Fair enough points, and there are likely plenty of us longer term BTC holders who may have learned a few lessons along the way, including that getting through the first cycle or so may well be quite challenging, including that unless you are able to front load your BTC investment, it could take you more than a whole cycle just to get to a point in which you might start to feel that you have accumulated enough BTC, so you may well not ONLY hold through various breaks of support or resistance, but you may well continue to buy no matter which side of the range the BTC price might happen to be... so then in that regard, there may well be questions about how much bitcoin is enough and is there going to be any advantages in terms of selling at any point in the first 4-6 years if you might have had determined that you don't quite have enough BTC.. so then the ongoing better (and assured) of ways to get more bitcoin is just to continue to buy as long as you have money and perhaps to hold during points that you are running out of money, and if you have cashflow coming from other sources, to just try to continue to figure out how much of your cash flow you are able to use in order to continue to buy more bitcoin.

Again, there may or may not be abilities to front load your BTC investment, but even if there is, it could take a whole cycle and maybe two cycles to start to feel comfortable in terms of having enough BTC... and there are even several guys here who are kind of on the border of those kinds of assessments (surely from their own perspective regarding how many BTC they believe that they need)... so HODL and continue to buy for the longer term investors.. and at some point it might start to become more clear that you have enough BTC to be able to pretty much sell BTC any time that you want, but you still might choose to sell in strategic ways rather than selling all the time or even selling big chunks at a time, which may well NOT be necessary... including (back to LFC's issue and tentative plan) whether selling 25% in any particular cycle is a good thing or not - and surely there might be some reasonable prudence built into such a strategy, even though it sounds like a lot to sell in one cycle. for some of us.. especially since there seems to be some built in expectations of being able to buy back cheaper.. which may or may not end up happening... and would such a person still be accepting of the fact that he sold 25% of his stash at a price that might end up NOT being even close to a high for that cycle.

Personally, I think that it is better to have a somewhat tentative plan in advance so that you sell on the way up rather than selling on the way down.. yet, I also know that sometimes with the varying personal tradeoffs in regards to how to do accomplish it, it can be easier said than done... . even though I surely buy into the raking approach, but I have been too whimpy so far to even attempt anything close to 25%, which might not be a bad idea.. but I am not unhappy with what I have been doing either.. Maybe I could consider some kind of a compromise.. like 12.5%?  So yeah, maybe I am in a similar boat as you, even though I don't really feel any burning need to sell more than I already do in my already existing system.


First of all, you are talking about support and not resistance, so I FTFY

Second, there is nothing really wrong with your proclamation, even though you don't really give very many claim specifics beyond that we are not going below $50k again absent some kind of a black swan event.. .. .. which is not an outrageous proclamation..   

A few months ago, I made a claim that I would be willing to bet (so I consider the odds to be greater than 50/50) that we would not come within 20% of the 200-WMA before the end of 2025.,. and sure currently the 200-WMA is moving up at about $42 per day and currently it is at $34,726-ish.  https://bitcoindata.science/withdrawal-strategy

No it is not very clear.  You are repeating points that I already addressed, which is that you seem to be referring to a lack of disposable income that some people might have, which is a more accurate way of framing the situation why some folks might not be able to invest into something like bitcoin.

But whatever, have fun keeping on repeating yourself in different ways.. or maybe arguing with yourself.


Being able to invest into something like bitcoin is called having disposable income. There is no need for capital, as I already mentioned several times.. but you want to argue about it.


If you have disposable income, then there is no need to wait... but if you do not, then maybe you have to wait until you do... yet I would not presume that a person has to wait merely because his/her disposable income is small, which seems to be what you are saying in a kind of dumb-ass, repetitive and stubborn way.


I am not sure what you are talking about here.  Bitcoin is not stable, and sure, historically it has tended to go up, but going up is not guaranteed which is part of the reason that a person who invests in bitcoin should be investing from 1) his disposable income or 2) from having capital that he can invest into bitcoin.. but the 2nd option is not required, even though it is one way of being able to justify investing into bitcoin.


Yes.. Reredmi896 is arguing and making dumb points about a need for capital, which is not true, and even though he seems to get the idea of disposable income, he seem to believe (assume without any real basis) that a low amount of disposable income means that waiting is a better strategy rather than getting started in regards to bitcoin investing... Sim_card largely pointed out Reredmi896's inadequate thinking.. so I doubt that Reredmi896 needs to be defended when he is spouting out waiting as if it were a strategy. .and also proclaiming that you have to have capital to invest into bitcoin, which truly is not true, either, but he (Reredmi896) wants to continue to argue about that incorrect and mostly wrong thinking.... which truly does not mean that he can choose not to invest and sure, Reredmi896, can choose waiting as his own strategy and he can have fun staying poor, too... hahahahaha


that is a dumb idea, and not even worth repeating here.


Again?  Why do we need to talk about what shitcoiners do in this thread?  It is not even on topic.. which even if they have some smart ideas or dumb ideas, it seems to be a distraction to even talk about it.


O.k. this part is correct.. DCA in regards to bitcoin, not shitcoins.. Shitcoins are more likely to be in and out type adventures rather than long term, unless you limit your involvement in them to no more than 10% of your bitcoin investment, then at least you have kept your distraction into them under some kind of boundaries.


You seem to be arguing and quibbling with the main points that I was making, which was to rebutt your assertion that investing does not give up anything in the current time, which it likely does, and if it does not then you may well be investing way too whimpily.

Sure your level of aggressiveness is a choice, yet your earlier blanket statement that investing into bitcoin does not contribute to giving anything up seems to be factually wrong, whether a person is investing whimpily or aggressively, and even if he ONLY invests $10 per month, he is still giving something up by dedicating that amount to bitcoin rather than buying a couple extra cups of coffee... or however he might have chosen to otherwise spend or use or save the $10.


Who says?  People can choose their own level of aggressiveness, and yeah they can structure their investment into bitcoin so that they are not stressed, but they don't have to.. The level of aggressiveness or whimpiness is completely discretionary... which means each person can choose and such person may or may not have regrets later over how they choose to go about their level of aggressiveness of their bitcoin investment.


Yeah sure the longer that someone has been in bitcoin, they have greater chances of having had gotten to a place of relaxation in terms of being in profits, but still some guys had made a lot of mistakes and even continue to make similar mistakes.. so yeah, it sometimes can be difficult to learn from your mistakes or even recognize some of the mistakes  and ways to get away from continuing to make similar kinds of mistakes. .. especially traders.

I would hate to request that you do more work; however, if your script were to eliminate any pushers whose average is less than 10 pushups per day, then I cannot see how that would not be considered fair... but that would have had eliminated Dailyscript, but not Judith87403.. so yeah.. tough to figure out some standard unless you just happen to see it or a member points it out to you prior to you running the next script.

This table has Cityhunter34 in there twice, and it is only obvious because the name is next to each other.. and sure one is capital C and the other is not capital c.

If you see a mistake, what do you do?  You manually fix it or you tell your script about it, so that your script will fix it?  I suppose it depends upon what kind of mistake is present.  

By the way, I had meant to send and smerit to your other post, not this post.. .

  It was this one:

Anyhow, I just want to say, that surely you likely did warm up to BTC more after 2017, but still, you have never really been much of an accumulator and holder, which likely would have also worked quite well after 2018.. ..

So, I am somewhat sorry to say, that you are kind of deluding yourself to proclaim that you made some kind of a major transformation after 2017 to become more of a Bitcoin believer, and sure relatively speaking you likely made progress, but it was not the kind of progress that could have gotten you set up pretty decent if you would have had realized in 2017/2018 to really get serious about BTC accumulation, such as shooting for some kind of a target in which your quasi-liquid investment portfolio would have been able to reach 15% or more within a year of converting into bullish..

So let's even say that you got bullish about bitcoin around the top of the 2017 BTC price run, you could have pretty much front loaded and invested into bitcoin starting from the 2017 top and spread your entry over the whole year of 2018 and perhaps even leaking a bit into 2019, and really gotten to a point of stacking up some sats.. .. and you can do the calculations for yourself in terms of figuring out what would have been around 15% of your quasi-liquid investment portfolio and spread out the DCA over 12-18 months from whatever timeline that you would have had started.. and if you want I could do the numbers for you...

If we go from October 1, 2017 and if our budget was $79k between October 1, 2017 until April 2019 (that's 18 months of DCA).. and then after March 2019, we just invested at $100 per week until now.  Ok. I cannot resist..

Here it is $1k per week for 18 months between 10/1/2017 and 3/31/2019 would be $79k invested and 12.93 BTC, and then if we did $100 per week from April 1, 2019 until present that would be $26,800 invested and about 1.5566 BTC.

So that would be a total fo $105,800 invested and 14.4966  BTC.  That surely would not be a bad place to be, and you could just start cashing out around 4-10% per year and/or maybe using raking too.

Rather than repeating what I already said.  I will agree to disagree, and reiterate that you and investors.com happen to be wwwwrrrrroooonnnngggggg..

I would like to answer for Philip.

He cannot resist, but to cash out every single year.

He cannot help himself.

That is part of the reason that he barely has any bitcoin, relatively speaking... and at the age of 67-ish, he should be cashing out rather than buying... but maybe perhaps in slow (and sustainable) ways (such as raking and/or time-based), rather than all or nothing kinds of approaches (and thinking).

#justsaying


There is no reason to mine.  Especially at 60 or even at 67.

If you have an amount of BTC, you can engage in time-based releases as in the sustainable withdrawal model (including doing a 10% annualized version) and/or you can engage in raking.  Either way pick your amounts based on your BTC stash size.


yes.. you are doing the opposite of best practices, Biodom - especially in bitcoin.
 
You should be buying on the way down and selling on the way up.. but careful to budget so that you never run out of cash to buy on the way down, and also budget to never run out of bitcoin on the way up, so in other words don't sell too many of your BTC and/or blow your wadd by selling too many too soon.

Of course, you can modify how much you buy or you sell based on where you are at in life.

But whatever. 

To each his own... you keep doing the opposite of best practices, and if it is working for you (so far), then so be it.


Still $80k is going to be pretty good for most, and yeah that is likely going to keep going up... but still $80k is a $2 million in traditional investments with a 4% withdrawal rate, and $800k in bitcoin with a 10% withdrawal rate.. and other details and caveats apply in order to get those rates to work.. which I would assert that right now is right around 23 Bitcoin...


You can do better managing it on your own and mostly being in bitcoin, as long as you get the numbers right (or approximately right... since you don't really need to be completely right with bitcoin and it if you are somewhat conservative, bitcoin will likely allow you to out perform your expecations).. of course, no guarantees, but seems better than having a third party fucking things up.

Have fun staying poor.

Even though I understand that you are saying that your bitcoin investment comes from your discretionary income, so it is extra income that you are putting into bitcoin with the hope to be able to both defer gratification and to hopefully improve your life at some future time.

Nonetheless, whether someone invests $10 per week, $100 per week, $1,000 per week or some other amount into bitcoin, the amount that is invested does have potentials to take away from current consumption, depending upon how aggressive the person is in light of his discretionary income.. if he is really wimpy and he is investing only 1-5% or his discretionary income then he is less likely to feel the effects of missing that income that he could have used for current consumption rather than potentially profiting later.  And, of course, if he is investing somewhere close to 100% of his discretionary income, he might be sacrificing driving a nicer car or maybe living in a less luxurious house or maybe going out to eat less (or perhaps not at all), so there could be some current sacrifices and reductions in quality of life based on investing into bitcoin, even though the investment into bitcoin would not be taking away from the basic expenses, yet the investor still chooses what he considers to be basic expenses or not.


That is a pretty dumb video.. but yeah sure funny at the same time.

There are people who could have had gotten into bitcoin at $69k and then just sat on their hands for the last 2.5 years, which surely that would have been a short-sighted approach, especially if we see that even someone who started investing right around $69k in 2021 would likely be in pretty good profits right now, and even if the person front loaded and bought a whole bitcoin for $69k, but if that same person bought an additional $69k worth of bitcoin since about October 1, 2021 until now (at $500 per week), then he would have had accumulated a total of around 3.2595 (1 + 2.2595) bitcoin and a total of $69* 2= $138k invested (currently valued right around $218k (so nearly 60% higher than the invested amount).. which truly would not be a bad place to be.


Yep exactly.. as my attempt at an example (above).  A person could have started buying BTC at the top and even lump sum invested at the top, and there quite a few different scenarios in which he would still be quite a bit in profits right now based on continuing to invest in BTC, even if he started with a relatively high lump sum investment at the top of the 2021 BTC prices.

The expression that "the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent" tends to be something that we really cannot rest with any guarantees since the price can move in either direction and then stay there much longer than it makes sense to stay there.... .. that is part of the reason why bitcoin can also end up being a great bet to the upside because it can go up way further and faster than anyone had expected, but it also could end up going in the opposite direction. and go down way further and longer than anyone expected... and so yeah, having some bitcoin prepares you for those upside possibilities, but you surely do not need to be "all in" in order to profit stupendously, yet on the downside, you likely would not want to be "all in" or even overexposed to bitcoin if you end up getting forced into selling some or all of your bitcoin because it went down further than you expected and/or it stayed down there longer than you expected...

But we still can see certain factors why those who are studying bitcoin consider that there remains really good chances that it is going to continue to go up... but at the same time, the opposite could end up happening (and it could just be a short-term glitch or it could end up staying down for way longer than any of us thought to be possible).

An overwhelming majority of the world's population have little to no exposure to bitcoin.  Maybe in the ballpark of 99%, but the lack of exposure and the fact that there are not very many people who have some bitcoin, that does not mean that they are going to have to end up getting into bitcoin, even though many of us see how bitcoin's network effects continue to grow in a variety of ways, including this year's financialization aspects, and including that there likely are governments that are covertly acquiring bitcoin.. .but hey, even that does not guarantee the price to go up, even though it would seem to be a good idea to accumulate some and to get off zero for those who are either on zero or who are under exposed.


Yes a lot of the guys here are using the term circle to mean cycle.. and sure historically there has always been a new ATH at least every 4 years and likely the BTC price is higher at any point 210,000 blocks into the future... but so what? that does not mean it is guaranteed, unless you can see into the future, which you cannot and no one else can either.


Good.  At least you recognize that it is not guaranteed.  That is a good thing.

Another thing can be arbitrary in regards from when to measure a cycle, and we can talk about halvenings as our reference points... and we can also consider that the number of new coins issued as compared to the number of outstanding issued coins is becoming so small that the quantity may or may not matter.. in terms of keeping up the effects of a four year cycle, even though I personally am not going to prematurely give up upon the concept of a cycle, even though we see that the new demand of the providers of the spot ETFs has likely dwarfed the size of the issuance of the new BTC supply, but still even with so much seemingly new demand for BTC, we cannot get rid of the likely ongoing effects of the halvenings of the issuance of the new BTC supply.


I largely agree with this, even though you said it in a bit of a weird way.. . but yeah we can create a plan that prepares us for various possible outcomes, because we should not want to get reckt merely due to under preparation in regards to BTC price dynamics that end up playing out and we had not planned or prepared for such a scenario... but yeah, at the same time, there are surely some scenarios in which BTC prices could go to zero or could go down rather than UP, so there likely is nothing wrong with having some preparations for that in terms of having some value in other assets, but it would be pretty ridiculous to NOT have any bitcoin or maybe just have 1% or 2% allocated to bitcoin based on the various scenarios that we know, and surely there are a lot of folks who either have low bitcoin or they have no bitcoin, so surely they are prepared for various scenarios in which the BTC price goes down, but they are either not at all prepared for up or inadequately/insufficiently prepared for up... and yeah, that is their choice.  not everyone can be part of what is likely to be (but not guaranteed to be) one of the largest transfers of wealth known to mankind happening right in front of our eyes... and it would likely be better to be on the receiving end of that rather than the giving end.. .. but people make their choices.


Yes.. not guaranteed to reach $100k.. that is for sure... but I would hate to be someone who is either selling BTC before $100k and/or around $100k because they believe it is some kind of an amazing top, when it is not.  so good luck with those views that $100k is some kind of a "high" number, even though it is not guaranteed to ever be reached.


Does not sound like a dilemma to me.

I doubt that it is a good idea for anyone to sell BTC with an expectation of buying back lower, and if anyone is in the stages of accumulating bitcoin, the best way to accumulate bitcoin is by buying it.  Not by selling it.

Surely once you get enough or more than enough then sell whenever you like, perhaps small amounts rather than a lot of it.. since why would anyone want to spend 4-10 years or more accumulating bitcoin in order to sell it.. that sounds retarded...

One of the great powers of bitcoin is mostly having it, and sure once you get enough or more than enough then you can start to sell it whenever you like, including creating various plans in regards to how you sell it, whether periodically or just raking profits from time to time as the price goes up (presuming that the price goes up)...

So if you are not sure how much bitcoin is enough or too much, then maybe you have to study your situation better, yet I stick to my claim that it is not a good idea to sell bitcoin in order to accumulate more, if that happens to be your goal.. and why would you want to go from bitcoin to holding inferior assets and/or currencies?  If you don't know what I am talking about, then you likely need to spend a bit more time studying bitcoin so you realize what it is that you are planning to sell and why you would do such a thing prior to reaching a state of overaccumulation.


I will agree with you that holding is not easy, and accumulating your bitcoin is not necessarily easy either, but I doubt the solution is getting out of bitcoin and getting into other things, even though surely, there surely are ways to diversify into other assets, especially once you have enough bitcoin or  more than enough bitcoin... and you would be the best person to figure out how many is enough or too much and what to do about it, even though there are a lot of folks who have regrets about selling too many of their bitcoin too soon, so hopefully you do not end up being like one of those folks merely because you are so focused upon some kind of a need to "take profits" or to maximize profits... getting too excited about maximizing profits sounds liek a trade rather than an investment.. but hey whatever, in regards to your bitcoin holdings you do you.


Hopefully you are not too distracted into shitcoins.

Fuck shitcoins. 

Thanks for the explanation.  I largely stick by my earlier comment (even though it might have come off as a bit too strong in terms of my reaction), but yeah it is up to you to do what you believe to be best including if you believe that you are doing something that is sufficiently similar to pushups or if it is even worth it (or a good exercise to be doing) to do 1 armed pushups - instead of waiting for recovery or maybe some other substitute kind of exercise that might not be so lopsided.. and yeah, maybe I am being a bit too judgmental in regards to what is an activity that is sufficiently-related to pushups..  

Yes, I had already known that 1 armed pushups exist, both in terms of the Rocky style pushups, and I had linked to that earlier in the thread.. but also surely there are likely folks who might be handicapped in some ways that might do various kinds of substitute exercises that might include something like a 1 armed pushup - though surely there might be better exercises depending on the kind of handicap that a person might have.

And sure, if you are doing the one-armed pushups from your knees then it might be more feasible (and less of a strain) than trying to do a full body pushup (with one arm), and  also there may well be some ways to do one armed pushups against the wall in order to do more reps again to the extent that 1 armed pushups are even reasonable to do or that maybe sometimes if people do things that are straining their body then they could get injuries, so it would be up to you if you are engaging in activities that are straining your body more than it is helping - especially since it is lopsided like that and you might be better off to wait until you are sufficiently recovered. but yeah, again, that is on you, and I already expressed a bit of judgmentalism in regards to the matter.... which truly you know the particulars of your situation better than me, and I found the whole matter a bit weird, as I have already expressed, now in two posts... and surely other guys might not agree with my making a BIG deal out  of your consideration that one armed pushups is a reasonable substitute for pushups.. We did have Phlipma in here doing planks for a while and no one (except me) was really complaining (or harassing him) about that.

---

Edited to add Pushup report:   

100k,JayJuanGee,103,20610,2024-05-17

Govt. bank agent.

Against the rules.

You cannot be a phoney in these here parts. hahahahaha..

Being a phoney might almost be the same as being an AI... yet I suppose they are different category, and surely the fucktwat government/bank agents are not stopped from posting in the forum as long as it appears they are largely writing their own posts rather than plagiarizing or using some other phoney system (which surely AI generated could kind of seem like that in the sense of coming from some data bases).

I would think that some of the government/bank agents (shill/trolls) have some similar talking points that they are spewing, which largely still seems to add up to their ability to get away with the generation of those kinds of "talking point" posts... Some will give up after a while, though.

There is an important distinction related to the point that you seem to be wanting to make, which seems to be that you are missing some nuance in regards to what makes a person able or unable to invest.

There is some correctness that if a person lacks capital, then he may well not be able to invest into bitcoin or anything else, yet the more important point would be that a person's ability to invest in bitcoin or anything else relates to the extent to which he has discretionary income.   

So in that sense there is no requirement that anyone has any capital at all in order to invest into bitcoin, and so the main requirement is that a person has discretionary income - and sure, a person who has a lot of capital may well be able to invest into bitcoin by moving his capital from certain kinds of assets into bitcoin, so there could be exceptions to any proclamation - even though we already know that it is not required to have any capital to invest into bitcoin so long as you have discretionary, even though having capital could be another way to establish an investment into bitcoin.


So are you admitting that there is no need for capital to invest into bitcoin?


With something like bitcoin, many times it is better to get started as soon as possible, especially once you have figured out that you have discretionary income.   

Now you might have a lot of messiness in your cashflows and your psychology, so you may well need to get some of those things in order, yet I would not presume that it mis necessary to get your finances and psychology in order prior to getting started in your investment into bitcoin, unless your situation happens to be so bad that you are not even able to figure out with any level of confidence whether you actually have discretionary income or not. 

Even though a large number of people might have a lot of complications in their finances and perhaps even lacking in their abilities to manage their finances very well.  Most likely an overwhelming number of folks should be able to tell you wether they have $100 per week or maybe $10 per week that they would be able to spare or throw away (meaning that it is extra and not needed to cover their expenses).    When folks have really small amounts of extra income and a lot of disorganization in their finances, it is likely more important that they start out more slowly and that they also spend time getting their shit figured out, but that still may well not justify waiting rather than getting started right away with some small amount of discretionary income that can be figured out. 

If there is no way to establish the existence of discretionary income, then those people need to make sure that they have discretionary income before they can start to invest into bitcoin.


Yes... if they have figured out that they actually do not have discretionary, then the should not be investing into bitcoin, because if they were to do that they would be gambling rather than investing.  They need to be able to put the money into bitcoin and have a certain level of confidence that they are not going to need such money for 4-10 years or longer and also understand the risk that the amount that they put in could go to zero (meaning they could lose up to 100% of the amount that they put into bitcoin, so they have to be ready, willing and able to accept that possibility, and if they are not able to do that, then their finances and psychology is not ready to invest into bitcoin).


No it is not better to be slow.  It is better to figure your shit out, and either you have disposable income or not.  If you have disposable income, then it is better to get started investing into bitcoin as soon as possible and figure out some kind of a system. 

Otherwise, if you figured out that you either do not have disposable income, then you should realize that you are not able to invest into bitcoin until you are sure that you have disposable income and then you can ONLY invest into bitcoin up to 100% of the amount of your disposable income, but if you are not sure if you have disposable income then you cannot invest into bitcoin.  I would not call that waiting, but instead you either have disposable income or you do not, and if you do not have it you cannot (or should not) be investing into bitcoin, and if you are not sure if you have disposable income or not, then you are likely in the same situation of not having it.. because you need to be clear that you actually have disposable income in order to invest into bitcoin, otherwise you are gambling and not investing.


I agree with all of the points of your post, including this one, except you could have worded this part better, since you are suggesting that holding more bitcoin is going to guarantee increased wealth, which truly is not true.  There is no guarantee, including that if someone does all the right things in bitcoin including investing into it as aggressively as he can, without over doing it, and he still might end up in a worse situation than if he had not invested into bitcoin... so surely it is better NOT to consider your bitcoin investment as if it were guaranteed, including communicating to others in a way that suggests that either you believe it is guaranteed or that it is guaranteed - since also you could lose your credibility when you communicate like that... even though many of us likely recognize and appreciate that it is better to invest into bitcoin rather than not investing into bitcoin, especially if we have figured out that we have discretionary income.  The devil is also in the details in regards to either how much or how to go about such investing into bitcoin.

Personally, I believe that the more clear way of expressing such ideas is to proclaim that as long as you are not engaging in leveraged trading, then the most that you are able to lose is 100% of your investment, so in that regard, each person needs to realize that they could lose 100% of their investment.  At the same time, there are a variety of possible other scenarios in which smaller amounts are lost or maybe the amount of gain is modest to non-existent, yet also there are some fairly highly-likely scenarios (that still may well be minority scenarios) in which there are various possible upside potentialities that still justify being in bitcoin, which is that bitcoin could perform at similar levels as other asset classes, or bitcoin could outperform other asset classes by modest amounts, or bitcoin could outperform other asset classes by multiples and/or magnitudes, which historically has already happened, but it is not guaranteed to continue to happen.

We should be able to hold all of these possible scenarios in our head and including choosing an investment allocation size into bitcoin that also attempts to sufficiently/adequately prepare ourselves for such various scenarios.. and surely by the time the future plays out, then ONLY 1 scenario ends up playing out, but we do not know in advance, and maybe that one scenario seemed as if it were obvious, but it has only become obvious after it already happened... .. so yeah there could be some folks who are greatly scared about various downside risks with bitcoin, and there is nothing wrong with that, except if they refuse and/or fail to act, which is that they should still buy some bitcoin (and get off zero), but if  they are scared little rabbits about the whole thing, then those kinds of folks would more likely be better served by choosing an allocation size that is conservative and/or small (aka whimpy) even though they have means to invest more, for their own psychology (and perhaps finances too) they are better off to employ a strategy that complements their own finances/psychology rather than investing in a way that does not adequately account for their finances/psychology.

Surely, some folks might start out in bitcoin in relatively modest (and even whimpy ways), yet it also could be that with the passage of time, they may well gain more conviction and confidence, and even gain that conviction and/or confidence by either ongoingly learning about bitcoin or merely by ongoingly maintaining a certain amount of exposure to it.. whether through directly holding it or by holding it through 3rd parties (and maybe even through the years learning the differences between directly holding bitcoin and holding it through 3rd parties).


100x or more is not very likely for anyone coming to BTC after 2015, even if they might have had tried to buy quite a bit of BTC in 2016, so yeah, with today's prices of right around $67k, anyone who has an average cost of less than $670 per BTC would have 100x in his current profit levels.

Yet I assert that even if someone came into bitcoin in 2016, it may well have had taken them a year or more to just establish their position, and sure there are some folks who might have had been able to lump sum (or front load) their investment in 2016, yet many folks are not really able (financially or psychologically) to invest like that, so it will tend to take an overwhelming number of folks a while to really establish their BTC position, even if they might be financially able to do so.

Even if there are folks who are decently in BTC profits right now, those cases might be interesting, fun and perhaps somewhat informative to hear about, yet we still have to figure out our own trade-offs of what we are going to do and how we are going to invest based on our own particular financial circumstances, including considering the 9-ish factors.

- as well as our need to continue to keep in mind that past performance neither guarantees future results and past performance does not even guarantee some more modest price performance version, in regards to future results.. even though surely there is likely a decent amount of Lindy effect going on with bitcoin, which means that within technology (such as bitcoin) the longer that something is around the more likely that is going to persist at least at the level that it has already established.. but even the Lindy effect is not a guarantee in regards to bitcoin, even though there are some persuasive aspects in regards to the Lindy effect being ongoingly relevant to bitcoin, including in terms of considering bitcoin's ongoingly growing network effects - within the framework outlined by Trace Mayer.


Sure.  That is one aspect contributing to bitcoin's relative price appreciation, but surely many of us likely realize that bitcoin's relative price appreciation is not ONLY related to dollar (fiat) debasement, but also has a decent amount of appreciation that largely relates to the ongoing growth in network effects that include considerations that bitcoin remains quite greatly in its early stages of adoption, so that even if their might be a small number of players who are trying to take advantage to front-run other parts of the population, even the ongoing attempts at front-running are still likely not pushing BTC prices up as much as their fair market value, so there remains ongoing justifiable reasons for normies to either get into bitcoin or to continue to accumulate as much bitcoin as they can, even if they are relatively poor and do not have a whole hell of a lot of discretionary income.. yet at the same time, they can ONLY invest as much as their discretionary income allows, otherwise they may well end up getting reckt due to their own lack of good financial management (and/or keeping their level of aggressiveness in regards to bitcoin within boundaries that are tailored to their own financial circumstances).


Sure no problem with that idea.. There are needs to balance in terms of any of us figuring out how much we are able to put into bitcoin without over doing it.. but still recognizing that it is better to get off of zero, even if we might have relatively low levels of income (referring to discretionary income).


I believe that it is not too extreme to talk about 1,000x to 10,000x, as long as it is put within a largely proper framework and context, including that folks do not need to agree with the framework and context, but to me it seems more than reasonable to be talking about those kinds of possible numbers  - and surely I think that I already put the matter in a reasonably fair context, including various previous suggestions that we might not even get $100k or any new ATH in this cycle..

If we neither understand the upside potential or attempt to present a variety of scenarios that might even conflict (in some ways) with each other, then we are engaged in a kind of sugar coating - including that there exist both the guys that proclaim that $100k is difficult to achieve in this calendar year, when it is possible we could get $100k within the next day or so, or at the same time, $100k might not end up coming either in 2024 or 2025.. and then at the same time, there are some guys proclaiming proclaiming that $150k would be bullish as fuck to reach either in 2024 or 2025, when in fact that is only about 1.2x higher than our 2021 top (of $69k).. or we can also call it 2.2x the price of the 2021 top.

So yeah none of those upside scenarios are guaranteed, and we can also ignore the various new BIG players coming into the scene, including the opening up of BTC exposure avenues that previously had not been available, and we can act like it is difficult for BTC prices to go up because fucktwats financial institutions including government entities and including status quo rich are afraid of the control they are likely losing in regards to bitcoins continued ongoing growth and the power of self-custody and privacy that they are likely going to continue to battle... so yeah we can have BTC price suppression efforts that are happening at the same time that new BTC buyers are coming into the space and a decent number of them failing/refusing (and maybe even afraid) to learn about and employ self-custody of some portion of their BTC exposure (stash).  Many of us realize that the BTC held through third-parties is likely to have way less value if there were to be success to wipe out self-custody... and sure, maybe (perhaps likely) that some of the BIG players getting into bitcoin are joining in goals to actually transform bitcoin into a controllable kind of an asset - which still could result in short-term profits while in some ways they might be working towards debilitating the golden goose with a speculation that they know how to debilitate the golden goose while not damaging its ability to lay golden eggs.


Surely nothing is guaranteed, so talking about a variety of possibilities should not cause them to be considered as guaranteed, so anyone dumb and gullible enough to fail/refuse to think for themselves or to be responsible for their own allocations does not need to be protected by down playing in the other direction.. so even this cycle we could have some thing in the ballpark of $2.5 million plus to be possible prior to the end of the cycle whether that is in 2025 or if it were to drag out longer, but the fact that the odds for $2.5 million plus to be perhaps in the ballpark of less than 0.5% possible does not mean that it should not be mentioned within a proper kind of framework.. including acknowledging that the higher we go up the attempts to predict a top for this cycle, the lower the odds become of that scenario playing out.. so maybe we could say the odds are greater than 50% for $100k to play out, but if we talk about the range of $120k to $180k, we might be getting into the 30% odds, even though we could simultaneously proclaim that the odds of $120k to $180k playing out are amongst the highest of the possible scenarios.. even though it is less than 50% odds.. including that it might be considered the base case scenario. but still end up not playing out. 

On December 16, 2021, I engaged in some variation of outlining odds for various upside scenarios including price and timeline in December 2021.. yet of course, the BTC price went down from the time of my outlining it.. even though I have absolutely no shame in terms of none of the upside scenarios playing out, and I don't even consider myself to have had been wrong in the way that I assigned those matters at the time that I did it.

And yeah, we should not become over-reliant on scenarios, even if we might consider some of them to be our base case scenario.. and even if some folks might not be able to understand the difference between having a base case scenario and believing that a base case scenario has really high odds, even though it need not have very high odds.


All that is fair.  You can prepare for both upside and downside scenarios, including assigning 0.5% odds of BTC prices to $2.5 million or higher by the end of 2025/2026 without having your own BTC holdings are strategy to be more greatly exposed than having a consideration of such low odd things that could end up playing out, even if they have low odds.. and the same goes for various extremes on the downside that our psychology and portfolio holdings should attempt to be sufficiently/adequately prepared.


I might be quibbling over your word choice, but it does not even seem correct that you are proclaiming that BTC is meant to make a new ATH every cycle... Even though you might not mean to say it, but you are implying some kind of a guarantee that the BTC price is reach a new ATH every cycle..

Maybe it is not even good to say that at all? 

It might be better to say that adoption is ongoingly increasing and also the new issuance of supply is getting cut in half every 4 years, so in the end there are a lot of ongoingly upwards price pressures on BTC. but it still does not mean that it is going to reach a new ATH every cycle, since it well could be the case that the previous cycle had already reached a price that ended up being higher than what it should have had gotten to.. so we cannot merely use the high price of the previous cycle to suggest what might be a fair price for this particular cycle or for the upcoming cycle.


Also, here, I would be careful in terms of narrowing down too many explanations, because it may well be a BIG SO WHAT? in regards to the BTC price having had hit a new ATH prior to our last halvening... It seems there can be various explanations in regards to why that ended up happening, which surely part of the anticipation (and actual) activation of the spot BTC ETFs in the USA had ended up putting a lot of upwards price pressures on BTC, and those kinds of UPwards price pressures continue, in spite of various kinds of forces that likely take away from such ongoing UPwards price pressures, that even seem to include some ongoing hostilities and battles in regards to bitcoin (and also shitcoins, too).

In the whole scheme of things, we surely could lose some confidence in regards to BTC's short-to-medium term price direction, and surely there are some folks who are selling BTC in these price territories, yet I still wonder where the various BTC spot ETF providers are going to continue to get their BTC that they need to back up their products, and sure there could be some shenanigans going on behind the scenes in regards to fractional reserve bitcoin, but that also could be very risky, even for BIG players who might have "wink and nod" approvals from governments who might want to continue to engage in various ongoing attacks against bitcoin... so even if there are ongoing upwards price pressures on bitcoin, we cannot even guarantee that it's price is going to go up from here, even while at the same time, it seems that the best way to prepare for the possibility of up is to ongoingly make sure that you have enough, just in case.. and maybe perhaps also making sure that you don't overdo your own betting in one direction. 

I see that there are probably a few members bringing down our average pushups per day per user into the low 100s, and some of that might be due to mistakes in their reporting.


If we just look at the ones who have fewer than 35 pushups per day in their averages, then we likely can see where there may well be mistakes.

I would suggest that Judith87403 and Dailyscript have errors in their reports,

and

I would suggest that SickDayIn and Kelward are providing proper reports, so they are merely working their way up to higher numbers.. perhaps?


By the way, when I had looked at this depiction, I had realized that I have had a tendency to vary the width of my feet. So sometimes i would have them together, but other times, I would have them apart and sometimes during the middle of the pushup I might change my foot position, so I had not really thought about foot position in terms of making much of a difference, except I was thinking that a little wider was more stable than being together.. but then maybe now that I thought about it, there could be some additional pressure on the core to stay balanced if the feet are closer together rather than being apart.

This article highlights the trade-offs in terms of foot position in regards to no more than 12 inches apart, and then I saw another one that said to keep them around shoulder width apart (which seems to be similar ideas).. but having them together might be acceptable too.. .but probably putting a bit more pressure on the core to maintain balance.

Here's the relevant statement from the article:

>>>"Great push-up form starts with a rigid plank. Your arms should be fully extended, with your hands, elbows, and shoulders all in line, and your feet should be no more than 12 inches apart—the closer together, the more difficult the push-up, because it requires more core activation for stability."<<<<<

Of course, merit sources are going to have varying standards and even varying level of time that they are able to spend reviewing posts, and I suppose that I don't really have any problem with the idea of both attempting to draw the attention of merit source members to quality posts or even some interesting things that are happening in other parts of the forums (such as in some of the Locals).  

Of course, these days translation is becoming easier, yet I do find that some of the browsers that I use are more friendly to translation than others, and for me, if I am on some kind of a mobile, it can sometimes be quite difficult to translate - and maybe it is my own lack of looking more into the matter.. so maybe part of the point might be that it is likely a lot easier for merit source members to stick with the threads that they visit regularly rather than exploring other threads - and merit sources do not have any obligation to explore other threads - including getting back to the idea of their own concerns about how productive they are being in their own ways of spending their time on the forum as well as other life obligations (interests).

I did send an smerit to the OP in the above referred to thread with the quiz and the game of earning merits, since I found it to be a kind of interesting approach, but still sometimes I even find it problematic to want to give too many merits in the context of what sometimes could border upon some form of merit begging.. and surely I would prefer to just organically come across various members posting in creative, interactive ways that may well have some links to supporting materials and making some interesting points, even if I might not completely agree or understand all of the points that are being made..

I suppose there can be some burn out in terms of reading so many mediocre posts.. or posts that might be difficult to determine if they are adding much if any value too.. ... Of course, some of the higher ranking members make great posts  - almost every single time, and I don't necessarily want to ONLY send smerits to the higher ranking members, and even sometimes if I have sent smerits to the same member several times in a day, I might also become reluctant to send more smerits to that same member on the same day, even if that member might seem to be continuing in making relatively great posts.

I am not going to claim to know the solution. but surely there still can be hope to place some blame on members to be providing decently good posts in threads that I already follow rather than expecting me to go around learning about new threads.. and yeah, sure maybe we can blame theymos too.. hahahahahaha.. in terms of there might be some needs to increase some of the merit source members.. which there may well be some work involved in regards to both selecting the new merit sources and then maybe some follow up monitoring that might be helpful..

and surely as far as I know, so far in the more than 6 year of the existence of the merit source system, there has not been any appointment of a merit czar, and not to be too atopically critical of LoyceV within his own self-moderated thread, I am not sure if his somewhat seemingly high standards (referring to his stating that he has somewhere in the ballpark of 4k smerits in his bank of smerits. .which seems like too many to have in reserves, yet I cannot even second-judge him too much in terms of why those smerits had built up to such high levels in his bank) in regards to sending smerits would be good for any possible merit czar - even though I am pretty sure that at some point he had volunteered to serve in such a position.. . and again, I am not even claiming to know much of anything in regards to what kinds of concerns might be happening behind the scenes in terms of appointing a merit czar and maybe increasing the number of merit source members (such as doubling and or perhaps having a longer term goal of tripling them), and yeah maybe the newer merit source members might start out with an allocation of maybe 30 source smerits per month and work their way up to 100 or whatever might be some reasonably tailored goals. without the problems of newly appointed merit sources (or the czar himself) turning into some kind of a monster that creates more problems than he solves....

I think that your post would be much more clear if you start out by figuring out what is the discretionary income and work from there.  Sure, no problem that we can consider gross percentage numbers that we want to aim to invest into bitcoin in regards to our take home pay, but we still should figure out the expenses first in order to figure out how much we are going to invest into bitcoin from there.

And, yeah, the emergency fund, reserves and float would also come from the discretionary income, to the extent that any of them might need to be built or perhaps largely already established and having some fluctuation.

Frequently it becomes quite abstracted to speak generally about the things you want to do, without describing that within more concrete examples, and surely I already mentioned many times that normal people have difficulties sustaining 10% investments and savings, and yeah, that is not to say that others might not be able to save/invest more than that, even up to 40% (and yeah emergency funds gets built from that too),  but when spouting out such seemingly high numbers, it probably makes way more sense to be explaining why, as some general person that we should be giving examples that are not representative of the struggles of most people, whether rich or poor, which is to really sustainably engage in a process that involves investing/saving more than 10% of their income... and if so, how do they get to those numbers .. and are the sustainable in order to constitute investing rather than gambling.

We need to attempt to be reasonable in regards to various BTC upside possibilities, and anywhere between 100x to 10,000x from today's price might not come easy and it could take 50-200 years or more to play out (that is even if it ends up happening).

Regarding this particular cycle, even if you take $25k as our starting point, 10x would be $250k and 100x would be $2.5 million, and surely $250k seems more in grasp, even though $2.5 million would not be out of the question, I would think it to be more reasonable as a consideration that is further down the road, and maybe as far as 3-5 cycles out there, and it could take even longer, yet it is difficult to know in advance and including some of the back and forth in regards to BTC prices, that surely could end up dampening some of what we might consider as bitcoin's historical exponential nature.

In other words, it should be able to hold several possibilities in mind at the same time, while realizing that surprises can happen to the upside and to the downside, so we need to be careful in regards to how we might choose to allocate to protect ourselves while at the same time maintaining the potential for growth.. which surely is one of the dynamics of investing into an asset (such as bitcoin) that both retains an asymmetric bet to the upside, but the fact that it is asymmetric also means that it is not guaranteed.

I hate to be misinterpreted in regards to why I am currently focusing on slowing down my pushups which is resulting in fewer pushups, and that is not even because I believe that slower is better, yet it is more because I am trying to find another way to both push myself and to show progress in terms of my overall abilities to do pushups.  So in the beginning, for me, I thought that it was best to focus myself on doing as many pushups as I would be able to do within the bounds of the framework that I was creating, so my ability to increase my quantity of pushups was a way to measure a certain kind of progress - even when it can be quite ambiguous and unclear regarding if progress is actually being made.

So right now there will be some sets in which I might focus on doing a larger quantity in a set and there may be other times that I am shooting for a longer duration of how many seconds it takes me on average to do each of the pushups.

My current practice is also my focusing on a certain number of pushups that I want to do each set, and I am tending to preestablish my target within a range.  Contrast my current practice with previously when I was largely shooting to do as many pushups per set as I was able to do, and I don't even consider that a worse strategy, but I consider the strategies to be attempts to somewhat tailor my approach in regards to where I am at.. which seems to be a progression, but surely it is not always obvious since sometimes that sets don't really feel good.. and other times I look in the mirror and I wonder whether there is progress or not or maybe some other kind of exercise might be helpful. 

A similar thing is true with my inclusion of lunges from time to time, which is a way to supplement the pushups and to potentially gain more strength in other areas of my body.

What a statement caught my attention at first glance and has stuck to me ever since, I started this challenge but fell off due to illness getting stronger everyday started my push ups again and building my strength though I don’t think I’m ready to begin updating this group on my progress I will though but I’d love to build myself up and maintain a steady rhythm before I begin.
Thanks guys for this challenge it’s been life changing.
[/quote]

Sure there sometimes might be some things in life that take us away from being able to do pushups, and sometimes you might not be able to be consistent, yet still it is up to you the extent to which you might want to report where you are at... or to report so that you can be included in the table.

I understand some guys might not want to be included in the table, and so there is nothing wrong with that - even though many of us likely have recognized that the development and expansion of the table has likely gotten several members to take their daily (or whatever) pushups way more seriously than they would have had otherwise, and maybe the health and well being of some guys have been improved by  how this thread has progressed.


That is a very good point.  If we concentrate on pushups , then we can do way more pushups as compared if we are doing a lot of other activities, or there might be some days that we might not sleep well or we might not eat very well, and these factors could affect our quantity and/or quality of pushups.

I have also found it easier to do my pushups when I am not having too many social activities, yet sometimes it might be better to have more social activities rather than pushups, so sometimes it might be better to stick to a number of pushups (purposefully doing fewer pushups and/or sets of pushups) that reasonably fits within your own schedule.


You make almost no sense.

Changing pushups into a 1 arm exercise would be nearly a whole totally new thing.  So to the extent that what you are saying is even true, it seems to not really be about pushups.

Hahahahahaha

Good one.  Get back at LoyceV for trying to sabotage the more or less (perhaps less?) future of "innovative" betting systems.  He deserved it.

 


Wow aren't you Mr charitable to the max (in other words and insensitive BIG meanie).

Your imaginary 300 WO merits are not going to go very far in the "helping me to feel MOAR better" including and  or any purchases that I might feel necessary in such process.. such as hookers, lambos and blow.. I don't do dolls nor other plastic items.  I  am more "needy" than that, and most of the time, I can tell the difference between real and plastic (or rubber for that matter) ..


This joke is factually very misleading, especially since miners are not solving any kind of a puzzle.  They are guessing as many times as they can, and the first one to guess correctly wins the block reward, so in that regard, the more guesses that you make, the more likely you will win. There is no puzzle solving going on, except maybe how to set up your systems in such a way that you can guess more and faster than others who are trying to do the same thing.


I can relate, since I say that to myself too.

 


That is how the cornz work...

sometimes.

The reason that we want to make UTXOs that are a minimum of $500 to $1k is not ONLY to save on the transaction fees that might happen during that particular transaction to move the funds from the exchange to the private wallet, but it is also to lessen the chances that we are going to engage in a practice that ends up resulting in us having a bunch of small UTXOs that from time to time (or even permanently) become unspendable and/or uneconomical to spend at some later date that we might not even know in the future whether we might want to move our coins again in the near future, or perhaps not for 4-10 years or more down the road, so we should not want to be getting stuck with a bunch of small UTXOs when we could have had engaged in better practices to avoid putting ourselves into such a situation.   


Thanks for highlighting that point Sim_card.   

I had sent an smerit to Reredmi896 and I had not even realized that he was talking about trading rather than my liking the idea that came from his post in regards to building up some kind of a cushion in terms of something like cash prior to overly investing when the income might be so low there can be needs for building up some cash and then strategically investing, but I was thinking about cash in that regard, and not fucking around with trading.. which surely Reredmi896 seemed to be talking about trading.. .. which seems like a strategy that is not going to really help, even with poor people..

Poor people may well never get ahead if they are fucking around too much with trading and gambling rather than establishing more of a building kind of an approach and also an approach that has measured practicalities.. and yeah sure there might be some risk taking that is in there too. .but surely it should be with very small portions of their investment stash, such as only 10% of their BTC value.. without cheating in regards to allowing their shitcoins, trading or whatever to siphon off their BTC value with the passage of time.

Many of us likely recognize a certain amount of temptation that comes to people with low finances to figure out other ways to earn money, so I don't necessarily want to discourage that, so there could be some possibilities in which some folks will end up resorting to trading/gambling/shitcoins when they might not have job and/or employment opportunities, and it might not even be clear if those are the better choices since it tends to be quite difficult to build wealth from trading rather than figuring out more traditional ways to try to earn a somewhat steady income when it might be possible to find ways to accomplish that.


"Spare money" is another way of saying discretionary income, so "spare money" is the proper term.

If you do not have spare money, then you should not be investing.

Sure you can still prioritize bitcoin investment from your salary.. but you better fucking make sure that it is spare money, otherwise, you are investing money that you need or that you might need soon.