|
That is quite interesting. My stance on drugs is that is much better to regulate and control than to ban fully and then having a huge social and economic problem that keeps many countries at the mercy of the narcos. I am not happy to know that legalisation can result in a more prolific black market. I am not surprised though that shops and legal sellers make little profit, since, at the end of the day, is simply another crop and not particularly difficult to grow.
|
|
|
|
|
This type of message is just what I would like not to see in this forum because it idiotizes the bitcoin philosophy and makes little to really explain the reasons and the underlying technology, the community and the people that use bitcoin. It also encourages people to think that crypto will make them rich just because that has been the case for some people at certain moments in the past.
Crypto is about understanding, even if you decide to simply hodl and do nothing in years.
|
|
|
|
you can tell that his recommendations are superb, ranging from real estate, commodities and I will also add bitcoin as the high priority one. Real Estate because once their is inflation, properties tends to grow more in value, secondly commodities because once their is inflation production price will also rise and they don't get affected and lastly US savings bond too keeps up with inflation and your guaranteed return is sure.
I believe bitcoin will become a trusted hedge for all people around the world to safeguard against inflation. It may take time but the good thing is the trend of adopting bitcoin as a hedge is already started.
Real Estate could be a great investment, but it is also very expensive to start. Where I live, we do not have too much land, which means we all live in apartments, there are probably just 1-5% houses here, rest are all apartments and tall buildings, people build like 10 story tall buildings to live, with 20 or even 40 apartments (4 on each floor, tiny places) so it is hard. So, for me to invest into real estate, it would take about 500 months worth of salary, that's right, I need 500 months to save my money and not spend a single dollar from it as well. We all know that is impossible, so I need to find a way to invest my money some other way and make money that way until I have enough to buy a house. It is not a bad idea, I agree with that, but it is both a no-brainer and obvious plus very expensive to start at the same time which makes it a not good advice. Not at all. Real State used to be expensive, full of taxes and difficult to invest in, even for professionals, but you can now access a wide range of investments that will provide exposure to real state. REITs are really good proxies and you can tune your investment to any type of real state. In a previous post I linked a fund that would make you a co-proprietary of a prison in the USA. https://www.millionacres.com/real-estate-investing/articles/top-performing-prison-reits-2019/For example, CoreCivic manages roughly 19 million square feet of real estate used by government agencies. The company has three operating segments:
Safety: CoreCivic manages 14.7 million square feet of correctional and detention facilities on behalf of federal and state agencies. The operation of safe and secure corrections facilities supplied 85% of the company's NOI in 2019.
Property: The company owns 3.3 million square feet of space like corrections facilities and other government service agency properties that it leases back to government agencies. CoreCivic engages in the development and sale-leaseback acquisition of facilities leased to government operators. These activities contributed 10% of its NOI in 2019.
Community: The company operates 700,000 square feet of community corrections facilities that provide residential reentry services. These activities provided 5% of its NOI in 2019.
Thus, CoreCivic primarily makes money managing and operating real estate on behalf of government agencies rather than on the ownership and leasing of facilities. |
|
|
|
The decision by China to conduct a trial use of blockchain technology in it major cities of Guangzhou Shanghai and Beijing giving the permission to about 164 organizations to run the trial test of the blockchain technology, this was made known as a report from China Central Cyber Space Administration makes the approval. “The notification requires that capacity-building be strengthened. All pilot units (regions) should give priority to adopting blockchain software and hardware technologies and products with interoperability and sustainable development capabilities; actively guide blockchain applications to develop towards value, scale, and industrialization; accelerate the formulation of relevant technologies and application standards,” the notice said. https://finbold.com/china-sets-certain-conditions-for-blockchain-use-within-the-country/As it was generally known that China has a total ban on cryptocurrency last year and it decision has remain steadfast as the government took drastic measures to bring to an end existing crypto firms, mining rigs to shutdown, stating that it imposed a danger to their economy. But to a latest development, its giving the use of blockchain technology application a trial opportunity stating that the proposed blockchain differs from the bitcoin blockchain. what's our intake on this? This is kind of a joke but, for fun: CCTV camera - London: We use it at airports and cities to catch terrorist and identify criminals. CCTV camera - Washington: We use it to prepare blackmail material for politicians. CCTV camera - Romania: We use these to film porn. CCTV camera - China: We use this to monitor our people and make sure they are "good citizens". This is the same, I am sure that the CCP will eventually find the way to pervert the blockchain concept to further cripple the people of China. |
|
|
|
Calling for regulation instead of restriction is a simple choice because regulation would mean at least some influx of money for the state, and given that crypto mining isn't anything morally questionable (unless one believes it's very harmful for ecology, but Russia's not the sort of country that takes ecology seriously anyway), it's clearly a win to legalize cryptos and operations with it.
As for Zimbabwe and tax collection, I think if taxes are applicable, it already means that cryptos are legalized in some way there. I only hope taxes will be reasonable because otherwise people will simply look for ways of avoiding paying them.
Regulation has to be there, it is inevitable and up to a certain point it is desirable. As I have mentioned a number of times, the devil is in the details. The fine print of the regulation may mark the distinction between a ban, a regulation that restricts trade and use, a regulation that simply protects the users or one that simply taxes and provides zero value for the investors. I am interested in regulations that protect users. |
|
|
|
I don't think you can "avoid" inflation in fiat. It's an integral part of debt-based money. Governments just try to keep inflation somewhat under control when they can, so that it doesn't rise too quickly. Usually not with any great deal of success, but that's the theory, at least.
You technically could if there was a finite supply of fiat. A currency based on the gold standard wouldn't have any inflation, granted the supply of gold was steady. Even without a gold standard, a fiat currency based on magic pixie dust could theoretically not have any inflation, as long as the government is unwilling to create more supply. Government targets the inflation rate to be at 2 percent, so they'll make adjustments accordingly. The problems arise when you try to increase the money supply too rapidly, like the US does by having a debt balance sheet of trillions of dollars -- predictable result is an insane 7 percent inflation rate (compounded by COVID, of course). You can perfectly avoid inflation in fiat and it does not need to have a limited supply. It is a simple as printing money based on the real growth of the economy so that the monetary mass is in sync with the real demand for money. To explain it for a 9 year old: You print the money that is required. If you print less, there is deflation, if you print more there is inflation. Bitcoin is NOT inherently deflationary. |
|
|
|
I'm starting to feel bad for the poeple that spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a jpg of a rock when they could have spent millions on the jpg of a house.  . Oh silly me, forgot I'm still human and one with a lot of flaws, I'm not sorry at all!!! “Metaverse land sales are generally a pyramid scheme and have been for more than 20 years,” said Edward Castronova, professor of media at Indiana University. “The Metaverse is El Dorado for internet startups. They chase it into the jungle and die.”
First time hearing about this guy, but I'm starting to like him. How many lunar plots have poeple bought? Stars? Pixels? This is nothing else than Sims's furniture and clothes, wait till you have just like cryptos 100 metaverses each more special and more useless than the other. year 2011 - I am starting to feel sorry for those people who exchanged their very real dollars for an imaginary currency that only exists in a database. They could have spend their dollars in buying a lollipop. We do not what would be valued and what will grow in the future, so if someone is buying is because they may see some merit on the idea or see it as an useful asset to diversify. You may see it clearly, others have just another view. There is no limit to the number of new metaverse platforms that can launch. Even the big existing platforms can create more land, as Sandbox did when it decided to increase its parcel sizes. Does this sound like a familiar argument or not? |
|
|
|
Nothing except centralized organization doesn't like a decentralized cryptocurrency. IMF is a centralized organization and it always will force to go through centralization. Those who are involved with Bitcoin they are well aware of it. So IMF doesn't need to force them. They should prevent El Salvador before accept as a legal tender. Now reversing the decision would be harmful to the citizens. They don't know the potentiality of Bitcoin so they will be always against it. Not surprising.
That seems to be the essence. The problem with all this is that the IMF always works in the same way: I will lend you money but you will have to follow and be abided by my economic agenda or else I will leave you to your own demise. El Salvador has a number of problems and, as far as I know, the US pays "aids" to fight against narco-traffic in what could be construed as a blackmail payment. Does it happen in bitcoin? Everyone here is talking about the situation like they have no idea about the real deal. I have read it on reddit that IMF is not telling El Salvador to stop bitcoin legal tender out of blue, they are doing it because they asked a loan from them. El Salvador asked 1.3 billion dollars worth of loan from IMF, and IMF RESPONDED with this, they didn't just say it out of nowhere like it was their business. And when you ask someone to give you a loan, they may have some requirements about it as well.
I totally understand IMF not wanting crypto in El Salvador, it really makes sense, why? Because, we are talking about a "bank" that gives money to nations and this nation is buying bitcoin like crazy instead of using that money for whatever they needed loan for.
If a friend of yours had 3k dollars in bitcoin but asked you 13k dollars in loan, would you give it to them? Or would you say "I would give you 10k, and you could sell the 3k you have in bitcoin"?
According to that, the IMF could only lend to countries that have zero foreign currency reserves?? |
|
|
|
I would like to know what matches made you think that Barcelona are improving their level of play. In my opinion, they are degrading - returning to the outdated Tiki Taka strategy. With such a lineup of performers, this strategy is meaningless, plus it is 2022 now, most teams already know how to successfully counter it. As for transfers, yes, they will strengthen the team a little, but Atlético's squad is still better.
Yes, the tiki taka game that they played again only made them superior in ball possession. But as for finishing, they will be tough now, not like they used to be in their heyday. It is true that the strategy can now be read by the opposing team. And of course every coach of the team they played against, would have been prepared to stop that. It’s always funny for me to look at such statistics - possession of the ball is 65-70 percent, while the defeat and the number of shots on goal are higher for the opponent. In such cases, possession of the ball only indicates inefficient play. Those times when the opponents rushed to pick up the ball and exhausted themselves have already ended, now the team just steps back and defends. Absolutely, there are teams and coaches that focus a lot on possession, and that makes sense in a way because in theory will make your rival more tired and psychologically weaker along the match, but there is a tendency to forget that winning is also about striking a balance. At the La Liga level, the rivals will detect that imbalance on an adversary and start playing confident defence and generate the opposite effect - like if there was a wall impossible to break. |
|
|
|
If I were to pick five most important features of online crypto casino that I consider, customer service would be the first one because it basically covers all of the other factors. Second is responsiveness to complaints, which seems to be lacking for most online casinos. Then, security, bonuses & offers, and payout speed. Although what is being offered is what would initially enticed me, on a deeper level of entrusting my loyalty, the first ones are the most essential.
Quite well said, nothing makes the experience worse than to feel ignored or that you have a problem and nobody seems to be on the other side to provide a decent solution. And yes, that covers all factors such as deposits, withdrawals, rules in general. I find it particularly annoying when there are hidden rules that are deep into the small print and the customer service simply says - you should know XYZ because it is written and so on. If it is important, you should make it clear and loud, else you are cheating. |
|
|
|
Thurman is a chance for thurman to win this fight after he lost his last fight. Based on fighting experience between thurman and barrios, thurman may likely win the fight against barrios.
Both have the chance to win. It's going to be the matter of whoever goes first and got lucky with him is the one that will ring the bell. Don't belittle the other fighter if you're for Thurman. It's a little bit worrying for Barrios because his last fight ended him losing via technical knockout and he was dropped three times, he is vulnerable in body and head he was even knockdown with a jab he has weak knees in his fight against Davis, and we all know a boxer is judged based on his last fight and this is something Thurman will explore, I'm sure he will go all out trying to intimidate Barrios jus like what Davis did. I would not rule out Barrios but he should do something different. That's worrying on his end then. But with what I know with these boxers, after losing with the last fight, they're learning the lesson that they've seen from there and that's why they'll do better with the next match that they have set. On the otherhand, their opponents are also going to research with most of their fights and if they see some weakness, they'll for sure going to use it against them and you're right with that about Thurman. Sportsbooks are favoring Thurman over Barrios in this fight. Thurman has only one loss, which is from Pacquiao. And Barrios has also one loss as well. We know they want to redeem themselves in this upcoming fight so we will see a toe-to-toe fight here and see who's the prepared one. But in this case, I am betting on Thurman to win on this match. Of course, they will study the strategies and weaknesses of their opponents and work from there. But we will only see those strategies once inside the ring. And which one of them have very good tactics to beat his opponent. Even with only one loss, it does not mean that eventually, the guy will find his match. Just remember that even Tyson, eventually, got the chance to meet Douglas and have a taste at the floor. In this case, the chance are not even remotely that unequal and the books are possibly right from their perspective but there is a good reason to bet for Barrios - I mean, is not crazy at all at this moment. |
|
|
|
|
De una manera u otra Zuky va a crear su propia moneda. Que la llame criptodivisa, que use blockchain o que sea (mas probable) una base de datos centralizada y totalmente controlada (y con toda la informacion de transacciones de usuarios para su uso exclusivo de Meta) eso ya esta por ver. Para mi que lo suyo va a ser abrir el sistema a desarrolladores pero mantener perfectamente controlada la informacion, inclusive la financiera.
|
|
|
|
|
Yet another dubious project or just a simple application of NEM. Basically NEM has lost any luster it used to have as the Jap alternative to Ethereum, Neo and a million others that are no longer even near the top ten. Certainly, not the choice I would have made to develop a real world use case for blockchain. I wonder why this was the choosen platform as simplicity and other are better in alternative chains. Also, I wonder why this in economy,
|
|
|
|
Ukraine won't be easy to beat, it's back is covered by great nations, USA, London and other super power countries inside NATO. If ever there will be war, Russia will need allies, may N. Korea or China as these two have issues with the west. Now the wisest move to do is solve the issues and ease tensions without any bloodshed, war is not the answer and yet we as human are also fighting another war that the enemies are naked in the eyes.
First of all, "London" is not a "great nation". It is a city within the United Kingdom. And if you really believe that the United States and the United Kingdom will come to the aid of Ukraine, then I pity you. Russia and China are the countries who are willing to spend some money on their allies. The Western nations on the other hand, never do that and they will not offer any military support either. Ukraine will be on it's own, if Russia invades. The US/UK may impose embargoes on Russia and Putin, but that's going to be it. Is Russia ready to spend a lot of money on ITS PARTNERS? You are probably confusing the essence - you confuse investments and assistance with attempts to bribe and support bastard regimes. Please name at least 1 country where, after coming to power (with the help of the USSR / RF), life became better, richer, more stable? Which of the countries - friends of the USSR / RF have at least some weight in world history / economy / life? Russia is a terrorist country, and it finances either neo-Nazis or terrorists, or simply corrupt parties or associations, ready for money, like a prostitute, to fulfill any fantasies of the payer. If you do not agree - at least 1 example proving the opposite!  Threat Immediately I warn you - "fairy tales" will not work. I personally saw, personally communicated and I know what was happening, and personally visited such countries as Cuba, Hungary, Czechoslovakia (when it was one country), Poland, East Germany, Vietnam. These are the countries where the USSR / Russia left their "help imprint" ... I think Russia would like to do as it used to be, you know, the satellites around full controlled, etc.. It has already lost Poland, Bulgaria and many other... It seems that letting Ukraine go would just be too much. But, this is about realpolitics, not about morals or people. USA has been the kingmaker in most of Latin America, it has even been a documented formal attitude. Monroe doctrine served the US well. Although the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 was essentially passive (it asked that Europeans not increase their influence or recolonize any part of the Western Hemisphere), by the 20th century a more confident United States was willing to take on the role of regional policeman. In the early 1900s Roosevelt grew concerned that a crisis between Venezuela and its creditors could spark an invasion of that nation by European powers. The Roosevelt Corollary of December 1904 stated that the United States would intervene as a last resort to ensure that other nations in the Western Hemisphere fulfilled their obligations to international creditors, and did not violate the rights of the United States or invite “foreign aggression to the detriment of the entire body of American nations.” As the corollary worked out in practice, the United States increasingly used military force to restore internal stability to nations in the region. Roosevelt declared that the United States might “exercise international police power in ‘flagrant cases of such wrongdoing or impotence.’ |
|
|
|
So the issue is people bitching about not investing when the time was right? Hell I started investing in 2017 and I'm still complaining I haven't bought more in 2018. Look, that's just human nature. We are wired to lament on missed opportunities and to always want more than we already gott. That's a good thing because it drives us forward to not make the same mistakes, but it also keeps us locked in the past, and that's a bad thing. If you are a type of person who couldn't really just moved on in the past then you wouldn't really make yourself anymore better since you do keep on minding on your past mistakes which would really boggle up your mind in possible things that you might be engaging currently or in future. Its always been part of human nature on having these kind of reactions from time to time whenever we do missed out opportunities and since this market is unpredictable then its inevitable that we would missed up chances. All varies on how you do take risks on particular times without minding whether its the peak or the bottom and you do just simply go for long term. Frankly, whoever says that they do not have any remorse for not buying early are only fooling themselves. I personally do regret not having invested 100% of my assets on bitcoin much much earlier on. However, I a rational enough to understand that the past is gone and perhaps that is the best thing about life: You do not get to press the "undo" button, but you also can chose not to press "repeat" and learn. So, buy. Leave it there, go sleep 10 years. |
|
|
|
China is the best example for modern day invasion, they invade most of the countries economically and make them to pay for their country forever by giving lucrative offers in the beginning, but later they will take control of everything with the puppet rulers so any country wants to dominate should follow them. Its immorally wrong but that's the strategy.  I once posted under the title "if you sell is no longer yours", that also happens when you buy. Commercial invasion is not something desirable and is immoral if it happens corrupting politicians and giving credits that would never be able to pay for countries that have lousy politics. However war is something else and instating a dictatorial government is also undesirable and, while economic prevalence can be prevented with laws and discipline, the killing in war cannot. |
|
|
|
The metaverse is interesting, even though I find it a bit dystopian (Zucc being creepy also isn't helping). Considering the company behind it I think it's a worthy investment but most people would probably give it a pass right now and find it too risky.
I suppose if you have a lot of money lying around you don't mind losing you can use it for that and if you were right they you'd be richly rewarded for being an early adopter (like with bitcoin). Taking loans though? I don't think so, that would be too risky, we don't have a proper timeline on when it'll take off.
If you must take a loan to make money, spend it on something else.
Certainly, if you could choose among all the possible metaverses and ways of governance, you would certainly not say "hey, this guy Bill Gates or this guy Zuckerberg are just the right ones for the job" The idea even makes me laugh, particularly Mark is probably the most trustworthy person in the universe in the sense that you can absolutely trust that he will rip you off the moment he can, by all means and with total disregard for any implicit right or agreement like he did with his initial partners. |
|
|
|
I would not expect anything less from the CIA, they are after anything that does not look controllable and frankly, is probably being used worldwide to move funds around without raising suspicions. I would say that bitcoin is not precisely the most anonymous stuff out there. Monero kind of does the trick, other such as grin or perhaps some others that I am not aware of may be even better. There may be also a possibility of the CIA paying informants as well with crypto. |
|
|
|
|
Is one of the most accurate models and clearly the one that gives more incentives to the future investors. However good, the accuracy is always limited and there may be factors on institutional investors that may limit the future validity of the model and the need to re-tune a little bit to get a proper long term measure. It is in any case a difficult exercise and, perhaps, if the model becomes too accurate the profits may not be there.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
