Airdropped coins are meagre compared to other forms of social tasks or bounties. Earning from airdrops is usually hard and scarce. Often, the little or much you have will exchange for next to nothing.
Airdrop coins, I strongly believe, is a free investment for the long term on the simple reason that generally believed, coin price will increase and stabilise over a long time, in hopes that the project really succeeds.

In my opinion, ethereum is the worst cryptocurrency and will still fall well under $200. I am even predicting a baseline line of $100.

Those who understand how bitcoin works will.

I don't see that happening though.

The same question was asked when Obama was president. He had a second term.
And in my opinion, trump has done very well internally to deserve a second term, irrespective of propaganda or his seemingly bad foreign policies.

Just enough to start. Trade coins only in high volume exchanges. Do some research to aid your decision making.

It is general belief that coin worth grows with time, and the principle of "holding" is built on such a belief. Long term trading (or holding) is just passive trading. The major disadvantage is that it is possible to make 10 times or more profit in short to medium term trading using the same capital. But also, the risk of loosing too in short to medium term trading compared to long term.
Your ability to set long term goals and be disciplined enough to achieve them is very important.

Venezuela is one country already doing this. Others will key into crypto adoption in the near foreseeable future as well. And I believe some countries in the middle East like UAE, Turkey, Iran, and Qatar will do so.
If Venezuela succeeds, their success will trigger a mass acceptability and adoption of cryptocurrency by many nations, particular those whose GDP is heavily dependent on crude oil. That's how I look at it.

Maybe, because the will be improvements in the future.

I understand the problem of mining vs power and the heavy cost implications. This is one of the few reasons why mining is considered to be no lucrative. It really requires a lot of resources.
Sstoshi has done well with his innovation, and I belief he and his team of developers (if any  ) can still do more in improving the mining algorithm. Of course if the algorithm is improved, it could reduce electricity consumption.

It is even made a bit difficult because of the amount of bitcoins currently in circulation. And I believe this was an unforseen "harmless" error right from the very beginning.

You don't make people accept cryptocurrencies. Events will shape the digital future accordingly, with time. Just as with the Internet, so it will be with cryptocurrency. The only hurdle in the part of cryptocurrency, and blockchain revolution in general, is those large multi national financial cooperations, to which the banks belong, global monetary regulatory bodies; the IMF for instance, and the likes. And as you already know, the simple reason for that is because  a person with a fair knowledge or exposure to the principles and operation of cryptocurrency and blockchain, who has come to appreciate the technology, may not want to put his money in a bank account, thus deny these banks the privilege of financial custodianship and consequently, taking away from them investment capital or potential.
This hurdle however, will only be a temporary one. Global progress will not stand still on that account, but will surely run over every hurdle. Just as the past clearly shows.

I the same in my own country. Bitcoin still relatively unknown. And just as yous said, people tend to look at you as "not serious" when you talk about making money online.

Yea. Many coins now are shit coins. It is even difficult now to find a true crypto ICO. But I believe this will be temporary also because eventually, the bad eggs will be phased out.

Lite coin to be over $5000 in 2018? I don't think so. I think you are being overly optimistic, with a lost touch to the ground.

In crypo, it doesn't matter whether you are rich or "they are poor", its all about investing and hoping for good returns.
These guys you call poor may not really be poor in the way you mean it. And, English language is just one out of other thousands. It is your statements about the language that you reveal your smallness! Most investors in crypto are inexperienced. They (rightly stated by you) believe that crypto is a get-rich-quick kind of investment, and will tend to swallow hook, line, and sinker whatever ICO is readily available for them to invest in, whether legit or scam. With their innocence and enthusiasm, they will then spread the "scam" out. And, eventually events and experiences teach them the hard lessons.
It is true that the world of crypto today thrives frantically because of the set of people, but this does not justify, in general terms, the description "poor".
Surely, the poor-rich, good-bad mixture exists also in the crypto game, just as it is everywhere. But I tell you, it has never been easy to get rich quick anywhere else as it is now with crypto. This is one of the simplest possibilities now, offering everyone the chance to become rich.

Whoever falls to the temptation of greed has himself to blame!

Take about $2k and buy KINGXCHAIN coin. Thank me later.

https://polynetwork.org/public/whitepaper.pdf
https://polynetwork.org/

The project looks great.
But links above not working, which in my opinion casts suspicion.

I wouldn't know that! But as for me, I have less than zero. 

It is really difficult to say whom that is responsible without facts. The skripal case as I understand involves a high degree of power game between the USA and Russia, with rhetorics and mutually playing the blame game. No one can say a thing in this issue without definite proof. No matter how one analyses pseudo-facts, the truth remains: the public has no idea who did it.

However, because the human brain is too apt to joining issues, even before or without concrete knowledge, I would like to throw my own opinion into the pool as well.
Observe: Closely looking at both super powers, and comparing fresh events of the past; in international treaties, trade, and diplomacy, between the two, who is more willing to foster peace and mutual cooperation, who is readily steered to pick up a fight with the other, even over trivial and insignificant events, who is aggressive and tends to domineer, who is more thoughtful and systemic in approach to matters; thus, who's a boy and who's a man, who is noisy, and who is more quiet? Lastly, and probably the best proof regarding this case: who has demonstrated the greatest scandalousness?

How does all these relate to Sergei Skripal's poisoning?
 The whole thing looks bizarre, and one may find it really difficult to arrive at a comprehensively logical picture devoid of damning errors. It is difficult because the possibilities are tenfold. In Wikipedia's article about (google keyword): "who poisoned skripal", Britain accuses the Russian state, and her nationals Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov of using a chemical lethal compound  (Novichok nerve agent) in Scripal's poisoning,and calls them suspects. While the Russian government has repeatedly denied any involvement.

But who looses more from a demised skripal; is it the UK/USA government or is it Russia? Or, was the incident a precedented scheme designed to further propagate Russia's already battered global image, with the aim of punishing Russia through more sanctions for "committing" such an act. What does Russia gain from the death of a former military intelligence officer, Is it fear of supplying UK/USA government with critical information about Russia's military intelligence, If so, how updated is skripal's intelligence about present Russia's military capabilities, does he still have any sound intelligence gathering network, hasn't he  done that already in times of his active years and double secret service to Britain and Russia, a practice I consider dishonourable and treasonable? Why should Russia kill him now, when he was already convicted in the past and punished, when Russia had all favourable opportunities to silence him for good? Or, does the British government believe that he was/is also sharing British intelligence with Russia as a spy?

It is said that the Novichok agent was "found in a body spray container by a man" who gave it to a lady, and the lady sprayed the "perfume" on her waist, and eventually died from contamination. This happened in Salisbury after skripal was poisoned. However, not much is said about the man who "found" the container.

 While this is right or wrong, the whole thing is a confusion and in disarray.

Were there no more clean and more lethal options for Russia to use other than the nerve agent? How many of such cases are recorded from the past that can be confidently traced to Russia, and if any, has the USA of UK government not in one way or the other involved in more atrocious deeds? Who can truthfully, and confidently say that he is cleaner than the other?

The way I look at it (my opinion) three things are involved:
1. The UK government collaborating the USA government, in a precedented effort, to frame the Russian government into more sanctions and economic/political marginalisation. Or,
2. The Russian government deliberately poisoning Sergei Skripal for fear of military intelligence sabotage.
3. The British government deliberately poisoning Sergei and his daughter(...) for fear of British intelligence sabotage.
All points are in order of preference.

Guaranteed profit? I wish not to sound pessimistic, but many "guaranteed" ICO projects have debuted with risen hopes, only to crash miserably dashing people's beliefs and investment too. IN CRYPTO, THERE IS NOTHING LIKE GUARANTEED. Only positive prospect or speculation.