Speculatively, with the influx of institutional investors, prolly we wouldn't go too low, that's if it's going to go low at all, I'm not forgetting the volatility of the network, but my argument is, with the sort of investment coming into the BTC network left, right and center, we prolly may have gone past spontaneous fall in price.
Bitcoin's dominance was never in doubt, so it's not going to 'recover' it's dominance, rather it's going to continue to establish it, as for altcoins, speculatively I don't think they'll go down in price, rather they'll also see some appreciation in price as Bitcoin keeps up it's move to $100k.
I don't think it's become any easy, all of the predictions are still just but speculations, even if users study historical price movements, it's still not guaranteed that a shift from that pattern isn't possible, the network isn't in the control of any single entity, thus unexpected changes can happen anytime.

ADA isn't going to do that, many coins people said will 'kill' ethereum, just like ADA were also expected to do that, but in the long run were unable to sustain their development, but Eth is still doing that (developing) and skyrocketing on the market; Ethereum's ecosystem is more developed than that of others, plus it's community of investors keeps increasing, if any other altcoin wants to prolly do better than ethereum, then they ought to work on their network, so it's development will continue to the long term, why many of the "eth killers'' fail is cause they are only short term sustainable.

Like it has been said a couple of times already, XRP's future depends a whole lot on what the final verdict of the lawsuit is going to be, XRP is appreciating at the moment as some of the SEC's arguments and requests on the case have been denied/dismissed by the court, this prolly must have allured some investors back to XRP, with a bit of hope that victory could be XRP's at the end of all this.

Having said that, since the case is still pretty far from over, I'd be concerned with pump and dump occuring along the way, a big news against XRP in this case could surface in the coming weeks that could see the price crashing down yet again.

The Laliga is still very much open, Real Madrid, Athletico Madrid and Barcelona still have a chance to be champions at the end of the season, Barca have been in swashbuckling form in 2021, thus losing in an El classico is not too much of a bad result, Madrid is a big team, thus there was always the possibility of a loss for Barcelona, but that doesn't mean they should forget about the Laliga or that it's out of their reach.
Chelsea didn't lose yesterday, they comfortably beat Crystal palace 4-1.

I second this, cause quite a lot of people do not know that in any Bitcoin transaction, there is a certain number of confirmations (6 at best) required, before it can be said that you've successfully received the coins, even some vendors or merchants (some I've personally come in contact with) aren't knowledgeable on this and had to either learn the hard way (giving out products and then failing to receive funds) or through the stories of others who lost funds via the double spend modus operandi.

Having said that, "your Bitcoin is your responsibility", and if you're yet to know how to use it (that means covering all the risks concerns, security protocols and other whatnots), then you prolly shouldn't use it till you've acquired adequate knowledge on how to "be your own bank".

Spurs made a big statement back then, when they beat Manchester United 6-1, people thought they prolly could go all they way and win the league, but at this moment, it's all about if they can make it into the top four position and qualify for the Champions league next season, I don't think they will though. For Manchester United, it's to stay as close as possible to City and hope (even if it's the tiniest of hope) for a slip up (one I cannot see forthcoming); I think Spurs will either win this game, or it ends in a draw.
Bielsa knows quite a lot about Pep, and there's also mutual respect between the both managers, so anytime they play, it's usually an interesting game to watch, the first leg ended in a 1-1 draw, back then though, City were still struggling, while Leeds were doing good things in the league, I think this game will be completely different and I can only see a victory for Pep's team.

They weren't so 'great' in the first leg, yes, they won by two goals to nil, but on the night Porto was the better team imo, and if they had better composure and were bolder in and around Chelsea's box, then they would have come out of that game with at least a goal and make things more interesting in the second leg. But as things stand now, Chelsea should be through, I think the second leg will be pretty boring, as Chelsea will prolly not come out firing, since they have a strong advantage.
I'm usually careful when wagering on teams that have a first leg advantage, they could come into the second leg with a slightly defensive strategy and the game could prolly then end in a draw, but Pep being the attack-minded maestro that he is, I don't expect City to sit back at all, they'll come at Dortmund yet again, and will surely go through at the end.

Adama Traore is yet to ever convince me that he's a quality player, he's unarguably big, strong and fast, but that's all he's got imo, and he doesn't really use it to produce much for his team as his creativity in the final third of the pitch is really poor, Adama is an average (prolly even below average) player if you ask me.
Is Adama really worth that amount? I can't imagine any team signing a player that has contributed so little down the years for that much, if that's the price tag wolves has set for Traore, then they must reduce it or else they'll scare away any team from signing him.

Government can only influence the value of their Fiat, create inflation/hyperinflation, decide to print some more of it from thin air, etc cause they control it, all that isn't possible when Bitcoin is in the picture, government can't influence the value, they can't control it cause Bitcoin was designed to function without government (third party) interference. No government can generally ban Bitcoin, they could regulate it within their own jurisdiction and prolly ban it's usage there as well, but it's not possible to ban (stop) Bitcoin from operating, not even it's creator (Satoshi) has the power or wherewithal to do that.
Mining and whatever energy it uses poses no problems, the media prolly could be saying otherwise, but imo, that's only just for propaganda sake; Regulations have always been something Bitcoiners somewhat worry about, but that regulation is mostly only possible through centralized exchanges (services). Via third party services, government can get data of Bitcoin users and use it as they please, but such dangers can also be evaded, cause even in a country were Bitcoin is banned or regulated, citizens still run transactions with Bitcoin via P2p services, which is preferable for anonymity and privacy.
Basically, Bitcoin is a decentralized currency, thus the best way to understand how "priced" is it is based on its adoption rate and the growing level of believe people have about Bitcoin, which unsurprisingly is skyrocketing atm, having said that Bitcoin's value being somewhat created from demand of it's users isn't a con, that's how the network was designed to be, if it wasn't that way then there will prolly be a body or 'government' ("something tangible") running it's affairs which will then only make it the very centralized "thing" we want to do away with. And Bitcoin is very well worth $60k cause that's how much you'll have to pay to acquire one of it right now.
It would make a difference, if and when we're at 1btc=$600k, the demand will definitely be more than it is right now, we could prolly be at near-mainstream adoption then.

There's a generally accepted mode of approach to investing in crypto, and it is adhering to the rule of thumb of "investing only what you know you can afford to lose", whether you're a long/short/medium term investor or even a trader, that axiom should come first before you take a decision in crypto.
There are quite a lot of cryptocurrencies, many of which are shitcoins/pump and dump coins that aren't viable for the long term (I'm talking about Altcoins) but Bitcoin is, many early adopters of Bitcoin have been hodling for more than a decade now, plus new adopters, institutional investors, private businesses etc, all involved in the network, Btc is changing the monotonous financial system for good, acting as a hedge to fiat and offering control and freedom to it's users as well, if you also pay close attention to it's historical price movements then you'll understand why Bitcoin is a long term (or prolly even forever) coin/asset/investment/currency etc.
Imo, there could be price corrections or a bear market, and it's nothing new; but the use of terms like "bubble..."burst" is pretty incorrect, it's obvious that the believe in the Bitcoin network is growing, cause if it's not, institutional investors wouldn't 'employ' it as a hedge to devaluing Fiat currency, Bitcoin will definitely move to mainstream adoption with bearish periods and price corrections along the way, but it's not a bubble that's going to burst.

The United States of America is a world power country, but even at that, it's not possible for them to influence other countries to follow their tax policy, every country fixes their tax rate for their best interest, thus if the U.S. feels an increase from 21% to 28% is for the best, then they should go ahead with it alone; Yellen and Biden are only seeking a "united global corporate tax rate" cause they know it's a bad policy, and that if it's taken by only the United States, it'll hurt them and play into the hands of (favor) other countries.

Having said that, they can only manage to get a few of their allies to go along with this policy, but if they are envisaging it on a 'global' scale, then it's not possible, that's even the more reason I think they'll forfeit this tax increase, or else, their competitors in the global economics that would definitely not follow this policy (like China) could allure businesses away from the U.S. and in years to come overtake them as the country with the best economy.

I don't know your country of origin, but I think most countries will experience the negative effects of the pandemic, governments have taken different policies to combat the effects of the pandemic at the present, but the thing is that most of such policies have negative repercussions in the later time, and the economy will definitely bear the brunt of them, there have been incessant printing of money, borrowing, etc to see that the economy still stands, but the likely results of such will be inflation and hyperinflation, there's still dark days for the economy imo. As for the virus, it'll definitely not just disappear, but with vaccines already in distribution, the virus is definitely going to be controlled.
I don't think so, as long as lockdowns have been lifted in your area, the most productive decision will be to get a job or grow a business IRL, there are risks concerns with Bitcoin and crypto and it's never a 'safe haven't, plus in as much as it's still a volatile network, it's unwise for it to be your only source of income.

In our contemporary society, the importance of working hard cannot be overemphasized, and one need not another to tell him or her that if you do not work, you'll resort to begging and other irksome social vices, I know there's the one or two percent of people living of inherited wealth and prolly do not have to work as hard as others before they can earn a living, but that sect is in the minority.

Having said that "work ethics" has quite a lot of advantages imo, not just for the individuals themselves, but for the general society at large, "work ethics" helps to shape an individual positively into putting maximum effort into their work without seeking shortcuts, for example if every individual actually has the desire to work hard following the principles of "work ethics", then there prolly won't be scammers and thieves out there, cause "work ethics" doesn't only forster hardwork, it also builds an individuals morals.

On the other hand, the "American dream" or rather dreaming big has an advantage on people's desire to work hard, and I think it's inextricable from "work ethics", why I say so is cause, it'll be futile to dream without actually working to make such dreams come to fruition, thus an individual through introspection first of all envisions what they want to achieve and what their talent is, and then the major step is working to achieve it, and work ethics is a good guide to making dreams possible.

City could prolly win easily against Borussia Dortmund, but Bayern definitely have a game on their hands against PSG, the last time they faced each other was in last season's UCL final, and Bayern won by just a single goal, but PSG put in a very good performance in that game and missed a couple of chances; with this present meeting coming quicker (RO16) and it being a two leg tie, I fancy PSG's chances, unarguably Bayern are favorites, but even if they'll go through, it'll be a hard fought victory.

The reason there are quite a lot of users on the Bitcoin network is cause of the "be your own bank" anxiom, I think that factor already makes it somewhat improbable for banks to adopt Bitcoin, banks are centralized bodies and the only connection they have with Bitcoin is through centralized exchanges, where one can buy BTC with their debit card and receive fiat in their bank account after selling, but all that is possible cause the exchange is a centralized one and is still somewhat controlled by the country of it's location. But in the 'true' definition of Bitcoin, the presence of banks is an impossibility cause third parties have already been eliminated, with freedom and control in the hands of it's users.
This is not true, building more banks imo doesn't automatically mean there'll be more flow of money in the country or better economic growth, remember that people need to first make money before they can use banks, thus it's things like creating more job opportunities, building infrastructures, supporting microeconomics, etc that causes more cash flow within a country, better economy and even the use/needs of more banks.

A couple of Covid-19 vaccines have been produced and distributed already, but sentiments still abound amongst the populace as to if they should or should not be vaccinated, and with the latest development, I think those sentiments surely must have grown stronger as Argentinian president Alberto Fernandez has tested positive to Covid-19 despite having being vaccinated with the Russian-made Sputnik V vaccine early on in the year.

What implications do you think will arise from this news? Will it dampen the believe of people in the efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines, and will it also strengthen the arguments of anti-vaxxers that natural immunity could actually be superior to that of vaccine immunity?

Source: https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/04/americas/argentina-alberto-fernndez-covid-19-sputnik-vaccine-intl-latam/index.html

That's the basic con of using crypto wallets that you do not own the private keys/seed phrase just like in your case, judging by your explanations, I can't place the reason why your account has been blocked for now and only their support team can really unravel the mystery behind what went wrong, if you wait for some more time, you could drag them on social media and maybe create some awareness and attention to your case.
Have u stored your Bitcoin there for a pretty long time? To prevent a repeat of this scenario use only non-custodial wallets to store your Bitcoin so you can use your coins at your disposal, but it is what it is, so exercise patience a bit more, all hope is as yet not lost.

I think the Spurs' board would rather wait till the end of the season, to see where they finish and if they would win the carabao cup, before taking any decision on either retaining or changing their manager, but looking at how things are with Spurs atm, it's correct to say Mourinho's job could be on the line at the end of this season and if he suffers another sack, then it's bad for his reputation as a great manager cause he's been sacked a couple of times already in the last few years.

Manchester United play Brighton today, another game they must win, even though the title is all but over, United have to keep winning and stay close to City, at least for a second place finish.

I'm pretty sure City fans will be getting ready to start singing as Pep is on the brink of winning his third EPL title, I think City will be champions sooner than when they get the 11 points they need to be champions, cause imo, United are going to drop points, which will make City's inevitable walk to the title all the more shorter.
The top four race is by no means settled, from now till the end of the season there could still be major ups and downs/twists and turns, with teams dropping out of the top four spot, every point at this stage is crucial for Liverpool, Chelsea, Spurs, westham and the teams trying to cement their position for next season's UCL.

The thing is, even cbdc's that many countries are on the verge of launching isn't even intended to replace Fiat currency, it's just going to be another "digital Fiat" currency for them, just one that they are going to control and manipulate as they deem fit, which leads me to think that it's somewhat impossible for stablecoins to replace Fiat, is there a way the government is going to be able to solely control this stablecoins? And 'print' more when they feel like? If they can't then how possibly can they adopt it, what our government cares most about is control, and that's why quite a lot of Bitcoiners are in the BTC network cause they get to 'be their own bank' and control their funds themselves without the government being 'in the picture'.