesting thing about this is government doesn't have to sanction Bitcoin in any way and it can continue to become more popular. If Bitcoin is easily obtainable (currently it is) and very liquid (currently it is), the government can continue to refuse to recognize Bitcoin as an official currency, but that matters very little to anyone using it as a currency with other people who also consider it a currency. Perhaps you can't pay your taxes with it if the government doesn't recognize it, but also, who cares? If you wanted to live a purely BTC existence, it's easy enough to convert BTC to fiat to transact any official business. Of course, finding enough businesses that want to trade in BTC is another problem entirely. But at least the main hurdle isn't the government. |
|
|
|
My strategy is a bit risky for a rational investor.
Here is my investment strategy :
1. Buy Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ethereum, NEO(I'm sure that Chinese will back their own cryptocurrency), and Monero at the same percentage (this is for long term).
2. Buy these hyped up coins, sell when they are pumped.
3. Buy old hyped coins (after they have been dumped) and hold for a few months.
4. Reinvest all the profits made in trading to BTC, LTC, ETH, NEO, and XMR.
5. Repeat.
*Don't involve your emotions in trading and investing.
I know it's risky but I'm young and I'm going to give it all into crypto while I can.
Everything looks good when you put it down on paper, but this "strategy" isn't any different than someone proclaiming they're going to be good at investing because they plan to "buy low, sell high." Obviously, that's everyone's strategy. 'Buy hyped up coins and sell when they are pumped.' That is literally everyone's strategy when it comes to these garbage coins. If you can't do anything to actually manipulate the market (like the whales have the ability to do), you're just trying to ride the waves they make like everyone else, and what makes you think you're going to be so much better at it than them? If it's worked in the past, it's luck, not strategy. It's like someone shooting dice and winning money and bragging about how good they are at rolling seven, when the fact of the matter is nothing you're doing is in your control. |
|
|
|
Hello guys!
I've been using this faucet for a very long time but now I have an issue. My old account has no email associated to it and I changed my old computer recently so I lost all the navigation data. When I try to login to my old account it says "Please check your email inbox for a validation email", which I cannot receive obviously. I had a small sum in it and I really don't want to waste it because I worked hard for that, referring people and so on. I tried contacting them using the form on the website some weeks ago but still no replies. I also tried contacting wetsuit here on bitcointalk via PM but nothing again. Does he actually answer sometimes to other ppl?
Btw, have you got some other ideas in mind to solve my situation maybe? Thanks in advance to everyone who will reply.
He seems pretty busy with other endeavors and stated so some time back. But he does check in here (what seems to be fairly frequently). I'm a bit surprised you haven't heard from him. Are you sure you didn't just miss the PM? I miss them all the time because the PM system on these boards are terrible. In any event, Myfe seems pretty responsive now, and maybe he can reach out to Wetsuit for you and get a more timely response. There's gotta be some way to prove your ownership/recover your account. |
|
|
|
The housing market is not going to rise at the rate of bitcoin any time soon and probably never. A $100,000 bitcoin purse is going to be worth much more in five years than the value of a $100,000 cheap house is going to be. If you want to eliminate your payment, that is one thing, if you are looking at it as an investment, than that is another story altogether. You need to take analysis of the house price and compare it with bitcoin price for the next 5 to 10 years.
Housing also is far more stable than bitcoin is, and there's nowhere near the risk that a $100,000 house will ever depreciate near the speed bitcoin has shown an ability to lose value at. Five years from now is a long time in crypto. Worst case for a house is it depreciates 20-30% in five years, and that would probably take another housing crisis and global recession. Worst case for bitcoin is that it loses 90% or more in 5 years, or that it gets replaced by a more innovative coin and has no value in 5 years. |
|
|
|
I see your point, but I don't consider what I said to be contradiction. First of all, I was speaking only in regards to stocks, which do not comprise 100% of my investments. I also own bonds, real estate, and crypto as well as short-term notes. The diversification was only in respect to the equity portion of my investments.
So I suppose there are two types of diversification, and I was speaking about the smaller set. There's diversification across investment types (what the asset is: stock, bond, real estate, commodity, crypto, etc.) and there's diversification across industries which is most commonly (but not exclusively) used in relation to equity investing. If you're invested 50% in stocks and 25% in bonds and 25% in real estate, and all your stocks are in one industry, I wouldn't consider that diversified. You could be well-diversified inside crytpo (10% across 10 different coins) but equating 100% of your investments and I wouldn't consider that diversified in the larger sense either, since crypto by and large is dominated by btc, and whatever btc does it for the most part drags every other coin with it. In equity investing, there are defensive stocks that perform better in recessions than growth stocks which are very dependent on good economic conditions. So there are several ways to get at diversification, but in each case it's going to depend on the facts of the case. I would say a general way to put it is you're diversified if a general event doesn't impact all your investments at the same time. (Exceptions for catastrophic market events, which will drop everything, because you can never be diversified to the point where you never experience losses.)
As to me, this kind of diversification doesn't make a lot of sense for an individual Note that I specifically point this out since a big investment company (like Berkshire Hathaway) is a totally different matter (obviously, they have quite a few of different individuals). Diversification, as I understand it, serves for profit multiplication at a certain level of risk. If you are looking for capital preservation, you buy gold, and that's pretty much it. Since no one can learn and understand any asset perfectly, it makes sense to invest in no more than 3-4 assets (as I told before) while learning these assets as deep as possible, otherwise you will be wasting time and energy mindlessly shuffling your money between different assets with no real purpose I suppose I'm on the other side then, as I completely see the point of diversifying. Diversification is mainly about risk management. Investing is about trying to increase wealth, which is essentially taking on risk in pursuit of future reward. In the pursuit of this reward, if you put all your investment eggs in one basket, and that basket breaks, you're ruined. Diversification across investments (or industries) is about making sure that if one of your ideas proves wrong, it doesn't end up in you losing all your money. Necessarily, diversification likely lowers overall return because it forces you to invest in other areas instead of putting all your money in your "best" investment idea to protect against the possibility that that single idea proves wrong. If you were simply trying to maximize returns, you would identify your best idea, and sink all your money into it. You wouldn't diversify to try and make money, but to protect you from the some of the risk as you try to make money by taking on risk. Because diversification's aim is risk management, if you just wanted to swing for the fences regardless of risk, you wouldn't diversify at all. That doesn't matter if you're a large corporation or an individual investor. Though large corporations have more money to lose by not diversifying, the money lost by an individual is more meaningful per dollar because it is so much less. So as an individual investor, I fully embrace the need to diversify. Spreading money across different investment types and industries is meant to decrease the likelihood that you lose everything due to a catastrophe. |
|
|
|
It is yet to be announced that bitcoins would be used worldwide as in many parts of the world ,bitcoin introduction is too much necessary then we can apply it.We need media to join hands with us for the promotion of bitcoins.
There wouldn't be any broad announcement any more than there was for the dollar. Nobody controls the international currency market, so there's no authority to deem anything an international currency. It just kind of happens. Whatever currency is the most sought after worldwide is an international currency because its sought out worldwide. Nobody announces it to be so first. Actually it depends on how we judge it because there is no proper of fixed definition of international currency, bitcoin is not regulated by the government so we can call it anything we want to, but for me it is already an international currency. That was kind of my point. If you're waiting for an "announcement" that bitcoin is an international currency, it's never going to come, because there is no authority that makes such proclamations. A currency is just an international currency or it is not, and the means of determination is consensus (wide-scale use). However, to me, bitcoin is not nearly ubiquitous enough to be an international currency. |
|
|
|
Ridiculously, she is not a debtor, she can bankrupt a minimum of 50 countries, which allocated funds for help. The country with the most developed economy, even the dollar when there was still no euro, was the main currency of many countries. But the points of view of aggression and submission to oneself, this is its worst quality.
America is not a debtor? Because that's demonstrably wrong. America is one of, if not the biggest, debtor nation in the world. America has a chronic inability to balance its budget, necessitating borrowing money from people, institutions and nations that have surplus money and are looking for a "safe" place to park them to mitigate inflationary risks. In no possible sense can America be said not to be a debtor. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
