|
Maybe a month ago, kodak announced it would create a blockchain based payment system for photographers. As a result kodak's stock price increased as much as 40% over the short term. Many other corporate entities have done the same. They've announced "blockchain" or "crypto" related projects and benefited from their stock price increasing dramatically.
The kneejerk reaction would likely be to assume fujitsu is hopping on the same bandwagon, announcing a blockchain related project they have little or no intent on following through on to increase the value of their stock.
BUT to be fair fujitsu establishing a physical location does represent much more of a commitment to blockchain technology than any of the other vaporware announcements made by previous companies. The location in brussels belgium could also be indicative of fujitsu doing their homework and having good knowledge of crypto currencies if indeed belgium is similar to hungary in that they have taken measures to reduce the influence of central banks in their respective country, which could reduce the likelihood of anti crypto legislation being passed there.
This could represent a legitimate effort to utilize and develop blockchain technology unlike the vast majority of blockchain announcements we've seen which are likely little more than efforts at stock price manipulation aimed at boosting equities value over the short term.
|
|
|
|
Although miners are moving to locations with surplus hydropower and relatively moderate climate like Iceland, Quebec, according to this research, based on difficulty, utility company data, and different mining equipments there are a few other countries where mining is absolutely profitable and a few not at all suitable for mining. The break-even cost of mining a Bitcoin is as low as $531 to a staggering $26,170. There could be additional angles to miners migrating into iceland aside from climate. After the economic crisis of 2008 iceland imprisoned some of the bankers who contributed towards economic crisis there. As far as I know, iceland is the only country in the entire world who did this. Iceland may be perceived as being unafraid to stand up to international bankers and largely independent from central banks which is one reason why miners could view it as being favorable for crypto mining operations. Iceland also is the most likely country on earth to achieve energy independence from oil/coal and other non-renewable sources of energy, which could contribute toward its being more independent from anti crypto political agendas. Years ago, iceland also may have supported auroracoin and there could be a decent pro crypto community demographic there. I'm certain there could be many other reasons why iceland is a good place to setup a mining operation, I can't claim to know them all. Japan also could be a good place for crypto given their cultural tendencies towards delayed gratification, building long term value and general responsibility/morality. Japan often invests in long term value projects like building a network of high speed network infrastructure as a means of building long term value and so bitcoin could mesh well with their ethos. |
|
|
|
There might not have been a technological paradigm shift, but there definitely was a societal one. before the 2nd I.R. and cars, people had to get around in horse drawn carriages to get to the train station if they wanted to get out of town. Most farmers still had cattle or horses to pull carts. after the advent of cars and the combustion engine (different from steam) society changed A LOT. I think that is the paradigm shift, a shift in society caused by the technological advances
That is a good point.  I think there also may have been a massive population boom after the petrol revolution where oil was found to be useful in pesticides, fertilizer, fuel, lubricants and a host of widespread innovations which allowed a larger population to be sustainable(which also fuels concerns over peak oil et al). Said population boom could represent many changes which validate the distinction between 1st and 2nd industrial revolutions. I wish academic lexicon, jargon and terminology were more intuitive. Rather than introducing paradigms which further isolate the average person from understanding many of the buzzwords and abstracts utilized within. Lowering the learning curve might not be such a bad thing? Also would not mind more emphasis on terminology which help the average person to put historical events into context in a way which helps the public to recognize real issues society faced in the past and lessons which could be derived from them. I think more emphasis on centralized versus decentralized markets and related phenomena could be more valuable an abstract than distinctions between 1st, 2nd or 3rd industrial revolutions. But hey I'm a supporter of bitcoin and crypto posting on a crypto forum so maybe I am a bit biased there? |
|
|
|
Hello friends.
I have a problem to share.
My country is average. They are too familiar with outdated and old technologies.
In my country many people still understand Bitcoin as virtual currency. BTC does not bring anything to life. They just think Bitcoin investment is gambling, chance, black red.
Why?
Why do not they look at Bitcoin, ETH or blockchain technology for the present.
Blockchain minimizes transportation costs, intermediates and risks.
Personally, I always try to absorb and learn nonstop.
And you? How is your country?
That's a good question. I guess most remain unaware of the opportunities and potential for profit in crypto currencies. The other less tangible benefits to society and civilization at large presented by decentralization, algorithmically regulated supply, trust-less systems, deregulation and other principles upon which some crypto currencies are built or experiment with all have the potential to reshape and revolutionize the way we think about and use money. There are a lot of amazing aspects of crypto but I guess most of it does not connect with popular culture in a way which captures peoples imaginations. Maybe its the media spamming negative sentiment which is the prime force influencing people into having negative views. I'm glad someone tries to absorb and learn nonstop. That's what I should be doing but somehow end up doing other things. Hopefully i can be more focused and do better in the future. |
|
|
|
By treating cryptos as a property/asset instead of a currency, Australia is effectively locking themselves off from becoming one of the leading crypto-tech countries. I expect startups and even big investors pulling their money out of Australia to more crypto friendly countries with less ridiculous taxation laws -- e.g. taxing only when cryptos is converted to/from fiat. I'm sorry to say this as australians are cool people. But australia is a shady country. Their government could be far more corrupt than its given credit for. If you want an example of this... has anyone noticed how unbelievably slow some australians internet connections are on multiplayer games? There is a very good chance australia's government secretly set up an internet filtering and monitoring system which kills internet connectivity. Similar to china's "great firewall". Historically australia had good internet connectivity. Then during a time when the government began discussing internet censorship, australians suddenly saw their pings increase by a huge factor. It was blamed on an undersea telecom cable being "damaged". But given that high pings remained even after the cable was repaired the more likely explanation may be that australia's government secretly set up an oppressive internet surveillance and censorship regime. There was also australia's controversial gun ban program, which some might say was unsuccesful. Long story short, don't be surprised if there are more nefarious policies coming out of australia. People in australia are cool but their politicians might not follow the same precedent. |
|
|
|
Your problem is that you don't understand what a holiday means.
I've lived in a communist country while I was young, everything was rationalized so the only hope of actually eating your fill was to help my grandparents in the country side.
Medieval way ... no running water, no tv (loool), no gas , no roads , only the main road to the village was made out of concrete blocks full of potholes, and electricity when you won the lotto.
There was no holiday!!! Nothing!
Chickens, cows, sheep, they don't give a damn if it's new years eve, Christmas (the pigs do) , Sunday or Monday.
There is no holiday as taking your family and we all go this weekend somewhere, no such thing.
You chop wood all the time, you carry water all the time, you dig dirt all the time....for god sake, by 2 pm I was not able to hold a fork in my hand without shaking. I don't think you can compare communism to the medieval era. Communism outlaws free enterprise and free markets which greatly decreases standards of living. We see this in venezuela where socialists waging war against capitalism and the private sector have destroyed the economy, killed jobs and driven their entire country to ruin. Many other things were structured differently during the medieval period. Here's a brief list. #1 Settlements were geographically located nearer to water supply. In the large majority of cases homesteads were built on wells which provided fresh water. #2 Population density was vastly lower, making it easier to obtain resources, graze livestock and practice subsistence farming. #3 Livestock such as horses for transportation and plowing were more widely available and affordable. #4 The average size of land and space people had to themselves was far larger. There are many circumstances which contribute towards farming being easier and much more convenient in that era, than it is today in a communist bloc. Not only may medieval peasants have had more days off, they might also have had more available time to enjoy their holidays. First , rebellions had everything to do with happiness.
And further more one of the greatest in my country (although the region is not anymore part of it) happened exactly because of this trick you call free days and holidays.
The peasants were indeed free , but only on paper. In reality they had to pay taxes that didn't care about how much they worked for the landlord. You could have 200 days off, but the problem was that you had to work your ass over to pay it otherwise you would end without land.
And this is exactly what happened here in the 17 century.
The crops where bad, they had to work for the landlord and they had too little time for theirs they ended with no food, had to take loans and in just ten years the peasants lost nearly 70% of their entire lands. Which led to a rebellion and a few tens of thousands dead in the battles and a few more in prisons or in other ..very creepy.. ways.
Also..about the red part....please!!!
Peasants where interested in world affairs? Are your serious?
The percent of literate people in the western world reached 10% in 1800 and you claim they were talking politics?
Was this a trick question to see if I read your entire reply or what?
Please don't tell me you actually believe this... You made some good points, here. I'll merit you +1 for that. #1 Literature and literacy rates. Compare books and plays written in past eras to the content available today. Compare Shakespeare to Michael Bay's movies. Are literacy rates really improving? There is a movement in the world to pretend people in past eras were fools. Yet looking at their level of literacy in terms of the books they read, were of a far higher quality than content created in the current era. #2 Specialized skillsets and labor. Skillsets and labor were likely more specialized in previous eras, which could coincide with higher levels of education to a finite degree. The movement towards replacing specialized labor with unspecialized labor could be a reason for stagnant wages, etc. #3 Taxes. In the united states, income taxes were 1% in the year 1913. Today taxes are much closer to 50%. Its confusing how people act as if peasants in previous eras were being taxed mercilessly to death, when tax rates in the present are likely far higher and more insidious. #4 Rebellions in your country. There appears to be some confusion here in terms of pre industrial and post industrial eras. Medieval era is pre industrial and that makes a bit of a difference. |
|
|
|
BEIJING (Reuters) - China’s central bank will launch a crackdown on all types of virtual currencies this year, a vice governor of the central bank said on Thursday.
A Chinese national flag flutters outside the headquarters of the People's Bank of China, the Chinese central bank, in Beijing, April 3, 2014. REUTERS/Petar Kujundzic This news story is from 2014 btw. The crypto market was much more centralized within china in 2014 which caused news of a chinese crackdown to have a much more powerful effect. Also in that time the crypto market was heavily centralized within the first silk road. Around the same time as china's crackdown occurred law enforcement apprehended Ross Ulbricht (aka Dread Pirate Roberts) and shut down silk road which may have negatively impacted the utility crypto was perceived as having during that time. Similar things have happened recently. China claimed they would crackdown on crypto exchanges. Alpha bay, silk road 2.0 and many other deep web markets were shut down by law enforcement. It didn't appear to have any noticeable negative effect on the value of bitcoin, which could imply that crypto markets have decentralized enough for them to not be centrally affected by any single negative piece of news they way they were in 2014. |
|
|
|
Update: If President Trump's tweet was not enough, White House spokesperson Raj Shah has just confirmed that tax policies need to catch up to Amazon, and President Trump would support tax changes aimed at leveling the playing field, which now favors the online retailer as Amazon has advantage over brick and mortar stores.
“Right now, there is no Internet sales tax and as a result companies like Amazon can buy and sell goods without having to pay basic retail taxes,”AMZN is extending its losses on these latest headlines...  Image link: https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/2018-03-29_5-53-13.jpgAs we detailed earlier, the main driver behind yesterday's FANG plunge, was a report in Axios, according to which it was not Facebook that Trump wants to go after, but rather Amazon: “He’s obsessed with Amazon,” a source told Axios. "Obsessed", and added that Trump has allegedly talked about changing Amazon’s tax treatment because he’s worried about mom-and-pop retailers being put out of business. Another Axios source said that POTUS has "wondered aloud if there may be any way to go after Amazon with antitrust or competition law."Trump’s deep-seated antipathy toward Amazon surfaces when discussing tax policy and antitrust cases. The president would love to clip CEO Jeff Bezos’ wings. But he doesn’t have a plan to make that happen. However, as we countered, none of this is new and Trump's feud with Amazon reemerges periodically, although on Wednesday it came at an especially sensitive time for the tech sector, which had gotten clobbered in recent days, making it especially sensitive to negative news (one almost wonders if someone had bought AMZN puts ahead of the Axios news). And, as if to underscore what we said yesterday, moments ago Trump himself said that he has stated his concerns with Amazon "long before the Election" and said that "unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state & local governments, use our Postal System as their Delivery Boy (causing tremendous loss to the U.S.), and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business!"Trump's tweet comes just hours after White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders denied the Axios report on Wednesday, and said that the administration isn’t considering any changes in policy directed at the company. Which means that the bad blood remains and that nothing has changed in the two or so years since Trump launched his campaign against Jeff Bezos (who also owns the Washington Post, which over the pastg year has made it overly clear what its feelings toward Trump are). So will today's confirmation that Trump is again on the war path against Amazon - and Jeff Bezos - serve as today's tech selloff catalyst? Keep an eye on AMZN stock for the answer.  Image link: https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/2018-03-29.jpghttps://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-29/trump-amazon-pays-little-or-no-taxes-puts-thousands-retailers-out-business.... Looks like Donald Trump intends to go after amazon, at some point in time.  That's an interesting and good point that was made about amazon utilizing america's state run, taxpayer funded, US postal system to deliver packages. I'm not certain what amazon's arrangement is there but it seems there is always a line of people in the post office picking up packages they ordered on amazon.com. Would be interested to know how amazon set up and arranged that deal as if could be a pivotal and key part of their free shipping program. I think everyone knows by know amazon is killing retailers and centralizing markets. Over the short term, amazon is offering low prices and good deals. The long term outlook could have amazon hiking prices once its competition is killed off. These types of short term benefits, might be considered "predatory business practices". How do people see this panning out? |
|
|
|
Interesting content. Thanks for posting + merited. I have to ask, does Stellar's creator always type with CAPS LOCK ON. Hahaha. That's funny. Interesting contrast between how ripple and stellar do things differently. Also was not aware Stellar operated on a "non profit" basis. The point about Ripple operating all of the nodes under a centralized paradigm is also interesting. I wish more content like this was posted on this forum. Somehow good posts get buried while boring and mundane ones are constantly are bumped to page 1. It almost makes me wonder if there are people paid to spam on this forum and kill any good discussion or points of view that are shared here. I would like to hear Jed McCaleb elaborate more upon specific advantages he believes decentralization have. That appears to be one of the key points, the specifics which often go unaddressed. Also thanks for sharing the youtube link I'll definitely check it out later & subscribed to that channel. |
|
|
|
My question here is will cryptocurrencies follow shortly there after with micropayments, or will we have to wait say 5 more years for that? I think micropayments may not be necessary for this type of business model. For crypto implementations a better way to do it might be to allow people to purchase "credits" in advance which can be exchanged for watching a certain number of games. Like say they might offer 5 games for $4. That way a person could purchase in advance which would cut down on the wait time and network fees for btc. I'm not certain anyone is watching NBA these days. It seems like there are always only 2-3 teams that are doing well. Every other team has something like a 20-40 record. I would guess NBA audience and tv ratings are declining which is why the NBA is reaching out and attempting to find new ways to monetize their games and draw in viewers. |
|
|
|
A new report from the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General (DoD IG) exposes even more fraud, waste and/or corruption in America’s ongoing war in Afghanistan. This latest report reveals that more than $3.1 billion of U.S. taxpayer funds provided to the Afghan Armed Forces from 2014 through 2017 was grossly mismanaged.
According to the DoD IG, U.S. military leaders overseeing operations in Afghanistan "failed to accurately record" some 95,000 vehicles transferred to Afghan Armed Forces, along with fuel expenses and maintenance costs to keep the vehicles operational. The report issued last Wednesday was the last in a series of DoD IG audits that examined the Pentagon for “systemic challenges” in how senior officials oversee U.S. direct funding to the Afghan Armed Forces said the Military Times.
The DoD IG warned the lack of accountability via military leaders overseeing Afghanistan leaves U.S. taxpayer funds vulnerable to "fraud, waste, and abuse."“Combined Security Transition Command–Afghanistan (CSTC-A) officials did not effectively manage and oversee the U.S. direct funding provided to the Ministries of Defense and Interior, which oversee Afghanistan’s Army and National Police, respectively,” the report stated. “CSTC-A management and oversight of the direct funding is intended to increase [Afghan security forces] effectiveness and capabilities so the [forces] can become more professional and increasingly self-sustaining.” Stars and Stripes, an American military newspaper, said military officials blame, what else, “inadequate staffing and security concerns” for any financial discrepancies. However, the DoD IG audit determined systemic issues are to blame. CSTC-A officials established unrealistic and unattainable goals for the Afghans to improve their own capabilities toward achieving independence in supplying their own troops, the IG also found. Instead, the Afghan government has remained reliant on the United States to furnish its supplies because American officials have not provided adequate training, according to the report. Additionally, the report stated CSTC-A officials have not enforced penalties within U.S. agreements with the Afghan government. Penalties include levying fines when terms and conditions of contracts are not met, such as providing detailed logs of vehicle maintenance and fuel consumption data. Stars and Stripes provides a summary of the latest findings from the DoD IG report: For example, Afghan officials only provided CSTC-A fuel consumption reports for the Afghan army when directly requested by the United States, though contracts require biweekly reports. The IG concluded the United States cannot be certain that at least $174 million worth of fuel was properly used. CSTC-A also cannot properly track the status of some 95,000 vehicles that the United States has given the Afghans because officials did not properly inventory the types and quantities of vehicles provided. Furthermore, the IG blamed CSTC-A officials for failing to properly train the Afghans to maintain those vehicles, leaving the U.S. military to spend about $21 million to replace engines and transmissions that should have been the Afghans responsibility. The IG report was the eighth and final report in a series of oversight investigations into CSTC-A functions since 2015. The reports have uncovered widespread issues within the command, including the commands’ inability to account for more than $700 million of ammunition provided to the Afghan security forces between 2015 and 2017.
As a result of the Pentagon’s lousy accounting practices, if not outright fraud and embezzlement, the audit notes that CSTC-A officials did not have the assurance that “$3.1 billion in U.S. direct funding was used entirely for the intended purposes.”
In other words, just over $3 billion may have been stolen. And lastly, we will leave you with David Stockman, the former Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan, who recently appeared on Fox Business — calling out Trump’s record-setting defense spending for fiscal year 2018/19 as absolutely “crazy.” To that, all we can add is that with all the “fraud, waste, and abuse” via the Pentagon in America’s endless wars, the next war would leave the country even more insolvent than it is already. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-28/pentagon-billions-us-funds-disappeared-afghanistan-fraud-waste-and-abuse .... Not certain anyone cares about this.  Having weakly followed these types of things over the past 10 years or so. There seems to be a strange tendency whereby anytime weapons or money "disappear" or due to "bad accounting practices" or whatever explanation is utilized in an effort to explain these things. The weapons and money which disappear have a strange tendency to end up in the hands of ISIS, terrorist organizations, drug cartels or other illicit activities. Its an interesting point. The media spams us with constant stories about how bitcoin and crypto might be utilized to fund "terrorist activities". Yet, for anyone who bothers to keep track there are billions of dollars disappearing in afghanistan, mexico and other countries which have a mysterious tendency to end up in the hands of ISIS or mexican drug cartels. And so, I wonder why these stories do not make the news more or receive more publicity. |
|
|
|
During the G20 meeting, the nations said they will implement the standards of FATF as these standards also apply to cryptoassets.
Nations which are found to be uncooperative with FATF standards may face being blacklisted. It will also become harder for the citizens of that nation to open bank accounts in foreign countries and send money abroad, and they would be paying higher interests in finances. I'm not 100% certain about the bolded part. It almost sounds like they are planning to impose economic sanctions against uncooperative countries which could be a somewhat drastic and severe measure. Also if the G20 follows through with these measures it could drive people to embrace crypto currencies more as they seek ways to circumvent what could be considered overbearing and unfair regulatory practices on the part of collective states. The G20 meeting concluded that cryptocurrencies needed to be examined. In a press conference by Federico Sturzenegger, Argentina’s central bank chief, he said that the member nations agreed that they still need more information about the industry before they can give their recommendations. The international forum set a deadline in July to decide on what data are needed. Argentina is interesting in that I think the region identifies largely as being 80% roman catholic. Yet, Argentina was one of the first to pass gay marriage years ago. Argentina may be somewhat progressive and bold with the legislation it passes and so I'm not certain if this can apply to the rest of the G20. |
|
|
|
|
Very interesting. Seems like good news. Am I correct in thinking russia may be utilizing Belarus as a proxy to testbed legalized and deregulated crypto. Perhaps similar to how california became a testbed for legalized marijuana in the united states? Or would be it fairer to say this is motivated moreso by money and potential tax revenues? Just as legalized marijuana represents a massive increase in tax income for the state, so might legalized crypto perhaps have an identical effect?
The proposed measures and changes by central banks to "combat terrorism" and "prevent money laundering" are also very interesting to me. It is public knowledge that banks like HSBC have laundered money for terrorists for the past 10-20 years without any real changes being made to prevent them from doing it. I wonder what the details of those changes are, and why they feel the timing should be now, rather than decades ago when this was a more dire and pressing issue?
|
|
|
|
.... I think for this discussion, inflation is key. ROI (return on investment) depends heavily upon how much value is lost due to our declining value of currency and diminishing buying power as consumers. Real inflation could be as high as 10% per year in some instances, if we're measuring utilizing the old method of calculating inflation. 10% loss of purchasing power per year could cut heavily into any purported gains. If we're looking @ 16 year cycles, some cycles are better or worse than others depending upon economic growth and prosperity. There are many economists predicting doom and gloom for the future, which could imply our next 16 year cycle will be distinctly inferior to the last. I'm not certain if the "trade war" making headlines in the media is necessarily a bad thing. Over the long term it could have positive implications, not only for the united states but also for nation's like china who could be forced to be less centralized and introduce more competition into government run social programs if they are to reach viable degrees of efficiency and effectiveness. |
|
|
|
It has always been known that bankers n economist are the ones who create wealth in an economy. I'll contend bankers and economists do not create wealth. Economists like Paul Krugman are especially guilty of this with their "we must kick the debt can down the road" mentality. Past economists even moreso with trickle down economics and the similar frameworks & methodologies they have devised. It might be more accurate to say what bankers and economists do create is extremely large piles of debt. Bankers typically do not create value either. They hoard piles of money and do not do much with it. The same can be said of many billionaires. They have mountains of cash which sit in vaults collecting dust. Capital which could be invested, devoted towards scientific, medical, or assorted research isn't put to good use. At least that's my criticism. Maybe me being poor I lack an accurate perspective on this. |
|
|
|
No. The price is irrelevant. It takes more to move a currency with 1m coins up by 50% than a currency with 1k coins, even if that second one is worth a 100 times more per coin. So you have a coin worth 1 USD and a coin worth 100 used and you'll still need more money to pump that 1 USD coin by 50%.
The number of trades is also irrelevant. The major factor here is the supply of coins on a given exchange and the number of traders interested in buying it.
Most of you seem to be taking the price for granted, like it's the indicator of value. In reality only a small fraction of the supply is being traded. If all holders moved their coins to exchanges you could say the charts are the exact representation of the value. Au contraire, price is important. From the perspective of traders they often select the path of least resistance. This implies they sometimes invest in assets which are relatively easier to move on a price point basis. If bitcoin is priced @ $9,000, on a per unit basis it requires $9,000 to move 1 unit (1 bitcoin) in terms of volume. With penny coins priced lower @ $0.30 it only requires 30 cents to move 1 unit. It requires far less money to move the price value of a penny coin, than it does to move the dollar value of a more expensive asset like bitcoin. On some exchanges, there is no commission fee for buying/selling. Its been suggested that some traders buy and sell assets to themselves to artificially inflate/deflate the value of crypto currencies. The lower price point and value of penny stocks makes it easier for someone with less money on hand to accomplish this. With bitcoin's higher price point, that makes things more difficult. |
|
|
|
Hi all. What do you think about this idea - is it possible to actually use crypto for daily payments? The largest impediment to bitcoin being utilized for daily payments appears to be transaction speed and throughput. Crypto's limited transaction rates and transfer fees may be two of the largest obstacles to the technology being embraced and aside from volatility, probably two of the main criticisms against crypto. But not to worry. We might fix this. Bitcoin's theoretical maximum transfer rate amounts to around 4 transactions per second. There are critics who claim this technology can't scale. Well, here's one potential solution to scaling bitcoin. We could take bitcoin and make 1,000 different altcoin spinoffs from it. Each altcoin could achieve 4 transactions per second, giving us a total of 4,000 transactions per second to work with. Maybe this is a dumb idea, I don't know. But all of these altcoins and spamcoins could be good for something after all? |
|
|
|
These stuck out to me, because I see these ugly traits daily in my job with substance abusers--and gambling can go hand in hand with that, though not a lot of the people I see are problem gamblers. But I think the basic disorder is much the same and produces a lot of the same effects. When you've got an addiction, your brain adapts and does everything it can to protect the addiction, and part of that is isolating emotionally from people who are going to try to *force* you to get help. That's usually your loved ones. So problem gamblers have to do a lot of lying, manipulating, cheating, stealing, and everything else that substance abusers do. Plus for whatever reason they feel like they're gods in their own heads.
Decent thread, OP. There are probably at least 200 people who are already members here who should read this. But just like with the alcoholic, it likely won't help anyway. When you've had enough, you (and only you) have had enough. There aren't enough words or love in the world that'll be enough to get you to stop until you're ready. Interesting perspective + merited. I hate substance abuse and agree with you on your points. I like gambling though. Maybe its because a high percentage of my gambling is taking $20 and attempting to turn it into $200, rather than the rampant consumerist, get-rich-quick, balls to the wall variety of gamblers. I'm not certain substance abuse or gambling should be singled out. It appears as if society is increasingly being encouraged to be uneducated, uninformed, make impulsive and irresponsible decisions. Many of those negative traits are becoming cultural in origin whereby many view being uninformed as being a form of liberation, rather than oppression. Things like lying and being deceitful are actually viewed as being forms of freedom by many and their application isn't limited to substance abuse or gambling afaik. Yes, there is. A huge one. In gambling, the mathematical return of every bet is negative, whereas in investing you have not that mathematical certainty.
I think you example could only be applied to poker. People starting poker from zero and becoming successful develop abilities necessary in investing. But those people don’t call themselves gamblers, they call bad players gamblers.
As for OP, I think problematic gambling behavior is a consequence of previous problems. Nobody sane, with a happy life and without problems, ends up gambling pathologically. There are people like Vegas Dave (Dave Oancea) who have become rich at least partially off of sports gambling. You can check out Vegas Dave on social media if you're curious. He is known for making big predictions in sports and winning most of the time. I know people who consistently announce all their bets ahead of sports events and consistently turn profits over a period of months. It is possible to make money off sports gambling, similar to how people make money off investing in stocks. Is it easy? Probably not. But it is possible. In terms of all time numbers, I've won more money than I've lost gambling on mixed martial arts. The difference between gambling and investing may not be as great as some think. Investing generally carries lower risk and lower potential profits. And so these fundamental factors contribute towards fewer meltdowns. But there are still many uncertainties and the results can be disastrous. The economic crisis of 2008 could be characterized as being caused by banks gambling on subprime mortgages and losing. Then having to be bailed out by taxpayers. Whether its trillions of dollars being gambled by investment bankers or $5 being gambled on the superbowl. The difference between the two may not be that big. |
|
|
|
I suspect there are similarities between penny coins and penny stocks. The methodology behind trading penny assets could be based on a few generalized principles. Here's a brief attempt to theorize why penny assets could have potential advantages. #1 There is less capital distance necessary to move a penny coin from $0.20 to $0.30 for a 50% gain, than there is to move bitcoin from $9,000 to $13,500. For sake of discussion, imagine a scenario where it takes 100 trades to move a penny coin $0.20 to $0.30 and 100 trades to move bitcoin from $9,000 to $13,500. The penny stock would require much less capital to execute those 100 trades, which could make it a path-of-less-resistance to traders. This could in turn make it more likely to be attractive to speculators who are interested in insider trading, currency manipulation or coordinated pump and dump, all of which could constitute a decent percentage of major price movements. #2 Penny coins have less trading volume which could translate to it being easier to move their price upwards by a considerable percentage in comparison to more established crypto currencies like btc. There is a variation of #1 but still possibly a valid point. #3 Coins with lower supply could theoretically be easier to move price upwards (or downwards) in comparison to coins with larger supply based on the hypothesis that lower supply might be correlated with lower trading volume. This could define some of the elusive relationship which exists between supply and trading. Feel free to add more #'s I'm certain there are other perspctives on this. |
|
|
|
Why is the world economy is sliding down, a bit reminder to 2008 when the world economy is in freefall, The shock waves from the collapse of Lehman Brothers maybe on of the main factors.. The economic indicators - trade, industrial production, unemployment - are comparable to the early stages of the Great Depression in the early 1930s.
My point is, how bitcoin could take place to helps the Economics rise again or it would be an additional threat to economy stabilty ??
.... I guess the main issue driving economic slowdown is lack of inherent growth. In past eras of american history, economic growth was as high as 10% in many years. Today the USA is lucky to reach 1% economic growth and in many years we experience economic contraction where our economy shrinks rather than growing. There is also a secondary issue whereby a good portion of what economists cite as representing economic growth are reflected by governments or banks adding increasingly high sums of debt to their own balance sheets. Most US economic "growth" comes from the financial or real estate sectors in recent times, which arguably may not reflect true growth. Long story short, lack of economic growth coupled with stagnant wages for poor to middle class earners and cost of living growing at an incredibly fast rate all contribute towards imbalance which threatens to negatively affect stability. These circumstances contribute towards everything being overvalued and hints at likely price corrections and devaluation across the board. Bitcoin could counteract these negative precedents by providing competition to banking and finance sectors. This increased competition provides incentive for banks to be more competitive which in turn fuels economic growth and results in a more efficient economy. Whatever value crypto currencies create also counteract our precedents of negative economic growth. There are also the jobs and money flooding into economies which are derived from crypto's market cap and growing industry. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
