You always hear the pundits saying that the rise of inflation suppresses the price of risk assets such as stocks and bitcoin, as interest rates are pushed up in an attempt to control inflation.
But if bitcoin is a hedge against inflation then shouldn't the bitcoin price rise when inflation goes up instead of going down?
I'm guessing the answer would be that inflation causes bitcoin price to go down in the short term, but in the long term causes it to go up? If so then why?
Nope, inflation doesn't suppress the prices of risk assets. The attempts to fight inflation(interest rate hikes) are what suppresses the prices of risk assets. Inflation means having excessive amounts of fiat money in circulation, which causes the prices of everything to go up. Certain assets like Gold, Real Estate and probably Bitcoin are being viewed as a "inflation-protection" assets, because they preserve their value in times of inflation. This means that their value/price does up with the same ratio as the level of inflation. In the short term, the Bitcoin price determined by the demand for Bitcoins, not by the overall inflation levels. |
|
|
|
1. Increase in Petroleum products, the increase in fuel , diesel prices automatically increases the price of transportation and distribution of goods across state boarders.
2. The forces of Demand, when there excess demand for a product, an artificial scarcity is created which places value on the product. This scarcity is artificially created by two means - There could be scarcity created by shortage in the production and distribution process or short of the product in the market over a period of time.
3. Supply Chain, the supply forces are most times influenced by the increment in petroleum products and other motor body parts, the cost of transportation as the major means of distribution and supply greatly affects the price of goods , which makes it hard for individuals to easily purchase such products. 1.How do you plan to regulate petroleum prices, since they are "regulated" by OPEC+? Nigeria also exports oil, so it benefits from high oil prices just like the OPEC+ members. 2.Excess demand for products is created mostly by the money printing machines of the central banks. There's no point regulating prices of consumer goods, when the money printing increases the demand for products artificially. The solution is "regulating" the central banks and stopping the money printing machines. 3.How can you regulate disrupted supply chains? Sometimes, supply chains can be disrupted by other factors-political, technological, even environmental. Imposing "regulated" or controlled prices over consumer goods and services in a pretty dumb socialist policy. |
|
|
|
|
Inter deserved to win against Juventus. The Polish goalkeeper(I forgot his name) saved Juventus from a bigger defeat. I can't see who is going to compete against Inter for winning the Serie A trophy. They have six wins in a row and are obviously in great shape. Juventus relies mostly on Vlahovic for scoring goals, so they have big problems, when Vlahovic can't score. I've always disliked Massimiliano Allegri as a coach. I don't know why he still isn't fired as a Juventus coach. Napoli and AC Milan are weak and inconsistent as well, so no team in Italy is going to stop Inter to win Serie A.
|
|
|
|
There's no way achieve 100% safety. It doesn't matter if you are going to use hardware or software wallet. What if you lose your hardware wallet? What if the hardware wallet breaks? I've never heard about this Freewallet software. No legit software wallet is going to ask you for an email, because emails can get hacked. The software wallets are usually asking for password only(and they ask you to remember and store your seedphrase somewhere safe). I just don't get too obsessed with the safety of my Bitcoins. Otherwise, I will freak out.  I wouldn't bother buying Trezor unless I have 10 million USD worth of BTC. And I will probably have to put the Trezor wallet in a safety deposit box and dig it somewhere in my backyard. |
|
|
|
Carbon is not the commodity, it's carbon credits, so you don't get paid to produce CO2, you get fined for producing!
I'm not the biggest expert in this field, but carbon credits are not a fine. You are just obligated by the system to buy carbon credits, if you are producing lots of carbon emissions. Some "green idiots" have decided that CO2 is bad for the environment, even though the plants and trees consume CO2. The excessive amount of CO2 produced by the industry is what created global warming(that's what the "green scientists" are saying). There's no discussion about other possible factors causing global warming. Anyway, all the countries that accepting carbon credits trading has done this voluntarily. If some underdeveloped country thinks that carbon credits are stopping it's industrialization, that particular country could simply out of the carbon credits trading system(this will probably have some negative consequences, but I'm not sure about that). |
|
|
|
|
Is there an option to report Ads on Facebook and Instagram? I'm asking this because I've deleted my Facebook and Instagram Ads several years ago. I'm sure that there must be an option to report ads, that are promoting sketchy products and services. Gambling ads shouldn't be allowed on big social media platforms. Why would anyone deposit money on a shady, obscure sports betting platform, without checking the reviews and feedback about that platform? Such scams will continue to exist, as long as there are greedy and gullible people, who are falling for this sh&t.
|
|
|
|
Yes, I don't think that Bitcoin's blockchain is compatible with MetaMask EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine).
Perhaps this is just a mistake, maybe what they meant is Wrapped BTC or WBTC. And any case, this just shows how poor crypto journalism is.
Crypto journalism isn't "poor". It just relies on clickbait. Nobody would pay attention to any news about Metamask accepting some shitcoin/token, that is pegged to Bitcoin. Everyone in the crypto world would pay attention to the "Metamask now supporting Bitcoin!" news. I would never use Metamask, even if they somehow started supporting actual Bitcoins. Metamask doesn't seem like a secure wallet to me. There are even "Metamask drainer" software programs that are being promoted over the darkweb. I don't want any hacker to drain my Metamask wallet out of nowhere. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin or other digital currencies have a rebellious image because they are outside of government control. But when it comes under government regulatory agency, Bitcoin will no longer have that rebellious image. And will be counted as one of the ten institutional investment sector. The "rebellious image" of Bitcoin seems kinda fake. I'm sure that at least 90% of all Bitcoiners would be totally OK with the governments accepting BTC as an asset and/or a currency. You can't be "rebellious" and against the system on one hand and waiting for the same system to recognize and adopt you on the other hand. This seems like hypocrisy to me. Privacy oriented coins like Monero are way more "rebellious" than Bitcoin. I'm sure that no big crypto company and no government around the world is going to adopt a privacy coin. |
|
|
|
|
So what alternative do you suggest? Returning to the gold standard? Dumping fiat money completely and going with Barter trading? Anything else? Barter trading sucks and going back to the gold standard is close to impossible, because there's not enough gold around the world and handle all transactions. Most of the gold on planet Earth is still underground and it has to be mined.
Rule based order? Why do you think that order, which is based on rules is something bad. We can't live in a society without rules. What would a financial system without rules look like? Will it look like total chaos? Who is going to benefit from a total chaos?
|
|
|
|
My neighbor has tuberculosis and from the information I gathered from a reliable source, his case is so severe. He is at the lung cavitation stage of the disease and he has been advised to avoid overcrowded environments for his health and the safety of others. But my neighbor who is a responsible gambler will always visit physical betting shops. Some physical gambling shops in my area are poorly ventilated and they could be overcrowded and stuffy. Sometimes you could see that he is struggling to remain in the casino shop and such cases he would be coughing heavily. I have told him to focus on online gambling but he told me that he is more entertained in physical bet shops.
Betting with online gambling firms will shield you from contracting communicable diseases because you are all alone in a comfortable atmosphere. My neighbor's behavior has made me focus only on crypto casinos because I am scared of my health. Don't get me wrong there are many well-built and very comfortable physical casinos that offer quality services, but when you are an online gambler you will not need to worry about the health concerns of fellow gamblers.
OP, your thread title seems very misleading. I thought that you will be writing about any actual health benefits of gambling. Staying indoors and playing online gambling will prevent you from getting infected? Is this the "health benefit" you are writing about? If that's the case, playing video games has the same "health benefit"? What about watching online porn, instead of going outside and getting infected? Your neighbor seems to be very irresponsible to his own health and the health of other people. Maybe that's why I always avoid offline gambling as well. Some idiot might be spreading infections left and right in the casino. |
|
|
|
And at first I felt uncomfortable because my child had a beautiful name, but over time I got used to it and if my child was called Bitcoin he would definitely respond more because he was used to it. And I'm worried that my child will be called Bitcoin when he grows up, and I also feel uncomfortable if there are questions about Bitcoin because I'm afraid of answering it wrong. So basically your relatives started calling your child with the nickname Bitcoin? I don't think that this nickname will get outside of your family, unless your relatives start spreading it everywhere(which is weird). My relatives never gave me a nickname, when I was young. Do you really think that his schoolmates will call him Bitcoin when he grows up? I don't think that this nickname is going to stick to your son for several years. Spreading the word about Bitcoin among family and relatives can be a double edged sword. They might blame you for getting scammed by a BTC scam or buying right before the price drops. That's why I would never say anything to my family about my Bitcoin journey. |
|
|
|
Every story you tell someone can either be a motivation or something to get them depressed. I have been thinking about this and I'd like to pass this advice to every serious gambler in this platform who has won a substantial amount of money from gambling, not to share their success story about winning to everyone and in every place. You do not know the story of every gambler, and on the face some gamblers may just look alright but in deep down they are in debt, some depressed due to addiction to gambling that is destroying them and has made them plan to quit. Your success story when shared indiscriminately may trigger and motivate this addicted gambler battling to stop to want to keep gambling, having the believe that their time is close. Be careful who and where you talk about your success in gambling, you may just be encouraging an addicted gambler to continue.
I usually hate to brag about my gambling winnings. Those winnings are mostly based on luck and luck just comes and goes. There's no point for me to brag about having luck, because my luck would most likely go away tomorrow. And I hate bragging in general. Almost all gambling addicts are mentally unstable and I agree that bragging with your success in front of a gambling addict could have negative consequences. The problem is that many casinos use testimonials from gamblers, who won money as a part of their marketing campaigns. How can you stop the casinos from doing such sneaky marketing moves? |
|
|
|
|
Great game between Man United and Wolves(is was great for the neutral fans, not the Man United fans). Getting equalized from 3-1 to 3-3 means that Manchester United lacks confidence and strong defense, their goalkeeper is also mediocre. The "red devils" got kinda lucky because of their 4th goal, but I'm sure that they will keep losing points against the weaker teams in the Premier League.
I hear rumors that United wants to buy Ronaldo Araujo from Barcelona during the summer. I'm not sure that this will stabilize their defensive play.
Marcus Rashford scored a goal, but he is still far away from his peak performance. Manchester United needs several new players and a new manager.
|
|
|
|
If this issue is been addressed, bitcoin will prevail. The fee is deterring the adoption especially in our rural and local areas.
This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance. Why does it stop the adoption in rural and local areas? You have to pay the transaction fee regardless where you live. The fee is the same if you live in a big city or a small village. I guess you mean that the people living in rural areas are poor, so they can't afford big transaction fees. I've written this many times, if you don't like high BTC transaction fees, just choose an altcoin or stick to fiat money. Nobody is forcing you to use BTC. Buying and HODLing BTC doesn't require making multiple transactions and paying high transaction fees. And by the way, the transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain are pretty normal right now. |
|
|
|
You can't "go bank less" with Bitcoin, because you can't buy food and pay the bills with Bitcoin. Sad but true... The Federal Reserve will step in and provide enough liquidity for the bank, if the bank really has problems. The NYCB stocks dropped, but that doesn't mean that the bank is insolvent and the depositors will lose their money. We don't need such unnecessary drama and clickbait news. We might be seeing more news like this, mostly because of the high interest rates in the USA. The same drama happened last year with Silicon Valley bank and Signature bank and everyone was a expecting a big financial crisis in the US, but nothing happened and the US GDP has a 2.5% growth for 2023. I think that the news around NYCB are basically the same clickbait FUD drama. |
|
|
|
Liverpool completely destroyed Chelsea, which proves that Chelsea's American owner doesn't know what he's doing. There was a situation for penalty for Chelsea at the beginning of the match, but VAR and the referee didn't see anything. Other than that, Chelsea was just a too weak to compete against the inspired and highly motivated team from Merseyside. Liverpool plays great even without Salah. Jota, Nunez and Diaz are at their best shape. Great game for the young Conor Bradley. One goal and two assists for a 20-year old player in a game against Chelsea is a big achievement. I'm not a Liverpool fan, but I want Liverpool to win Premiership because of Jurgen Klopp. |
|
|
|
Satoshi created bitcoin for the world and he never even cashed out. He did it for us and he didn't even profit from it. It's truly amazing and it's 100% impossible to ever have a cryptocurrency where the coins are circulating in the wild freely for 18 months before having any value. I also don't think that we'll ever see another cryptocurrency created where the founder never cashes out. We will never know what really happened to Satoshi Nakamoto. Maybe he wanted a to sell a part of his 1.1 million BTC, but died before that. The coins were circulating freely because nobody wanted to buy them and give them any monetary value. If someone creates an altcoin today and nobody wants to buy that altcoin, I'm sure that the coins of this particular altcoin will also circulate freely between several early adopters. That doesn't necessarily mean that the redistribution of the altcoins between multiple early adopters will be fair. Is there something wrong with the founder/developers of a cryptocurrency wanting to profit from their creation? I don't find anything wrong with this. The altcoin founders/dev can sell their coins and profit. Nobody would blame Satoshi for selling his BTC. |
|
|
|
Not a day goes by without a tech company announcing major job cuts. Today Paypal and Block (both payment service providers) have announced a total of 3500 job cuts, and recently Salesforce, Microsoft, SAP, Google, Ebay etc. have also done so. According to https://layoffs.fyi, 25,000 documented tech jobs have already been cut this year. What do you think? Is it just a shrinkage and normalization after the strong build-up of the workforce during Corona or a long-term trend that will accelerate through the use of AI?Maybe both. Or maybe the effect of the pandemic over the "Big Tech" is kinda exaggerated. The pandemic ended in the first half of 2022(in the western world). Why didn't the big corporations start firing tech employees in 2022? "Bullshit jobs" are a thing in big bureaucratic structures like the major corporations. AI will help the "Big Tech" to cut all the "bullshit jobs" and increase efficiency. Producing more with less people has always been the core principle of industrial capitalism. High tech capitalism is no exception to this rule. Maybe the higher interest rates and the expectations of a future recession are also playing a big role in the decision to cut labor costs. |
|
|
|
A lot of people have been clamoring about how gambling has ruined their life but same gambling has set some people up for life, just like every other form of investment there must always be a profit or a loss. And life is so balanced that what works for Mr A might not be the same that works for Mr B. Likewise in gambling, while some are crying about their loss they are some who are smiling and celebrating their win.
Gambling has been seen as a very dangerous thing base on some people's point of view here in the forum whereas in reality it has given some people the capital to start what ever business they want to do. My point in this post is that we shouldn’t just paint gambling all black because some people have fail to stick to the discipline of gambling.
I believe that before one make a decision in life, they should've already weighed the consequences of making the right or wrong choice, then put their fate on luck coupled with their little knowledge concerning what they're about to decide on, so why complain and play the blame game when things go wrong? "Share your thought on how gambling has come through for you if you got any". You are coming up with the assumption that the amount of people, who lost from gambling is equal to the amount of people, who won from gambling. This is too far away from the truth. The amount of gambling addicts, who ruined their lives is way bigger than the people, who profited from gambling. In fact, I don't know about anyone, who changed his life for good because of a big win from a casino. I agree that the blame game is pointless, but don't try to paint a picture, that isn't real. The gambling industry isn't as balanced as life in general. There is a reason why "the casino always wins". If the amount of winners was equal to the amount of losers, the gambling industry wouldn't be so profitable. |
|
|
|
"“I think there’s a good chance that … when we get to that 21 million Bitcoins, [Satoshi Nakamato] is going to come on there, laugh hysterically, go quiet, and all Bitcoin is going to be erased. Jamie Dimon is simply trolling at this point. You know the saying "don't feed the trolls". Don't give him attention for free. Does he really believe that Bitcoin is so centralized, that a single person could erase all 21 million BTC. What about consensus? What about the core principles of blockchain technology? I wouldn't be surprised if JP Morgan Chase secretly buys more BTC, while this troll keeps hating on BTC and spreads more BS around the internet. And no, Satoshi Nakamoto is never going to "come around" again. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
