I see the OP's message as too optimistic. Bitcoin can be a tool for liberation but for those of us who use it P2P mainly. Those who use it through decentralized exchanges and custoddial wallets we can't say they are very liberated.

And then the OP mentions the price rise, which to me is a consequence of the essence of Bitcoin, but we can't rely on it. The most important part is the first one.

Obviously, these charts serve as a guide, and not as a mathematical algorithm that gives us the 100% correct decision. And I think the OP is along those lines.

It doesn't need to keep dropping a lot, it might as well stay that way for a couple of years.

That's why I personally prefer the DCA instead of trying to time the market based on indicators like this and others. It is more boring, but safer and more profitable (if we take into account that more than 90% of traders lose money in the long term).

Yes. The title given to the thread by the OP is quite clickbait, as it is based on the initiative of an MP.

I'm not too excited about the news myself, at least I'm not as excited as the OP seems to be. Even if in the end what the MP proposes was approved, we are talking about a set of small islands in the middle of the ocean, far from everything basically.

Although I welcome any country that wants to pass Bitcoin friendly regulation. It is likely that little by little it will be this kind of countries, and not the big ones with strong currencies, that will do it.

I've clicked on the link and it just says:

"404
Not Found

The resource requested could not be found on this server!"

Was there anything on that page?

Of course, now I'm going to listen to someone who doesn't even know the difference between "borrow" and "loan". Great idea, OP, borrowing money to play roulette, which is what you're describing.

There are cases where it may be financially smart to use some leverage to invest, but it's certainly not how you're describing it.

Yeah, I don't believe it either. We see stories from time to time of people asking for help to recover bitcoin, but they are usually much more credible than this one. Even if it were true, it would be impossible to recover anything, because the OP remembers practically nothing.

How is the full audit supposed to work?

As far as I know, audits are made on the basis of documents, and if we start by saying that they are not going to be able to provide all the receipts, it seems to me that we are not going to get to a good conclusion.

Another thing that strikes me is that cabalism13 is boasting about how much money he has spent on his wedding, then he emphasizes that we are only talking about 0.4 Bitcoins that were split between three people, when the Bitcoin was at $30K, as if it was little money, but then he took $500 to buy medicine for his grandfather.

Buying medicine for your grandfather seems like an honorable cause, but taking it from an escrow is not and even less so if you are a financially solvent person as he seems to imply.

I totally agree with what The Pharmacist and LoyceV are saying.

I hope that in the end it is all just a misunderstanding, but it gives me a bad feeling. As COOLCRYPTOVATOR says, many charities end up being scams, which I don't think was the case here.

The three people involved have a good reputation in the forum, and it is clear to me that at least in the beginning the intention of the charity was altruistic, to help people in need.

What is not clear to me is whether it was something that in the end got out of hand because they received much more money than they expected.

Let's hope they come here and give us convincing evidence.

Lol, I wouldn't have put it that way, but I find the OP lecturing us on this subject amusing to say the least.

The whole argument of investing the money you have instead of paying a down payment is garbage and does not take into account the risk. If you pay 10% of your mortgage from the beginning you already have 10% equity, and every month that goes by, you have more equity. Having a paid off house gives you a lot of peace of mind.

I don't deny that some people might do well with what the OP says, but most people will do better with a simpler way and low risk.

I find it hard to believe that there is a strategy to consistently over the long term make money on slots. Some people have a reputation for being good observers and guess when they are about to hit a jackpot, although this has been called into question by several comments in the thread. I understand that it does have a certain logic as far as physical slots are concerned. For there is a limit to the number of coins they can have. As the box fills up, they have to give prizes to empty it. But I think that even if there are people who have a certain instinct for this, I don't think they tend to get it right consistently in the long run.

Yes, is the never-ending story in this forum. It has been discussed in other threads, but not exactly from the point of view that you raise it now. o_e_l_e_o is one of those who advocates privacy to the maximum, I guess he will soon come by.


It depends very much on each case. In that case, as I have argued in other threads, the problem will not only be that they will apply the 0 cost, the problem is that you risk an investigation for money laundering at least. Imagine that you show up in front of the IRS with $600K in cash and tell them that it is from an investment that has worked out well for you and you want to declare it. But you can't provide proof of when you made the investment. You could end up like Al Capone for money laundering and tax evasion.

In addition, a 0 cost would not be so much of a problem if the benefit is 90% or more. In the case you put the price has only been multiplied by 4, but let's suppose someone got 10 Bitcoins at $1k and holded them until they are worth $50K, then sell. The purchase cost was $10K and the sale price $500K. In that case it makes no difference if the IRS applies a 0 cost to you than if they apply the $10K it cost you, the difference in tax is negligible. To me it's more problematic if you show up with $500K that you can't justify. That's assuming you're an average middle class worker with an annual income of $50K who let's say you have a half paid off house (with equity and you are still paying a mortgage), $70 in retirement funds and $3K in savings but also with some personal loan and credit card debt.

Showing up with $0.5M to declare in front of the IRS, whether in cash or Bitcoin is very suspicious.

In that case there are two possibilities. If you did not move the bitcoins in the first place, you can clearly prove that they are yours. But let's say you bought them on a decentralized exchange, or P2P from someone you knew, and for the sake of privacy you passed them through a couple of mixers over the years and there is no way to track them. In the latter case you run into a problem.

Yes, that's how I have experienced it. I think the first few times I posted something in the thread I was a newbie but I just don't think I ever expected a certain reaction. Sometimes I posted something and no one responded, and it didn't matter to me.

You have to be aware of what this thread is, as Arriemoller says:


I didn't know naim027 at all and we were accused of being alts (which I could prove to be false). The only thing I hope is that he understands well the people here and how the thread works.

That's what I was thinking. After this year in which we saw a multitude of predictions, including some from former Bitcoin haters reconverted, saying that the minimum was going to be $100K, and with some that went much further, such as the supercycle theory, I'm going to find it quite difficult to believe any prediction, but especially predictions like the OP's, poorly justified.

If you stopped to read a little further than the OP, instead of writing something quick advertising your scam site and getting paid, you would have read this:


It is the third post in the thread, the OP's first response. But, of course, what to expect from someone who advertises a known scam site to earn a quick buck?

When you invest for the long term, and more for the intrinsic properties of Bitcoin than for the potential revaluation, FUD affects you little. Obviously, potential revaluation is an important aspect, but it is a consequence of what the Bitcoin is, and over the long term, short term swings become small bumps in a clearly ascending line.

What we cannot avoid is that most people trade and for them the most important thing is the potential appreciation and not so much its intrinsic properties. They are people who react to FUD and sell or buy because of FOMO.

The best thing to do is to think of yourself as a train that has a destination, and that no matter the stops and bumps, you just go on your way.

It seems to me that it's like the Wild West, there are many opportunities. The crypto gambling sites, especially the new ones that come out of nowhere can make a lot of money with little investment if they do things half right, especially compared to fiat sites, let alone those that do everything right and buy a license in each country where they accept players and are required to have a license for it.

As I commented in another thread, some crypto gambling sites don't even have a license, or have a license from a tax haven, which means that they don't pay taxes in practice. They may offer a better HE (less) which translates into better short term profits for the players.

The main problem they have, with the proliferation of so many sites (competition) is to maintain a flow of players to ensure a cash flow with which to maintain the business, and if they do not get it, some try to cheat, destroying their reputation.

It seems normal to me. The people here have known each other for many years. What you can't expect is to arrive here without anyone knowing you and have people talk to you like they talk to each other, when they have known each other for years. Just give it time, come here from time to time and they will get to know you.

But will you accept your share of the blame?

I wouldn't bet at Bitvest.io even if they had better poker rooms than Pokerstars.

You already knew how they work in that site before you mistakenly deposited. Now, no matter how much you bump the thread they are not going to answer you any sooner.

Congratulations! You have discovered that regulations and taxes kill business!

That's why crypto casinos are so attractive. Most of them either don't even have a license or if they do it's from some tax haven where they pay hardly any taxes, so they can give better odds to customers. By giving better odds, even for casino games, people usually have a better return in the short term (and lose less in the long term).

Regarding poker specifically, what happened about ten years ago is that apart from regulations and taxes in most European countries, the market was fragmented. Previously a poker player would enter pokerstars (to give an example) and play against players from all over the world. From about 2012 onwards a poker player from France could only play against players from France. So there was a migration of poker players who earned the most money from countries with strict regulations and high taxes to countries that still allowed to play with the rest of the world and with low taxes.

Call me crazy if you want, but I don't trust what the Fed says. The problem with this, as in other cases, is that we don't have an algorithm to determine if we are in a bubble or not, be it in the crypto market or RE.

To me the rise in houses what it points to is what the FED doesn't want to talk about: the effects of massive money printing, which what it does is seek a safe haven to protect against inflation. In that chart and that explanation of exuberance, I wish they had brought the speed of money printing into the equation.

Come on, I'm not saying there isn't a bubble in RE, but to me the biggest bubble is the massive printing bubble, and they don't talk about that or what effect it has on the rising price of RE.