For people wondering when we see first Webb images.
 that's funny. |
|
|
|
likely moved by mostly dormant BTCtalk account. |
|
|
|
|
@jjg-well, you can have ALL wishful thinking if you want it..peak in october..no, peak in november...no..peak in december...no, it is now Feb or March or September of 2022.
Scientific method suggests that you don't move the goalposts, but analyze the available data.
The data suggests that S2F is off the rails. Nothing personal.
Regarding the "other" thing-if you (or anybody else), personally, want this board to be overran with endless virus or political musing, so be it, but you WONT LIKE it.
I, personally, don't care about seeing the opposing opinions as i have a rather thick skin, but it seems that some people here are easily triggered when they see something political that they don't like. Namecalling ensues.
But, shit, let's go ahead and ruin this place for everybody with endless politicos and virus.
Let's make it another twitter or facebook /s
|
|
|
|
|
@jjg-what 1-9 mo are you talking about?
We are ALREADY past the Oct-Dec 2021 peak prediction (actually, it should have been even earlier in Aug-Sept if timing would have been the same).
The "long" cycle exists only in Ben C. imagination.
There is NO mechanism for it.
The long cycle is not the bitcoin halving cycle, clearly.
Maybe it is the usage trend, but then it is NOT a cycle.
We could have a usage trend at some point going into a hockey stick, but it might take years.
|
|
|
|
@jjg..my opinions are not for trading as I almost never trade bitcoin. It's just boundaries (>20K, <200K) that are useful to me. @phil has a good point about $35K-70K band instead. BTW, IF "real" market top was actually in April, then $29K in June could have been THE cycle bottom, but if the top was in November, then the bottom might be VERY low, even if it would be 70% down (from 70K it is 21K) instead of >80%, which is more typical. Ben Cowen keeps talking about extending cycle, but there is NO solid evidence for that, imho. https://youtu.be/Rfkb_ArjMXw?t=647Careful, mindrust talked like this before he lost his mind. the difference is that i don't need to sell (he was over-invested) and my cost has been below ZERO for a while now. No prob just pointing that out as food for thought.  I never trust TA gurus, they only have to screw you once to make you a no-coiner. yep, EVERYBODY (ta, fundamental, money flow, on-chain) were wrong in 2021. I've seen the best predictions from this thread and they tend to be soma from the gut. The last thing I trust s some rando that popped up on a social engineering site. Our subconscious can quantify many variables that TA doesn't even know exists. TA is nothing other than trying to find history repeating itself and this is a fluid market with new entries that make it increasingly less likely for patterns to repeat on a schedule. I agree, but you have to be choosy. If there was someone who predicted that we would actually peak at 69, let's see the link. Not post factum, of course. However, in general, you are right-I have seen very keen analysis here. |
|
|
|
@jjg..my opinions are not for trading as I almost never trade bitcoin. It's just boundaries (>20K, <200K) that are useful to me. @phil has a good point about $35K-70K band instead. BTW, IF "real" market top was actually in April, then $29K in June could have been THE cycle bottom, but if the top was in November, then the bottom might be VERY low, even if it would be 70% down (from 70K it is 21K) instead of >80%, which is more typical. Ben Cowen keeps talking about extending cycle, but there is NO solid evidence for that, imho. https://youtu.be/Rfkb_ArjMXw?t=647Careful, mindrust talked like this before he lost his mind. the difference is that i don't need to sell (he was over-invested) and my cost has been below ZERO for a while now. No prob just pointing that out as food for thought. I never trust TA gurus, they only have to screw you once to make you a no-coiner. yep, EVERYBODY (ta, fundamental, money flow, on-chain) were wrong in 2021. |
|
|
|
@jjg..my opinions are not for trading as I almost never trade bitcoin. It's just boundaries (>20K, <200K) that are useful to me. @phil has a good point about $35K-70K band instead. BTW, IF "real" market top was actually in April, then $29K in June could have been THE cycle bottom, but if the top was in November, then the bottom might be VERY low, even if it would be 70% down (from 70K it is 21K) instead of >80%, which is more typical. Ben Cowen keeps talking about extending cycle, but there is NO solid evidence for that, imho. https://youtu.be/Rfkb_ArjMXw?t=647Careful, mindrust talked like this before he lost his mind. the difference is that i don't need to sell (he was over-invested) and my cost has been below ZERO for a while now. |
|
|
|
@jjg..my opinions are not for trading as I almost never trade bitcoin. It's just boundaries (>20K, <200K) that are useful to me. @phil has a good point about $35K-70K band instead. BTW, IF "real" market top was actually in April, then $29K in June could have been THE cycle bottom, but if the top was in November, then the bottom might be VERY low, even if it would be 70% down (from 70K it is 21K) instead of >80%, which is more typical. Ben Cowen keeps talking about extending cycle, but there is NO solid evidence for that, imho. https://youtu.be/Rfkb_ArjMXw?t=647 |
|
|
|
Since you didn't bother to mention what country you were referring to I will do the same.
(see how easy it is to manipulate with graphs and numbers).
Changed my mind, my graph is for Sweden, I assume yours is for the UK since that's where LFC lives.
Kudos for keeping the deaths low. Unfortunately, 1500 Americans are dying from it every day. ... you need to unpack that "dying from CoVID" statistic quite a bit to get to the truth of the matter ... first there is the "dying WITH" versus "dying FROM" all-too-convenient distinction that somehow got lost early in the 'pandemic' and has not been rectified as yet ... then there is typical mortality versus age curve that needs subtracting out to arrive at an honest accounting for an excess deaths dying FROM CoVID ... and then to gain some perspective you would need to compare that much-reduced figure to fatalities for a similar respiratory virus, like the seasonal flu variant that circulates every season, during a non-COVID year with all the interventions, societal meddling and economy-destroying fuckery ...i suggest to post where EVERYBODY agreed to post about this topic. <snipped a bunch of yellin'> Interesting. Having said that, I was merely pointing out that almost nobody wants to read about the virus here now that bob made a thread about it. |
|
|
|
|
@jjg..at least $20-200k band is realistic in comparison with all your non-predictions.
But.. here are some specifics that I already mentioned before, so don't really need to repeat, but you are 'asking' for it.
1. S2f is dead like a door knob.
2. Cycles are mostly dead, but not completely yet.
3. 200Wk average low is real, unless it is violated, hence the lowest value of $20K (for now).
4. At 200K miners would be excessively profitable, which historically indicated the top, hence the max value until the new gen of miners is out.
5. We can stay at ~42-45K for a year instead of popping up and down.
6. We are in the new cycle, which is likely to be very long and quite possibly a "super cycle" (driven mostly by adoption, not halvings): 2021-2025(6).
7. The prior cycle (which you think is still ongoing) actually terminated in April of 2021 (Nov was just a 'secondary' peak caused by reaction to abrupt "chinese' plunge).
|
|
|
|
Since you didn't bother to mention what country you were referring to I will do the same.
(see how easy it is to manipulate with graphs and numbers).
Changed my mind, my graph is for Sweden, I assume yours is for the UK since that's where LFC lives.
Kudos for keeping the deaths low. Unfortunately, 1500 Americans are dying from it every day. ... you need to unpack that "dying from CoVID" statistic quite a bit to get to the truth of the matter ... first there is the "dying WITH" versus "dying FROM" all-too-convenient distinction that somehow got lost early in the 'pandemic' and has not been rectified as yet ... then there is typical mortality versus age curve that needs subtracting out to arrive at an honest accounting for an excess deaths dying FROM CoVID ... and then to gain some perspective you would need to compare that much-reduced figure to fatalities for a similar respiratory virus, like the seasonal flu variant that circulates every season, during a non-COVID year with all the interventions, societal meddling and economy-destroying fuckery ...i suggest to post where EVERYBODY agreed to post about this topic. |
|
|
|
I had another go at visualising the emission schedule, 97% will be mined in the first 20 years, the remaining 3% will take over 100 years ...  So basically this means that at some point the amount of coins mined and sold on exchanges won't be sufficient and the price will go up. Supply shock is real. And the best thing: the longer the price will stay down, the higher will be the price hodlers will be ready to part from their precious coins at. And the higher the price will climb. It's like those who were ready to sell some part of their stashes at $100k won't be willing to sell at the same price in 2023 for example. They will be expecting at least $200k. So it's going to happen like: price goes up to $100k are we ready to sell? NOT! Price is heading higher. Willing to sell at $120? NADA! Going higher... the coins are just not available on exchanges... $150k? Still no! Moar UP. At $200k some retail investors and/or small to average mining operations may start to sell... but not Saylor/Graycale kind of guys obviously. All of the above is SOMA.  Very well may be, but there is no guarantee for the demand side and for the timeline. To me, halvings are not very relevant anymore (as everyone keep posting about a small % of coins being released going forward). Miners did not sell at 69K and at 48K, so it is the internal market dynamics, not the miners supply, that seems to be in control of the price. Because of this, it seems that price can be anything (within a pretty large band of $20K-200K), imho. |
|
|
|
"Don't Look Up" - look it up on Netflix, best movie since Idiocracy IMO. Made well enough so that anyone can think "nah, I'm not that stupid, this is about all those other people". Bitcoin gets honorable mention too. https://www.netflix.com/title/81252357Watched it yesterday, i give it a 8/10 on the OOM movie score As for the BTC price action: Just sit tight and assess  I initially considered it as 8.5, but the credits scene kind of dump it to 8 for me as well JL dropped 5-10 lb through the movie..so the movie story line (minor spoiler: her character was on a diet) imitated rl in this particular instance. Timothy C. was cool, Jonah Hill-hilarious. |
|
|
|
Oddly enough you do not seem to have to pay FICA or Medicare taxes on CG.
yea, but above certain number (200K for single, 250K for family) you pay additional 3.8% NIIT (net investment income tax). Gosh..this is complicated... but only tea for me tonight. |
|
|
|
|
@jjg..yes, that calc is correct. You have to NOT work to take the advantage of it, which is kind of weird. The weird part it that, somehow, your reg income gets subtracted from 80.8K cap gains "allowance', albeit your income is NOT, by itself, cap gains.
|
|
|
|
Example: You are married, have 200K income and 200K long term cap gains. Your "regular" combined income is taxed at 32%, but your longterm cap gains are taxed at 15%. See the table in here: https://erwealth.com/podcastblog/will-capital-gains-push-me-into-a-higher-tax-bracketCapital gains will not cause your ordinary income to be taxed at a higher rate..
So, again, long-term capital gains are taxed at different rates and separately from your ordinary income. Unless i completely misunderstand their "slang" it appears that you could be taxed differently for reg income and for cap gains. ...So the best option is to be a complete louse, live off your LTCG and pay zero taxes on the first 80k. Which by the way is equal to a 100k "salary" because of all the taxes that cum out. a well fed 'louse'..i get it 
Which leads to my real fun question:
If on Jan 1 you redirect 100% of your salary to a 401k, then quit once you hit $19500 (the 401k limits), do you still get the whole 80k CG at 0% rate because the 401k was a "top line" (before AGI) deduction or is it based on total income?
Is health insurance paid for by CG profits deductible? Since Health insurance is another top line deduction can you work an extra few weeks for that money and still get the 80k 0% CG tax rate?
Inquiring minds want to know. :-)
Great questions..i don't know and in my org they like you to quit (retire) either in January or September (for some strange reason). That trick with 401K is definitely something to consider or at least run by the CPA (EDIT: @suchmoon is obviously well versed in this). Thanks! Now, that our cap gains are currently melting..maybe I would still consider working for a couple more halvings. |
|
|
|
afaiu, LONG term cap gains are different from income, but who knows.
In the US the federal long term cap gain tax rate depends on the total income. It can be 0, 15, or 20%. Then there are state taxes, somewhere between 3-13%, although there are few states with 0%. Probably true, but a simplification. according to the blog post i cited, Example: You are married, have 200K income and 200K long term cap gains. Your "regular" combined income is taxed at 32%, but your longterm cap gains are taxed at 15%. See the table in here: https://erwealth.com/podcastblog/will-capital-gains-push-me-into-a-higher-tax-bracketCapital gains will not cause your ordinary income to be taxed at a higher rate..
So, again, long-term capital gains are taxed at different rates and separately from your ordinary income. Unless i completely misunderstand their "slang" it appears that you could be taxed differently for reg income and for cap gains. |
|
|
|
Turducken.
popularized by Madden, RIP. as far as other stuff...once you get it, it is your case, stats are mostly irrelevant...have wife's close relative in intense care rn (strain unknown), had to get oxygen as the "number" was getting to 83. Do we care about the overall stats? Of course, not, in this case, just about the particular individual situation. In a large scheme of things, this is relevant, of course. |
|
|
|
These dumb-ass 5% bitcoin sales are annoying: It's not worth cashing in coin to buy back lower as the ~21% Capital gains tax will wipe out any profit.
Oi.
IOW: Capital Gains Tax makes it so that selling to rebuy lower is a losing move unless the after-sale dip is more than the CGT rate. Not limited to bitcoin: it's the same with stonks or any other financial asset. unless it is long term rate sale. ...and, first $80,800 in long term cap gains are FREE (if you are married). Not if your income (the stuff you get for being a wage slave) exceeds 80k. That is like the crappiest phase out ever. Unless I am wrong about that. afaiu, LONG term cap gains are different from income, but who knows. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/101515/comparing-longterm-vs-shortterm-capital-gain-tax-rates.aspYour ordinary income is taxed first, at its higher relative tax rates, and long-term capital gains and dividends are taxed second, at their lower rates.
So, long-term capital gains can't push your ordinary income into a higher tax bracket, but they may push your capital gains rate into a higher tax bracket. https://erwealth.com/podcastblog/will-capital-gains-push-me-into-a-higher-tax-bracket |
|
|
|
|
The year end seems to be quite annoying, isn't it?
2021 was not a great year by many occurrences:
1. A skimpy bull run despite all rah-rah-rah expectations. We basically did slightly better than double in four years; pretty good by stock market standards, quite low compared to what was expected.
2. Viral persistence. How many waves we gonna get?
3. Being totally tired of #2. Reinfection rises in the people I know.
4. The rise and rise of everyday rudeness...especially on our "autobahns".
Prediction:
Bitcoin is incompatible with your typical political/investor operator psyche.
As such, the path forward would be slower and more tenuous than I expected.
It is entirely possible that 'they' would try to control the narrative by pushing some solutions that are more easily controlled: it could be E-coin or S-coin or some other shitcoin (heck, it might even be xerp, once it settles), but it ain't going to be bitcoin as they cannot direct it to their benefit.
TL;DR Slow bitcoin in 2022, politicos heavily promoting a few shitcoins (probably the most corrupt ones). Fiat stock market slightly down, maybe 5-7%.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
