I've reported the thread to be locked. Let's see if there is luck, because as I have said several times I think the moderators think more before acting on this section.


That's because you don't go much to the Bitcoin Discussion section, as there are many such claims there, which some of us question, but many others don't, and they fill up with pages of comments from members congratulating and even meriting the OP who doesn't provide a single piece of evidence.

The original old, dusty, hole-punched books can be consulted thousands of years from now thanks to digitization. To preserve something you don't have to keep it in its original format.

Besides I think they are two different things. I would leave the forum format as it is. However, for innovations such as IA, I am clear, if it were up to me all text that is a mixture of IA with human content and results in a quality post, welcome.

The forum is staying in the time of the Australopithecus, going hunting with a club, while the world is on its way to the fifth industrial revolution.


AI is being used to improve the work in various fields right now, and the change it is generating is among the fastest in history. Those who worry that AI will jeopardize their income from signature campaign would do better to worry that AI will make this forum obsolete if they insist on fighting it instead of embracing it.

You forgot to say that, according to whoever popularized that definition, good debts give you positive cash flow, and that does not happen with Bitcoin, no matter how much return you get from capital appreciation, so it would be bad debt, also too subject to volatility.

When you have a loan you have to face payments every month, and a good debt would be for example that of a mortgage in which if you have to pay $400 a month, what the tenant pays you after deducting expenses is $500, so you have $100 of positive cash flow. With Bitcoin if it goes up a lot you can make partial sales, but there are also periods of bear market when it drops from $69K to $15, and if you have borrowed to buy when the price was at $60K or more, let's see how you manage to afford the payments.

Therefore, it is not a good idea to go into debt to buy Bitcoin, and although in principle we can consider that it is better debt than taking a loan to go on vacation, it is not good debt.

Let's see my friend, have you stopped to analyze the thread? I don't think so. Good thing there are some of us who are fed up with the threads of supposed investors who claim to have invested in Bitcoin and things like that that when you do a minimum analysis do not hold up.

In this case I didn't even need to do the analysis, Darker45 did it on the first page.

There are so many threads of this style in the forum, usually in BD with made up stories, that are a pest.

The problem with responsible gambling is not so much the percentage of people who have problems with gambling but the harm it does to people who do have problems. Most people who gamble lead normal lives, and apart from the odd occasion where they ended up gambling more than they had planned, like the one who went out one night and ended up drinking more than they had planned, it doesn't cause them any major problems. The bad thing is that those who do have problems with gambling that they cannot control are on their way to financial ruin, often asking for loans to continue gambling or taking money from their loved ones.

That is why I welcome all the responsible gambling measures that have been implemented over the years.

As far as I can see, since I wrote this post the OP has been edited and I see no explicit reference to "clean" coins or avoiding "coins from dubious sources".

Has the policy on this changed?

I just watched the video on the [banned mixer] website and these references are still made.

Not really. I don't see how someone could earn little money in their job and invest a lot, it's not mathematically coherent.

If you search on personal finance you will see that they usually recommend between 3 and 6 months of expenses, and at most there are those who recommend a maximum of 6 months of salary (which if you do it right is an amount higher than your expenses). The rest to leave it in cash is to lose money because of the opportunity cost, it is better to invest it.

Another thing is that many people are not clear, or refuse to be clear, about the concept of unforeseen or emergency. Changing the wheels of your car is not an emergency, you have to save for it and leave your emergency fund untouched. If you see that your roof is going to need some repair, you better start saving from the first moment to repair it and do not wait until your roof falls down and you have to use your emergency fund to repair it.

In other words, one thing is an emergency, and another is that, apart from the emergency fund, you also save for foreseeable expenses.

I agree.


This has nothing to do with reality. Surely you are someone who doesn't gamble, you only know the gambling world from a distance and from some extreme cases you have known, and you take those extreme cases as the generality. Saying that is like saying that people who drink alcohol end up alcoholics or that people who use kitchen knives do it to murder.

Most gamblers gamble money they can afford on an activity that can be considered entertainment, like going to the movies or dining out, but with the difference that at the end of the night you can occasionally walk away with more money than you came with (here I do not take into account those who play sports betting or poker in a more professional way, and get regular profits for it).

Then, yes, there are the addicts, the problem gamblers, the ones who steal money from their mother or wife to keep gambling, but that is far from the norm.

That is not going to happen in the near future. Central banks have an easier time backing it by gold and are not doing so although China is rumored to be planning to do so. Bitcoin is too volatile as of today for it to serve as a backing.

What would not surprise me at all is if some countries decide to start mining Bitcoin. I think that will happen before they dedicate to back the currency in it, if that ever happens.
These are ideas that might seem far-fetched to many people today, but how gambling with Bitcoin might have seemed 13 years ago, and we see how important it has been in the history of Bitcoin.

Just to remind you that I never spoke of an obligation, I think it is not necessary to quote myself, you can see my post above. In this case, as in the other of joker_josue I think that the community sees better that a separate thread is made for people who have made an exceptional contribution to the forum, and not just someone who has reached with a lot of effort Member rank but having twice the activity.

I agree with the two previous comments. On the one hand it may be due to a normal delay between the withdrawal request and approval, and, on the other hand, if it is not so you should give more data and provide everything you can as screenshots because in this section there are many accusations of which a large percentage is then shown that it was the player who actually broke the rules. 

Although we are closer to $20K than $50K, I believe like most of those who voted that it is more likely that the price will continue upwards, gradually, until it reaches $50k, without going back to $20 which seems to me too low for a dip, as it was the top of the previous cycle, and although as cycles progress it is normal for returns to be lower, it is still normal for lows as cycles progress to be higher.


This is key, although after a rise I would expect a dip, I think it will be higher than $20K, but we cannot predict with certainty with behavior as volatile as Bitcoin and less knowing that although there is some regularity in the cycles, the patterns we project won't necessarily repeat.

People who spend more than they should, paying high interest on credit cards I'm sure are tremendously profitable for companies. I can't find data on how many people defer payment with credit cards and it seems to me that it is not by chance, it seems to me that the companies for some very good reason for them don't want to make it public.

We live in a credit-addicted economy, just look at how states spend. So it is not so strange that many citizens do the same, what happens is that these citizens do not have the power of the printer that many states have and they put a noose around their necks.

If you have to sell because of an emergency, you're doing it wrong. An essential principle of personal finance is to have an emergency fund of between 3 and 6 months' worth of cash. That if you live in the USA or a similar industrialized country could very well be the $20k you are talking about. In addition you may have other types of assets that you could borrow on at low interest rates if you don't want to sell the Bitcoin.

For example, at your bank you have $20k in an emergency savings account, $150k in pension plans, and another $50k in stocks or mutual funds, your bank will be happy to give you a loan if a supposed emergency exceeds $20k, but I for example in the last 15 years haven't had an emergency that exceeded 10% of that
 
So, if you manage your personal finances well you will not be forced to sell, and you can hold the Bitcoin for a couple of cycles at least, to then consider whether to make partial sales.
 

So now what you say sounds more reasonable, as what you say usually sounds.


I agree.

For the reasonable person that you are, I find it quite shocking that you repeat this, which I suppose is what you have seen, but it does not agree with what I have been told by people who work in health care, nor with the statistics.

The first page I get on google:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/

As we can see, the bulk of the problem is concentrated from the age of 50 onwards, and if we were to break it down further I think we could see that the majority of deaths in the 50-64 range are concentrated in the 58-64 range.

When I have talked to people in healthcare and they told me about young people being in the ICU or dying from COVID, the question I asked them was, but were they healthy? Most often they would tell me that they were quite overweight, or that they had a lot of risk factors (smoking, high blood pressure, etc.).

I don't know if when you say "younger than us" it's because you and your colleagues are like 63 years old on average so I would understand better what you are saying.

I'd say for people like you, it doesn't matter that you wiped off your trust list. I wiped mine as well. The rest of the considerations about your profile outweigh the potential negatives of not having a custom trust list.


If you leave feedbacks to others, which you have done a lot.

(this is what I believe, icopress correct me if I am wrong)

The USA produces a lot of oil, but three years ago it produced enough to not have to depend on imports. With the change in government and fossil fuels policy, production has been reduced and the USA now produces less than it consumes, so it has to import. There are no shortage problems but part of the price increase has to do with the reduction in production, apart from the war in Ukraine.

Returning to the subject, I see the CBDC of the IMF as unnecessary if the others are to be launched, and vice versa. If a digital dollar, a digital euro, etc. is going to be launched, why the CBDC of the IMF? If we were to move towards a world government, which I doubt very much, the IMF CBDC would be enough, and there would be no need to waste money and effort creating and maintaining the others.

As odolvlobo says, the performance of past investments won't necessarily repeat indefinitely in the future.

If we knew with certainty that Bitcoin would outperform any other financial asset it would make sense to invest 100% of our net worth in Bitcoin, and there are people on the forum who do, if not 100% then an approximate percentage.

Being a little more cautious we can apply a principle of diversification and apart from investing in Bitcoin, have a house paid for or on the way to paying for it, having equity on it, and then you can invest a little in other sectors to taste, such as commodities, individual stocks or index funds such as the S&P 500.