Without a doubt this has to rate as the most unique potentially useful advice to attain financial freedom I've ever seen. Youtube clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfRVmRfR0nIIts easy to be skeptical of this woman commenting on financial topics. She doesn't fit the standard profile one would expect from a seasoned pro. I watched this clip thinking it might contain parody material but have to admit some of the things she says are interesting. One might go so far as to say some of the things she says are deep. The principle of earning money being strongly based in emotion or psychology could be a neglected area. Her stance on this is that people who strongly believe that "money is crap". Or those who have strong negative sentiments or emotions about money will create a barrier which makes it difficult for these people to psychologically consider methods to earn money or do ok for themselves financially. I may be in the minority here but I think this is one of the more intelligent things I've heard from someone offering financial advice. Does anyone have any tidbits of wisdom on financial freedom, investing, crypto, economics they would like to share? Please share the wealth. |
|
|
|
Speaking of bitcoin cash (BCH) and Roger Ver, looks as if they both could be in hot water.  Bitcoin.com & CEO Roger Ver To Face Lawsuit As 800+ Bitcoin Users UniteOver 800 individuals have come together to create a community against Bitcoin.com and its CEO Roger Ver. A legal action has been pursued by the “Bitcoin.com lawsuit/victims” Telegram group for misleading the users into buying BCH instead of BTC. Roger Ver in trouble over tricking people into buying BCH Bitcoin is the most popular and valued virtual currency in the crypto space. And anyone that wants to know about it, is likely to go the Bitcoin.com route. It’s only instinctual that bitcoin enthusiasts would try this domain. But when one Google “buy bitcoin”, the first result you get is buy.bitcoin.com. Now, the CEO of Bitcoin.com Roger Ver who is an early Bitcoin investor might soon face a lawsuit for his controversial promotion of Bitcoin Cash. It is gaining a lot of steam in a Telegram group chart named Bitcoin.com lawsuit/victims created by a user, Money Trigz. The group has already crossed 800 members that want to press charges on the website for spreading wrong information that Bitcoin cash is the real Bitcoin. Apparently, the group has attracted some big names from the crypto community as well though no one is in charge of this initiative. Roger Ver, who has been a Bitcoin influencer, started propagating Bitcoin Cash after the fork of Bitcoin. His website bitcoin.com shows users Bitcoin Cash at the top and represents Bitcoin as Bitcoin Core. Not only the logos are similar but this is the only website that refers to Bitcoin as Bitcoin Core. The misinformation led users to end up buying Bitcoin Cash when they wanted to buy Bitcoin. The Bitcoin community has been angered by this and wants to boycott the website. Meanwhile, Erik Voorhees, the CEO of Shapeshift and longtime associate of Roger Ver distanced himself from Ver regarding representing Bitcoin Cash as the real Bitcoin as tweeted by him: “Roger – please stop referencing me to back up your opinion that Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin. It isn’t. Bitcoin is the chain originating from the genesis block with the highest accumulated proof of work. The Bitcoin Cash fork failed to gain majority, thus it is not Bitcoin.” Bitcoin users/enthusiasts seeking legal route The community is taking it seriously as many bitcoin enthusiasts are even a ready to donate to the lawsuit. Regarding this lawsuit, Money Trigz stated: “Everybody is frustrated and outraged plus you have victims now losing money because of it. [Bitcoin.com] crossed the line, and we’re pushing back legally.” The creator of the group emphasized that instead of a discussion group, it is for the victims: “The legal angles are being discussed with lawyers, not up for discussion here, this is public, [Bitcoin.com] have eyes here.” He further said that: “We have things going on behind the scenes and ALLOT of industry people dm us to help with lawyer firms recommendations and in different juri’s. there seems to be some serious merrit with a few of the approaches, can’t say more now. send everybody to us that lost money using bitcoin.com platform or wallet.” Do you think Roger Ver and Bitcoin.com are committing fraud? Share your thoughts with us in the comment section below! https://coingape.com/bitcoin-com-ceo-roger-ver-to-face-lawsuit/ Specifics on how bitcoin.com could be misleading or defrauding the public into buying bitcoin cash (bch) as they are unaware of which bitcoin is the legitimate one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3419499.msg35755094#msg35755094Uncertain on what the 800+ bitcoin users chances are for a successful lawsuit against Roger Ver or bitcoin cash. I remember a lot of people on this forum saying facebook and google were correct to ban bitcoin advertisements considering many of them were for fraudulent ICO's or scams. Would be interested to know if those same individuals believe Roger Ver, bitcoin.com or bitcoin cash should be penalized for misleading people who want to buy bitcoin into purchasing bitcoin cash instead. How do people feel about this? |
|
|
|
5 Mental Responses That Will Make You Lose Money I'll try to list a few items I think apply to gambling. Not sticking to the betting gameplan / strategy due to emotional stimulus or a lack of mental discipline. Sometimes when people start to lose they will begin to chase bets which are higher risk than they normally would consider and it accumulates even worse losses than they would normally sustain if they stuck to the strategy they made when their mind was clear and rational. Expecting win versus loss to mirror a 50/50 split. After 8 straight losses a person might decide their lack of success has to balance out to 50% wins and 50% losses, which means their next bet will be a winning one. That's not how things work, unfortunately. It is possible to have 20 or more straight wins and 20 or more straight losses. The universe doesn't mirror a 50/50 split. Expecting odds on a bet to reflect actual probability rather than subjective or arbitrarily fabricated numbers. While it might be tempting to bet heavy on plays which appear to be "high percentage wins" sometimes its good to remember that bets which payout low percentages don't reflect the actual statistics of chances for winning. |
|
|
|
Can it be possible for the whole wide world use a single currency? A heavily centralized currency built around a monopoly? A number of competing currencies could be preferable. Bitmain having a monopoly over the ASIC market could have strong parallels to a world forced to utilize a single currency. Likewise microsoft's monopoly over the OS market, google's monopoly over search engines, banks having monopolies over many markets leading to industry wide stagnation and a lack of innovation for spanning decades. AMD versus intel and coke versus pepsi could be a better abstract for currencies. Competition offering consumers better options and terms, while fueling industry wide progress and innovation. Two or more currencies could achieve this, while one currency could be prone towards a zero incentive atmosphere where there is no effort made to improve as there is no competition from which to draw useful comparisons. |
|
|
|
|
Bellator 198 Fedor Emelianenko vs Frank Mir is scheduled for later today.
Fedor Emelianenko vs. Frank Mir
Emmanuel Sanchez vs. Sam Sicilia
Rafael Lovato Jr. vs. Gerald Harris
Neiman Gracie vs. Javier Torres
Dillon Danis vs. Kyle Walker
This will be Dillon Danis' pro MMA debut. He has been talking a lot leading up to this.
Would anyone be in favor of the UFC scheduling things so that Amanda Nunes and Racquel Pennington fought. And Tecia Torres versus Nina Ansaroff was on the same card? Then it could be a couples battle. Maybe that would be too much. Too controversial. Too many emotions. Nate Diaz and Conor did something similar with their team battle awhile back. Artem Lobov vs Chris Avila being on the undercard.
|
|
|
|
Global Warming: When the U.S. announced last year it would withdraw from the job-killing Paris Climate Accords, it was treated by the media as a climate-change disaster. But don't worry: The U.S. is slashing output of greenhouse gases all on its own. The latest report from the Environmental Protection Agency shows that the emission of so-called greenhouse gases declined by 2% in 2016 from 2015 and 11% from 2005. No major industrial economy on Earth has made as much progress as the U.S. And no, we're not claiming this as a victory for Donald Trump or anyone else in government. It's due to fracking and the replacement of high-CO2 fuels like coal with far-cleaner natural gas. That trend can bee seen in another data series, which shows that emissions in the electric power sector plunged 25% since 2005, an unprecedented amount. "This report confirms the president's critics are wrong again: one-size-fits-all regulations like the Clean Power Plan or misguided international agreements like the Paris Accords are not the solution," said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. "The U.S. has reduced greenhouse gas emissions more than any country on Earth over the last decade."
He added: "American ingenuity and technological breakthroughs, not top-down government mandates, have made the U.S. the world leader in achieving energy dominance while reducing emissions — one of the great environmental successes of our time." Sounds almost too good to be true, but it is. Pruitt is right. Meanwhile, among the other 194 countries that signed the Paris Accords to reduce their greenhouse gas output, emissions continue to rise. Many of these countries have promoted foolish policies, such as shutting down nuclear power plants, that actually make their skies dirtier, not cleaner.
By forcing a switch to "renewables" like wind and solar power, these countries had hoped to become clean-energy powerhouses. Instead, to make up for the growing energy shortages, higher cost and unreliability of renewables, they've had to rely on using even more coal for their energy — entirely foreseeable and avoidable problems that somehow the extreme green leaders of these nations neither foresaw nor avoided.Still, if you're hoping to read about the U.S.' tremendous success in the mainstream media, good luck. Most of the media have entirely bought the global warming doomsday scenarios pushed by globalist leaders of a socialist bent, who see in climate change an opportunity to extend government's reach into every aspect of human life. By focusing as they should on creating more abundant and cheaper energy, American companies are reducing our greenhouse gas output without being ordered to do so by dictatorial green bureaucrats. That's a lesson the rest of the world could learn from. Our friends in the U.S. media, too. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/u-s-cuts-global-warming-gases-faster-than-anyone-else-but-media-ignore-it/Different perspective. Tried to bold the best parts but tbh the whole thing is worth reading. This might sound counter intuitive but this claims policies like the Paris Accords increase reliance on coal via closing down nuclear power plants and that the USA will decrease carbon emissions more than any nation on earth simply by shifting towards natural gas production over the last decade or so. It is not often these types of counter culture / different perspective pieces are published. With the exception of a few outliers, the media typically presents a united front to the world and pretends there is only "one rational view" on every topic. The recent outbreak of pieces like this one which break the mold and challenge the status quo could be considered significant within the grand scheme of things. |
|
|
|
That is an interesting train of thought. I think they might be right on that although a big part of it will depend upon details of implementation and whether it will be possible to use things like VPNs, proxies or TOR to anonymize certain aspects of transactions to some degree. Of course there is plenty of theft, fraud, money laundering and market manipulation in regulated markets. An introduction of blockchain technology could actually decrease the amount of fraud and crime in regulated markets as many things would be logged and transparent for the world to see. Have banks really deployed blockchain technology en masse? I think that article confuses small scale test runs of blockchain technology utilized by banks for full scale support. It is doubtful banks have embraced or rolled out blockchain technology this quickly. |
|
|
|
|
Sometimes I wonder if governments fundamentally function as some unintentional form of anti Robin Hood. "Steal from poor to middle class demographics and give to the rich." It may not so much be theft as wealth redistribution. There is also Napoleon Bonaparte's angle which says: "Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence." Perhaps governments harbor no real malice, bureaucratic aspects of budgeting are simply incompetent in a way which benefits some demographics consistently more than others.
There appear to be many cases where police are cracking down on kids running lemonade stands, people collecting rainwater, growing food on their own properties or otherwise attempting to become more independent and free. They've made it illegal to give food to poor or needy homeless people in some cases. These trends could compliment recent developments where we see attempts to strike down the ideal of the rugged individual or encourage emasculation of men by encouraging them to wear rompers. Simultaneously encouraging people to be less independent while cracking down on attempts at entrepreneurialism(kids running lemonade stands). Not certain if size matters here but it could.
|
|
|
|
|
I would be more interested in discussion revolving around crypto indexes. Something like the crypto currency equivalent of a DOW Jones Industrial Average, S & P 500 and so on. How crypto coins might be categorized or grouped. Could bitcoin be considered an entire index given how heavily other altcoins and forks derive value from it. That might be a good discussion and perhaps a topic that is being neglected at the moment.
I could see an coin indexes being separated by coins with limited supply like bitcoin, litecoin, dash, etc. Then on the opposite end of the spectrum an index for coins with unlimited or variable supply which can be printed-without-limit similar to fiat money. Coins could also be indexed or categorized by having "no intrinsic value" contrasting with coins "backed" by oil or a type of commodity. Some coins could be designated as being long term HODL store-of-value while others might be geared moreso for fast transactions and designated as being designed for higher volume "intended to purchase a cup of coffee" type transactions.
There are many different ways to breakdown crypto coins into indexes or categories in an attempt to better understand which direction markets are moving and what facets of coin design and implementation is moving in an upward, sideways or downwards direction.
|
|
|
|
Don't forget many developing nations are dominated by banks and governments who have exploitive monopolies there. Here's an example. If you look at exchanges like https://golix.com in developing nations like africa, bitcoin typically sells at a much higher price than normal. The reasoning for this is electronic payment in those countries are riddled excessively high taxes, fees and costs. This puts more deregulated methods of electronic payment like bitcoin in high demand being that their fees are much lower and transactions are often faster. And so in countries like africa you have people willing to pay $13,000 for bitcoin as it is still cheaper than paying the taxes and fees of their normal banking system. Part of the reason for bitcoin's success is it once allowed cuban immigrants to send money home to their families in cuba without paying the cuban governments ridiculous taxes and fees which could take 40% to 50% of wire transfers coming into the country. Bitcoin and crypto currencies have a good potential to improve the circumstances and living standards of those in developing nations, an integral and key part of its worldwide success. |
|
|
|
There was evidence for Roger Ver deliberately misleading people on his website "bitcoin.com".  Image link: https://i.imgur.com/Q639aTC.jpgSource: https://twitter.com/Ragnarly/status/988535641070751744There is data which might support a lawsuit, also things like this: https://twitter.com/moneytrigz/status/989263151622426624From using bitpay which compares bitcoin transaction fees to bitcoin cash fees everytime a payment is made, it seems there is a coordinated and massive effort to convince people to embrace bitcoin cash over bitcoin core. I'm surprised this is a topic which isn't discussed more often as the bias in favor of bch appears to be very strong. Also don't forget the numerous sock puppet accounts posting bitcoin cash propaganda on this forum. Other coins would also appear to have advertising bots. |
|
|
|
|
In the competitive world of Las Vegas gambling the casinos with the best adaptations survive and thrive while casinos which stagnate and fail to evolve wind up on the endangered list. Offering bitcoin support has to give them a significant advantage over competition via including an entire new demographic with money to burn. I think the same precedent applies to other businesses. Those who offer bitcoin(and crypto) support will thrive, while those who hesitate will fall behind.
On the downside, I would guess they don't offer bitcoin withdrawal. They have a system in place to report earnings in excess of $10,000 to the US government for tax purposes(and also supposedly a system to detect attempts @ tax evasion). Their system utilizes fiat and so I would guess cash out is in dollars only.
|
|
|
|
With a US subprime auto loan issue looming on the horizon, right next to the subprime student loan issue and what could be a future subprime mortgage issue sequel. Automakers could accept crypto in the future to keep demand relatively constant and prevent prices from falling drastically on decreased demand. Crypto currencies could represent millions, perhaps even billions in untapped revenue. Whoever manages to effectively tap that revenue stream first could gain a significant advantage over their competitors. If anyone accepts bitcoin or crypto in the future, I would guess Tesla Motors will be first. Elon Musk has said pro bitcoin things in the past. He seems to appreciate economic and financial benefits crypto has to offer and I wouldn't be surprised if he included it in his future plans. It could help him to get a jump on the big three automakers in the USA and his business could flourish and prosper as a result. I think it is still possible to buy a car via bitcoin even without automakers offering crypto support. Here's one potential method someone in school could use. Easy school method to buy a car via bitcoin. #1 Buy candy using crypto online from a retailer which offers free shipping. #2 Sell candy in school to fellow students at a price markup to convert btc to fiat. (With free shipping a price markup here and a sale/discount could give someone a 20%+ bonus on their initial sum) #3 Use fiat to buy car. It might take a little bit of time for this method to work but the rewards could be worth it.  |
|
|
|
According to a Reuters report, the Philippines will legalize the entry of 10 blockchain and cryptocurrency companies to operate in the Cagayan Economic Zone Authority (CEZA), a government-controlled economic zone that is within an hour’s flight away from the likes of Hong Kong, China, and Taiwan.
The government aims to woo cryptocurrency companies to operate out of the economic zone with tax benefits to help generate employment opportunities locally, Cagayan Economic Zone Authority chief Raul Lambino told Reuters. That is an incredible contrast to how bitcoin and crypto currencies are treated in other countries. I hope this goes through unimpeded. In a few years we could have excellent data regarding the potential economic benefits of legalized crypto currencies in economies, which could encourage other nations to implement similar measures. It could also imply countries like china and south korea which impose bans on crypto could hinder their economies and job markets by opposing innovation and change rather than embracing it. This is a radical move by the philippines. I'm happy someone in the world recognizes the potential value of crypto currencies and that people might benefit from it. If only the united states could be as open minded and bold in pursuing good policy. |
|
|
|
|
Inital notes.
-Racquel Pennington, Nick Hein and Alberto Mina haven't fought in near to 2 years. Their fights could be difficult to predict. Sometimes fighters who are out for awhile come back stronger. Other times they return only to look like shadows of their former selves.
-I seem to remember Racquel Pennington training out of the olympic training center awhile ago. I think somewhere along the line, Racquel and her girlfriend Tecia Torres both made a move to train out of Elevation Fight Team. It could mean that Racquel's skills have improved drastically over the last time we saw her fight, depending on when they made the move(I haven't 100% kept track). Either way the main event isn't the best betting option on this card.
-People often quote Mackenzie Dern's lack of experience saying "she only has 6 fights". Amanda Booby Cooper (ABC) also appears to have 6 pro fights. That breakdown could be a bit misleading. ABC has two more fights on the ultimate fighter and she has 11 amateur fights. Don't know if it will make a difference but ABC could have more experience than she's being credited for having.
This event is still 2 weeks away. Hopefully no one is injured.
|
|
|
|
I dont know if it is just me or others also experience it. I always set goals financially, set limits in spending and trying hard to save but most of the time no matter how i tell myself to refrain from spending in unnecessary things whenever i see something i really like even if i dont need it i cant resist buying it that cause me to regret later. Are you familiar with this situation?
It helps not to have an ATM card, debit or credit card. If cash/credit is easily obtainable it will probably cause someone to spend more. Internet shopping is easy, convenient and often supports free shipping which can make saving difficult. How a person spends their time is probably the biggest factor. If friends always go out and spend money that makes things tough. This might sound unnatural but finding things to do that doesn't involve spending cash could be one of the easiest ways to save. When I was around 18 I managed to save about $10,000. I didn't have any real financial goals and made no real effort to save. I hung out at a skatepark almost everyday for maybe a few years & didn't spend much on things which normally deplete someone's savings. I guess for those with saving goals what might work best is finding things they enjoy to occupy their time where they don't spend much? |
|
|
|
Source: http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/24/bombshell-fec-records-indicate-hillary-campaign-illegally-laundered-84-million/Normally, I would copy and paste the entire article but in this case I'll pass as the piece is very long and covers topics some might view as representing grey areas. Just know that Hillary's 2016 presidential campaign and the DNC are accused of laundering money ($84 million to be exact) and there could be evidence they are guilty. These accusations could be contrasted with the amount of money laundering concern bitcoin and crypto currencies receive, even though there is no evidence bitcoin has been used to launder $100,000 much less $84 million. It might also be contrasted with how regulation, economic or otherwise, doesn't eliminate corruption or scams, contrary to the view propagated by media sources. If these accusations turn out to be true, it could mean regulators turned a blind eye to events they knew were illegal anticipating Hillary would win the election. Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Loretta Lynch and others are being investigated: https://www.dailywire.com/news/29587/breaking-congress-calls-criminal-investigation-ryan-saavedraNot certain if the implications will have an effect on the stock market. But if justice is done here it could translate to greater confidence in the government and elected representatives to get things done, which could translate to greater confidence in regulation and economic policies. Anyways thought this was interesting and decided to share.
|
|
|
|
Speaking of bitcoin cash. I saw this posted on twitter a few days ago. Image link: https://i.imgur.com/Q639aTC.jpgSource: https://twitter.com/Ragnarly/status/988535641070751744(Its a screencap of bitcoin.com which is owned by Roger Ver, the man behind bitcoin cash. Here it falsely claims BCH is the real bitcoin.) It might be fair to say bitcoin cash is a bit on the shady side. If BCH is going to become centralized, why not just use a fee-less centralized system with off-chain transactions. https://www.fliptopay.com/ . I noticed this site. Basically you transfer bitcoin to a centralized wallet. From there you have virtual bitcoin and can convert to USD or Euros. There you can use the currency at any android pay store. Note this is not fee-less, but it easily could have been. blockchain.info wallet is basically off-chain. All transactions on these type of sites, between its users and stores, are off-chain, and take zero space or fees on the chain. Yet they work instantaneously. Bolded: exactly. Many blockchain related proposals are attempts to re-create fiat money and other institutions inside of a heavily centralized paradigm. They may not be in the same category as bitcoin or crypto currencies as they are more similar to traditional banking and methods. Bitcoin is more decentralized and has differing methodologies behind it which are the inverse opposite to the mentality of people who operate things like bitcoin cash. There should be better terminology to describe distinctions made between the two. I wouldn't mind it if people noticed there are a large number of fake sockpuppet accounts in favor of things like bitcoin cash also. |
|
|
|
|
Legalization is a better policy imo.
Legal weed with higher health and production standards decreases the degree to which marijuana can be tampered with. In cases where a person smoked weed and developed a case of anxiety(or other issue), it is likely the weed they smoked was laced with a hard drug of some type. Drug dealers sometimes lace weed with other things to get people addicted to other drugs. Legalization has the potential to cut down on these types of illicit practices. Over the long term, legalization also has a good potential to increase the production of weed which should decrease prices while competition and free markets enhance quality and potency.
The taxation issue could be the most attractive aspect for lawmakers. With debts and deficits becoming larger concerns, it is likely many states will legalize for the boost in tax revenue. There have also been claims of legalization diminishing the income for drug cartels, gangs and organized criminal groups which could be a bonus on top of everything else.
|
|
|
|
Given that a country that in recession has slow growth nor a negative growth in terms of economy, which in result businesses in the said countries would definitely cut down there man power. Would it affect the numbers at the market? Or this is just a good opportunity to buy Cryptos, as a lot would definitely sell their coins?
In a recession, there would be stagnant market growth. With low growth potential there probably wouldn't be many good investment opportunities in fiat based markets. The number of crypto users has a tendency to double every 18 months or so. This high growth in bitcoin could appear to be an attractive investment opportunity in comparison to stagnant, low growth, fiat markets. This is one scenario where the value of bitcoin could actually climb higher during a recession. Investors tend to seek the path of least resistance in attempting to achieve high ROI. If a recession sets in and there aren't many opportunities due to stagnant markets, it could lead to a large influx of investment capital routed into things which appear to offer better performance. It all depends on the breakdown of crypto versus fiat market pros and cons and whether crypto's growth were sustained throughout a difficult period. It should be noted that during a recession things like job cuts and diminished revenue in the corporate sector are typically reflected in diminishing tax revenues for the government. These diminished revenues can bolster issues with debt as there is less income pouring in to offset the cost of liabilities. This could have a side effect of default on debt by governments, which would actually boost the value of bitcoin and crypto as people bought them in higher demand to avoid crashing dollars/euros which would accompany a default scenario. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
