|
People in Syria and North Korea are just too desperate to even consider bitcoin.
Syrians are trying not to get killed - finding an exchange where they can buy bitcoin is not on the top of their agenda. North Koreans are extremely poor and cut off, they don't have enough electricity in their country to be able to go online, let alone use an online currency like bitcoin.
If adoption happens, it will come in the second tier countries. They're stable enough so that people can earn the money to buy bitcoin in the first place, but also corrupt enough that people don't trust their govt or currency and are looking for alternatives like dollars, gold and bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
I don't want to open up another gold vs bitcoin thread. I'm just curious because I read an article that discussed whether we should be preparing ourselves for an upcoming recession by buying bitcoin or gold: https://cryptotradernews.com/cryptocurrency/preparing-for-a-recession-bitcoin-or-gold/Thoughts? I think the next recession won't be as big as the 2008 one (which, to me was a depression). Hence I'll stick with Bitcoin for now. I think bitcoin is not going to be negatively affected by a recession since it's an uncorrelated asset. It’s performance is not directly tied to corporate earnings and interest rates, etc. my personal opinion is that Bitcoin is anti-fragile and it gets stronger every time it survives from stress and chaos, because every time it recovers the more confidence people have in it going forward. Bitcoin is not the same bubble like most stocks. Most stocks bubbles burst and they never recover but Bitcoin recovers and is twice as strong. Bitcoin is an uncorrelated asset. But I do think it might get affected in a recession because people tend to sell assets in hard times to pay their bills. So we might see a wave of people selling their bitcoin savings if they lose their job for instance. |
|
|
|
|
I think this is great news, the easier it is for people to buy bitcoin the better.
Whether the German people take advantage of this is a whole other discussion. They are very risk-averse, which is why their savings are still in the form of cash at the bank, despite zero and negative interest rates, instead of putting it in real estate, bonds or shared. Bitcoin is more volative than stocks or property, so they may shy away from adoption.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is simply a mega-bubble that diminished people's ability to think rationally. Bitcoin can only go down to the price of an average coin. Just like Motorola's phones have prices of average phones.
If this is what you really think, knock yourself out doing a short on Kraken, Bakkt or Bitmex or the other futures exchanges. Put your money where your mouth is.  |
|
|
|
I have expected so much from LTC, because halving is a very important process for price growth, but what happened with LTC is just unbelievable. This coin added 20 percent before halving and dropped 40 percent few days after.
It's the old investment adage: buy in anticipation, sell on confirmation (or buy the rumour, sell the news). I'm pretty sure the same thing will happen to bitcoin. The price might surge to $20,000 and then there will be a lot of profit taking. |
|
|
|
After this halving, the coinbase reward will drop to 6.25 BTC. The price then has a direct affect on miner profitability. Historically this has been taken care of by the bull run. This time around Bitcoin is no longer new. It has become pretty mainstream. I think the affect on price now can only be driven by institutional investors.
This in turn is driven by whether institutional services for bitcoin can be a source of profit or not. The major institutions involved now are exchanges, trading apps, DAO like MAKR etc. If they are making a profit on their activities, they'd like to hoard more BTC to provide services to a wider consumer base. This is something we will come to know just before the halving.
This can be pretty much a moment of truth because BTC will be going into this halving with full mainstreaming. Its no longer a novelty that will make people invest before they can understand it. For the common population of developed countries, who are running the risk of losing savings to Govt debts, i think BTC is a must-have hedge. BTC is going to be integrated into its own peer-to-peer economy and it will continue to hold value as its economics is not limited by national borders and trade agreements.
The Litecoin halving in August was the canary in the mine. The price surged in the run up to the halving, in the belief that things would be just as last time. And then fell as people took profits. It was about $150 just before the halving and is now $50. Bitcoin might be the same - a surge in anticipation of the halving and then a lot of profit taking. |
|
|
|
I've just looked at the form they are asking me to Fill out.
Its a Form called W-8BEN
Its Giving permission for Coinbase to report myself as a indivudual non resident that ive exceeded there threshold
Whether i have to do this remains tobe seen.
Ive Email Coinbase stating in NON Us resident, i have No business in the Usa and the amount id only ever worked from and not exceeded was £2,800 gbp
and i will not be filling there form in.
I will see what there reply is.
Interestingly enough they are offering people who fill the form out $10 as a thankyou?? Abit strange i think,
Thankyou guys again for your help i will keep this thread updated
Send a private message to Coinbase via their reddit account: https://www.reddit.com/r/CoinBase/Sometimes they respond quicker if you contact them there. |
|
|
|
Before there wasn't bitcoin, people used gold as alternative, other precious metals and other goods, but bitcoin beats them all, its easier to hide and transfer it, if we talk about some higher amounts, how will someone transfer gold, or anything else, bitcoin wallet full with bitcoins can be hidden anywhere, much easier.
We haven't really seen a global meltdown yet. In the last couple of decades it has mainly been the USD that people used as hedge and store of value, and to some lower degree as means of exchange as well. Currently we have Bitcoin but that doesn't mean it's going to benefit from economic turmoil, especially with how people still consider it a very risky and volatile asset class.... stability is key to gain people's confidence. If the price pumps and dumps by 20-30% every so often that's not helping people. People looking for alternatives want stability and not constantly stress out about the price having gone up or down significantly. Stability of cryptocurrency is impossible since we all know that cryptocurrency is volatile in terms of value, meaning the price is changing time by time when there are transactions happening all around the world. The idea is that if we experienced downfall as of now, do not lose hope because there is a big chance that the price will come back again to its high value, all we need to do is to wait and HOLD that particular token we have. For you to gain a lot of money or profit you should learn different things with regards to the token you are holding. Cryptocurrency is only volatile because it's still small in terms of dollar amounts, and is not yet liquid enough. That means determined people can move the price with relatively little effort. Once more institutional investors come into the space and billions rather than millions are traded daily, then the volatility should decrease. |
|
|
|
At least Upbit claims they will cover the loss from their own assets and the client's funds will remain unharmed.
Korean exchanges are good for arbitraging and Upbit are serious until now.
The Korean exchanges are all regulated and I think if they didn't compensate their customers the regulator would investigate. The real question is "how did they let this happen"? What kind of breach of security was this, and is there anything other exchanges can learn from this? |
|
|
|
|
And if you bought bitcoin in Dec 2018, you would have lost 65% of your money.
It's easy to cherry pick dates to try to prove a point.
Hardly anyone bought bitcoin in 2011 because it was a super niche thing at the time. And most of those who bought then sold in the peak of 2013 when it hit $1000, in the excitement of banking in a big gain!
|
|
|
|
|
It would work for a small rich tax haven like the Cayman Islands, which currently uses the dollar as their currency (even though they arn't part of the united states).
For these small countries having their own currency is out of the question, and because they are tax havens, they need a SOUND currency. So yes, if the dollar is in trouble, I can see these tax havens switch to bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
We already saw that the adoption of physical coins settlement are not a preferred investment option with institutional investors. They prefer the cash settled options, because it is just easier and more convenient. Bakkt was a good indication of what we could accept from this venture, because it will also have a very slow start. It will gain momentum, when the Bitcoin price increase in the global markets and other investors see how much early adopters are profiting from that. (These guys are constantly bragging on private chat rooms, so it will be a Keeping up with the Joneses type of scenario)  Some investors could play both markets. So use the cash settled futures market to short sell and drive down the bitcoin price, then purchase actual bitcoins at the low. Rinse and repeat if the bitcoin price rises again. |
|
|
|
|
The answer is No. The halving reduces the rate of increase in the bitcoin supply. The bitcoin supply is currently increasing by 12.5 bitcoins per block, and it will increase by 6.25 per block after the halving.
As for "deflationary currency" - that refers to the purchasing power of the currency. If over time, you can purchase more and more with a bitcoin, it's deflationary. We can currently purchase nearly three times more goods with bitcoin than we could in January. That means it's a deflationary currency.
If you can purchase less with your currency than you did before, than it's an inflationary currency. You can purchase only 5% of what you could purchase with the dollar in 1919, so it's an inflationary currency.
As for does bitcoin create deflation in the economy? Does it force prices of goods to fall. The answer is no - it would only be able to do that if it was the sole currency people were allowed to use. But there are loads of currencies people use, including loads of cryptocurrencies.
|
|
|
|
According to data from Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), Bakkt futures trading volume reached the highest level at $ 20.3 million, or 2,367 contracts, surpassing the previous figure of 1,756. This increase coincided with the decline in Bitcoin price below $ 7000 and stability at that range. They seem to be "Institutional investors are trying to seize the dip! to buy more Don't forget that BAKKT will launch paper futures next year. Read more and source ---> https://cointelegraph.com/news/bakkt-bitcoin-futures-set-new-daily-record-trading-over-20mYou are assuming that institutional investors are trying to "seize the dip". But they might have been shorting and trying to force the price down. We just don't know. |
|
|
|
Behold good trading volume doesn't mean a coin or token is good, i read in a thread where few people are saying if a coin has no volume means its a bad coin, well here we go, bad coins can have huuuge volume, you must have heard of bomb token? bomb token has good trading volume but guess what? it has no real use case, the volume comes from HYPE because its a deflationary tokens, people believed that the more a max supply of a token get decreased or burned off over time means they are GOLD tokens, it does bring profits to early adopters like they say but NO REAL USE CASES.
Bad coins can have good volume. But coins that have no volume are dead coins. Being dead is kinda bad... |
|
|
|
Andreas is totally right about this kind of attack, it would be terribly expensive, and it would fail very quickly. It is not easy (if at all possible), to destroy Bitcoin, and I think something like this would be the last option in some possible attempt to destroy Bitcoin.
However, given the fact that China has more than 50% of the hash power, I see a big problem in that fact. We all can see that China makes strange decisions when it comes to Bitcoin, and one day they can just decide that all mining farms become the property of the CP. Of course, it will not destroy Bitcoin, but the panic that would then prevail would have a devastating effect on price.
I also think that Bitcoin is no threat at this time and that no state plans to destroy it, but they turned more to the control and supervision of those who use it.
Some of the Chinese miners are moving out of China because they're afraid of their governments. In the end it all comes down to the cost of energy. In China they have surplus power because they overbuilt the hydroelectric dams during the Great Financial Crisis. If the rest of the world can develop a lot of cheap solar or wind energy, then the mining will move there. It's literally about supply and demand of energy. |
|
|
|
This is just for New York residents, tho...right? That's obviously only 1 state out of 50 in the U.S., tho it certainly is an important one since its where a lot of big money investors work out of. It would be nice if this was available to at least all the other states, if not other countries.
New York is the only state that has really tough licencing laws. So if they can operate in New York state they can operate in all the states that have looser laws or no laws as well. So about 20-30 states in all. |
|
|
|
I think it's very useful that the whole supply chain is on BC (from raw material to product). I doubt they will use the XLM platform. Maybe they will do their own BC.
I think it's pretty much nailed on they'll use their own blockchain with their own token. They don't seem to be interested in the tech for moving money, but instead for storing data in a way that cannot be tampered with unless someone reverses all the blocks. |
|
|
|
America has a strange tendency to push double standards which kill american jobs, and restrict american economic growth. In sectors where every other nation in the world embraces said standards.
While the rest of the world scrambles to snatch up marketshare in cryptocurrencies and payment processors, the united states chooses to abort its own native start ups in those sectors. Guaranteeing the USA is left behind by its competition. The SEC stalled Winklevoss applications for a US crypto ETF, while europe and other nations around the world have no trouble implementing their own crypto ETF markets to boost job markets and economies. American regulators deny US traders access to many crypto exchanges and services for their own "protection". As if americans were the only country in the entire world lacking the intelligence or sophistication to utilize bitmex or another crypto exchange which allows trading with leverage. Even stablecoins like tether have banned US customers.
I don't see this move on the part of US lawmakers and regulators as being legitimate. But rather a double standard reinforcing a crooked agenda many of us have noticed over the years. Which says its ok for every nation on earth to reap economic and job growth from innovations like cryptocurrencies. But its not ok if americans wish to do the same & this should be banned or regulated out of existence to prevent it from occurring.
The US isn't "aborting start-ups". They're just calling out stable coins, which are essentially fake cryptos. If you want the dollar, use the dollar! why add a middleman called a stablecoin pegged to the dollar, with the additional costs of "managing" it and having to hold reserves? And if you want a cryptocurrency, then hold a genuine cryptocurrency. If you don't like the volatility then go back to fiat. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
