In the below linked podcast, there is a 45 minute discussion about the ongoing expansion of the Mi Primer program into several other countries, besides its start in El Salvador Stephan Livera Podcast: Mi Primer Bitcoin Goes International with John Dennehy SLP558

You seem to have a pretty narrow view, and you also seem to assume that because the BTC price has gone up then it is bound to correct, which may or may not be true.

If you do not have any bitcoin, then the ONLY way to prepare for UP is to buy bitcoin.

Furthermore it can take a real long time for a newbie to build a bitcoin portfolio, perhaps 10-15 years or longer, so there could be  a lot of value in getting started, rather than waiting.. and no one really understands all aspects of the bitcoin market, so there likely is no problem to get started and to learn as you go and learn as you are initially establishing your position, whether you are starting with $100 per week or $10 per week or some other amount that might be appropriate to get started.


This is a very good example. .The need to get the fuck started and to figure out some of the other details later.


Timing may well be a more advanced technique and also apply to someone who had already established a decent bitcoin position.. and yeah, almost no one needs to be fucking around with time, especially if they are starting out without any bitcoin.

Now, if they have $12k that they can invest into bitcoin and maybe they have another $6k that they are going to earn over the next 6 months, then they have $18k over the next 6 months, and if they don't want to invest it all (even the $12k that they currently have available), then maybe they could start by investing $4k to $8k right away and then dividing the other portion into buying on dips and/or DCA... yet one of the important things is to get started with some kind of plan and then if the person is really whimpy then maybe they don't invest right away and maybe they set up some buy on dip points, but that is likely a loser strategy if they are starting out without any bitcoin, so even if the BTC price might start to correct, it is probably better to get the fuck started with some kind of investment right away and then perhaps supplement with the other strategies of buying on dips and DCA.

But hey whatever, people can do whatever they want, and if they are no coiners and lowcoiners who are waiting for dips rather than acting, they may well end up being on the wrong side of the greatest wealth transfer known to man because they were too timid in their ability to figure out some kind of a working position size, even if it might be starting out whimpily. .whimpily is likely to be better than nothing...Of course, no guarantees, yet each of us are responsible for our own actions, and even failing/refusing to act is an action and each of us is responsible if we choose to go down the course of failing/refusing to act.


I think that you are trying to pigeon-hole too much if you are trying to describe a pensioner in too much of a narrow way, because there can be pensioners who have differing levels of pensions, and also pensioners who are newly starting to draw from their pension or pensioners who might have had been drawing on their pension for a lot of years.

Surely any pensioner would have to consider his investment timeline of 4-10 years or longer and also might need to focus on whether he is able to at least invest a minimum of 4 years, and the concept of fuck you status might not really apply so much for a pensioner, especially if the pensioner is already NOT working, since the idea of fuck you status is being able to discontinue working.. perhaps even before such a time that regular folks go into retirement status.. so a pensioner is largely already in retirement status, even though there still are going to be some pensioners who might still work and some of that extra work might be due to necessity and other might be as a form of optionality and not directly motivated by finances. even though presumably anyone who is working would be receiving money for the work.


Pensioners might already have a lot of experience investing.  It seems problematic to be considering pensioners as if they were just starting out, and another thing is that any part that they invest may well start to be drawn upon down the road, so maybe if a pensioner invests $50 per week into bitcoin for 4 years (which would be $20,800 invested), then maybe after 4 years or so, then maybe the pensioner will start to withdraw some amount from the pension . maybe if the amount had appreciated to $40k, then maybe the pensioner could start to withdraw at somewhere around $100 per week or some other amount that the pensioner believes to be a good supplement of his income... so then if he does not have any idea of when he might die, then maybe he could keep withdrawing at $100 per week for 10 years or longer.. which in part might depend on how well the BTC keeps its value and whether he is withdrawing at a sustainable rate... as i describe these ideas in my sustainable withdrawal thread.


There is a difference between starting from scratch versus if someone is already receiving or about to receive a pension.. so of course, at any point in time, a person can supplement their other kinds of income by investing into bitcoin. They do not need to exclude their other sources of income merely by choosing to supplement their income with their bitcoin investment that later down the road may well come in handy in terms of providing more options, whether someone is brand new to bitcoin and investment or even if the person may have already been investing int bitcoin and other things for many years, there could be decisions about whether to increase a bitcoin investment, which might even sometimes have options of rolling other investments into bitcoin which can come at various stages in life in terms if someone is already retired or perhaps nearing retirement.


You likely should want to try to be as aggressive as you are able to be without ever touching your BTC investment for 10 years or longer... so if you are more easily able to resist touching your BTC if you invest a smaller amount, then that is your choice.

There are so many people who are unable to resist touching their investment, and you seem to be that kind of a person, so you have to figure out a way to teach yourself how  to invest in a long time period without touching the investment and letting it build and grow.  Likely part of the solution is that when you invest, you also create an emergency fund that you never touch and then also establish reserves that you can touch and also a float which also is going to vary throughout the month.. so in the end you have to figure out way to maintain layers of protection so that your bitcoin is not serving as your emergency fund, and you are exercising responsible financial management that you likely are mostly using your reserves for any fluctuations and emergencies and you hardly ever would be touching your emergency fund absent a big emergency.. but if you prepare, you may well not even have to touch your emergency fund in an emergency because you would likely spend from your reserves first.. but of course, however you set up these funds and put them into practice is completely within your discretion and hopefully any amount you put into bitcoin can be stocked away, perhaps 10-15 years or longer. especially for guys like you who seem to be tempted to dip into your bitcoin investment way before it is even time to be dipping into it..

yeah, if you don't know what the fuck you are buying then you are likely not going to do very well by investing in a bunch of random coins.

Only bitcoin is good for long term investing.  If you are generally referring to shitcoins, then you need to be more careful in terms of actually holding onto them.. but yeah, if you have 90% bitcoin and then the other 10% are a variety of shitcoins that you have personally chosen, then yeah, maybe that is o..k. .. but the main one to focus your energies upon (especially in terms of long term investing) is bitcoin not some shitcoins that you are not even able to name..

In other words, learn what is bitcoin first before you start to recommend that it is a good idea to buy some unnamed shitcoins whose performance is likely already just correlated to what bitcoin is going to do.. and not even strictly correlated since the overwhelming majority of shitcoins are going to go to zero, relative to bitcoin.. so why hold them?  especially in the long term? careful about allocating more than 10% of the size of your bitcoin holdings to shitcoins.. especially shitcoins that don't even have a name.

That still does not make a whole hell of a lot of sense, even though surely there are comparisons that can be made in terms of figuring out some way to benefit from doing pushups without over doing it.. and the same is true in bitcoin.. to invest into it aggressively  but not so aggressively that you overdo it and you end up contributing to recking yourself... ..

so I suppose in those kinds of senses, a guy can take a good thing and go too far with it, whether it comes to pushups or it comes to investing into bitcoin.


There are many of us who are either not used to push-ups or we are getting back into doing push-ups after many years of not doing them, or maybe we are getting older or maybe there might be a girl or two in here.  So in any of those cases, it is likely way better to work up towards doing pushups and don't get too worked up about whether your push-ups are quality enough or if they are of the most stringent kinds of push-ups and all that bullshit that is more likely to be more applicable to guys who are either way younger, in better shape and/or already used to doing pushups.

Another thing is that focusing on quantity does not necessarily mean that a guy is being sloppy or not achieving a variety of kinds of potential improvements in his health.  For one thing, I am now able to do more pushups and so I have had several sets of 45, 50 and even 55 pushups in one go.. and yeah it is hard for me, and surely if I was to do a 2 seconds down and 2 seconds up pushup, then maybe I could ONLY do 10-20 pushups, and I am not even going to try it because I am not at that level of fitness yet.. and maybe down the road.. after a few more months of pumping out quantity of pushups, I might get bored enough or feel some kind of need to focus on quality pushups and to change my strategy.. .. another thing is that if some of us guys have not been exercising rigorously, we have body fat and sure there is muscle underneath, but it takes a fucking long time to build that and to even get rid of the fat, and it might  not even be possible to start to look like some kind of an Adonis-like creature.

Another thing, even if I am doing 40-55 pushups fast, I can feel it in my core, and it hurts.. and I am spending around a minute doing those pushups and even my back hurts from keeping my body like a board during that process.. and if I am doing 409-55 pushups, then I am spending around 2x the amount of time in that pushup status and like a boar than I was spending when I was doing 20-25 pushups... and so I don't feel that I am cheating myself or even cheating others since I might be doing 2x more pushups than the younger guys who are doing "proper pushups," but I give few shits. 

The younger guys have their own challenges that they need to figure out what is good for their own situation.. including there are a whole fucking lot of things that I used to be able to do that I am not able to do and likely I will never be able to do again.. which is kind of sad but it is a truth.. there are some things that we have to realize and appreciate about the aging process. and yeah, maybe I will surprise myself and come to be able to do some things that I though that I would never be able to do, but whatever it is, it is it is ONLY going to go so far because there are physical limits.. including I remember 10 years ago when I used to go hiking with this young girl and she would just say, think positive and you can do it.. and fuck that shit.. there is ONLY so much positive thinking that you can do when your body is only able to go so far at a specific time in its development... and even 10 years ago, I was experiencing some limitations, and now 10 years later, I am not able to do some of the things that I could do 10 years ago.. so there is a progress (or a degeneration) and some things just are not easy to maintain and getting back to your youth status  is a kind of fantasy land kind of thinking... and some guys might not even know some of these things.. because I know that there wee somethings that historically, I could just power through them. .and I did several physically taxiing kinds of activities, but when you get older sometimes you know that you cannot power through certain kinds of limitations or you might either end up injured (permanently disabled) or dead.


It can be hard to fit them all in and maybe even sometimes, some of us might get overly tired and wonder if maybe we have to do fewer or fewer sets... so there is a need to find a balance, and I doubt that skipping days is a good place to go, either physically necessarily or psychologically necessary, .. especially since these are body weight kinds of exercises.. unless maybe we might have injured ourselves then that might be another story.. and so it is very good if we can make sure that we do not end up injuring ourselves, and sometimes we might not really know...

My dad has some joint problems, and I think that maybe I might be vulnerable (in a kind of genetic way) to some of the same issues as him, and so when my shoulders hurt so much before during and after pushups, sometimes I think that maybe I need to lighten up a bit in my number of sets or my quantity of pushups, and so it can sometimes be difficult to know if maybe we might be pushing ourselves too much in terms of quantity and or quality or the type of pushups that we are doing based on certain kinds of pains that we might be experiencing and whether some of the pains might start to go away too..


Sometimes we might not realize that when we are skipping the pushups we are not helping ourselves to be able to do more pushups or better quality pushups, so there likely is a bit of value in persistence. but we still have to figure out those kinds of balances too... and probably if we keep doing them and if we are keeping track, we can look at our improvements through time or maybe we might see areas of a lot of stagnation and to consider if there might be something that we might need  to change.  So far, I am not really seeing stagnation with my pushups. especially since my average number of pushups per day continues to go up.. which one of my current ways of measuring my own personal progress. .and maybe at some point I might have to change the metric.


I bet in the whole group of participating members in this thread, we might already be getting close to 50k pushups.. and we might even already be over that.... even though some guys are not reporting their totals and even though no one is keeping track on a more global level.


That is bullshit.

Men and women are different physically, and sure some women might want to prove themselves but it is not necessary.. but whatever, they can do what they like and yeah there are going to be some women who are stronger than men too.. but on the average, men are built different than women and generally physically stronger, especially upper body strength. and several other physical strengths.. .. and  yeah it could be possible that in some kinds of endurance exercises, some women might be able to beat the shit out of men, and some of that is due to their training rather than their natural abilities or even their inclinations.

I doubt that we need to argue these kinds of points..   and I am not even trying to either not welcome women to doing pushups or even proclaiming that I am stronger than women who are either physically bigger than me or who might be 20 years younger than me... and yeah, I know a lot of women who could kick my ass physically, but that still does not mean that as a general rule women are equally as physically powerful as men.


If you are proclaiming that you are not a woman, then why is there a need to say that they will come and participate, when at this point we have no evidence of any members claiming to be a woman and participating in this thread or this challenge.

Anyhow, there is no reason for anyone to dox themselves as a woman and maybe in the end it really does not matter too much.. I am still going to stand behind my claim that pushups tend to be more of a guy's kind of exercise.. and yeah women can do them.. no problem... but they may or may not really be as interested in pushups, even though a lot of women like to do core exercises, which is also good.. and push ups can be a decent kind of a core exercise, but there are other core exercises too that are done in Yoga.. and I am not much of a yoga person, even though I know some of the poses are difficult as fuck to do and to maintain, and I am pretty sure that there are way more women who do yoga than men.. just like this article says around 80% of Yoga participants in the USA are women..

Sure of course they could afford to do that, and it would still be less than 5% of their budget, since their daily budget is close to $1million per day if they were to use a 5% rate.

It is a bit problematic to measure what you are doing (especially when it comes to dollar cost averaging kinds of purchases) in terms of BTC rather than in terms of dollars, because pricing the asset in terms of dollars would naturally cause buying more BTC when the prices are lower and fewer BTC when the prices are higher.. but then we should all realize that the world values are still measured in terms of dollars, and not in terms of bitcoin - since bitcoin is very volatile in regards to the dollar, not only because their is a war going on right now, but also because bitcoin is still in its earliest stages of exponential s-curve adoption..

 so there is going to be more value to figure out ways to be more rather than less aggressive in terms of BTC accumulation.. but to also limit such aggressiveness in terms of real world considerations and real world considerations are still priced in terms of dollars, not bitcoin.  So yeah, your suggestion is more aggressive than what they are currently doing, but I think it is still too whimpy and it is also denominated wrongly (and in fantasy terms rather than more realistic terms).


Oh gawd..    You sound looney and like you don't even understand what the fuck is bitcoin.  Who cares about the whales and the big holders.  There are still coins on the market and anyone can buy them.;. .and yeah people who got into bitcoin are going to be more and more advantaged by the extent to which others are coming into bitcoin later and buying later, which is one of the main justifications to get into bitcoin as soon as you can whether you are an individual, institution or a state...

and if you don't get into bitcoin sooner rather than later, then you are going to either have to enter bitcoin later and pay more or you are going to have to have fun staying poor including suffering from being on the wrong side of the greatest wealth transfer known to mankind.. and the criteria for the wealth transfer is that you have bitcoin.. so those who have bitcoin are going to be the recipients of the wealth transfer, and those who don't have bitcoin will be the ones who are losing their value to the coiners.. so better jump onboard sooner rather than later rather than getting worked up about whether you are unjustly pumping the bags of the guys who got in earlier...that is a losing mentality to think about bitcoin in those kinds of jealously (whining) laden ways.

Do you think that the odds are greater than 50/50 that the BTC price will be below $60k within the next 3 days?

Just a spike below or how far would you expect the price to go below $60k and is it going to last for very long, more than a day or two?


Just imagine.  On the fiat part, if Krubster did not receive interest on the payment, then the fiat value would have been worth less than 50% as much as it was worth in early 2014 when the exchange went down.

The bitcoin portion would likely make up for the lack of appreciation of the fiat, as long as he was holding most of his value in bitcoin, and the bitcoin is likely going up in terms of its dollar value that includes the dollars appreciating, even though I am suspecting that he is ONLY getting back around 10% the amount of BTC that he had in the account...

So for example, if he had 10 BTC in the account, the market value of those 10 BTC would have been around $1,800 to $6k depending on which then price would have had been used to measure it... . .. And so if he ONLY ends up geting around 1 BTC back, tehn the value of that is around $63.7k right now, so surely that is a good pay out in terms of a forced HODL that even involves a haircut.

Don't get me wrong, I am not even applauding any of that level of delay that has happened in the MTGOX case, it seems like a travesty of justice for payouts to take nearly 10 years - and surely I can understand 3-5 years, but anything beyond that just seems like feet dragging.. even though they were also resolving some of the claims on the coins during that time, and sometimes court processes can take time to allow parties to prepare and present evidence and for courts/tribunals/administrators to make rulings.


Yeah I wonder.

There are a lot of folks expecting the cycle's all time high to come early in 2025 rather than late in 2025 and it could almost be a bettable proposition...and it is fairly easy to measure too... at least in terms of nominal prices and a date.. and so then it would just be a matter of figuring out the date.. .. half way through the year is July 1, yet there are many folks expecting the high in the cycle even earlier than that, like in the March/April/May timeline. 

From my perspective, it seems like almost pure fantasy to be striving to call the cycle in that kind of way, as if the cycle is going to run out of steam earlier because the steam of the cycle is currently (supposedly) front loaded, so that will cause the blow off top to come earlier.. and I think that seems to be more fantasy than it is really based on solid logic that is really attempting to account for what is actually going on with this powerful asset class, also known as my lil precious.

What do you mean by that?

Fatal consequences can come from any kinds of overstraining, so it might not matter if they are done slow or fast if a person gets to a point of overexertion then there could be fatal consequences.  But there also could be fatal consequences that come from having a sedentary lifestyle too.

You may need to explain your fatal consequences theory.


We know that we can take a break anytime that we want to, but then what would David Goggins do or say to you?

He probably would call you a pussy.

 


We have not heard from anyone who claims to be female doing these push-ups.. so far, except per reports of some of the forum member participants, we have had a wife or two participating.. .. but still no participating member claiming to be female.. which maybe this is not as much of a woman's exercise.  

I am not against the idea of women doing pushups, so it would be nice to hear if there are any women in here participating in this particular challenge...or maybe substituting into some other kind of exercise that might be appealing to their own fitness preference(s).

On the internet, no one knows if you are a cat.

Of course, I am not listening or following David Goggins - yet I am NOT planning to take any days off, either - even though my push-ups continue to hurt, and even my light days are continuing to bring up my daily average...so far I have had ONLY one day that failed to bring up my daily average.. which is my own system that might be creating requirements that are unnecessarily high.

Only one more set left for today.. so four sets completed.. and ONLY 1 set remaining.

I don't know if you were correct or not - because for sure the level of feasibility of a correction might well have to do with the extent to which the price might be going up faster than support can keep up with it, and yeah, so if you presume it is getting out of control, but your models are not sufficiently accounting for some fundamentals (such as the exponential s-curve adoptions), then you might presume that it is going up faster than it should when in fact it might be nearly impossible to measure what it should do since we have never had an asset that is exactly like this particular asset, namely king daddy cornz.



From my perspective, you are still waffling.


Does that mean that you are changing the terms..?  As soon as we seem to be honing in on a potential bet, you change the terms to try to make them more favorable to you?  This seemingly bet negotiation is not going too well.


The more you type, the less committal you seem to get.. it is like you are working against the possibility of any bet being possible.

We need more disagreement in order to get into potentially bettable territories.


We are back to not yet bettable, then.  Ok..


If we do which one comes first ($40k or $80k), then there would not be any need for a timeline on that.  It is a pretty narrow range, and I am pretty sure such bet would be resolved in 2024, and if it were to not be resolved in 2024, then so be it... I would be o.k. with just allowing it to keep riding.. It surely would be strange if BTC were not to break out of such range within the next 9 months or even within a year.  I would probably be shocked if that were to occur.


But you are not even agreeing to it. Don't you need to the price to drop first before entering into such bet?  It should already be bettable or pretty damned close to being bettable, or if the BTC price got back down to $61k-ish..

I am willing to go along with some of your extra demands, since I am continuing to presume that we are still in no man's land within the ballpark of $55k to $82k so even if there are some unfavorable movements within that range, I think that there is an extra bonus of UPpity price pressure that is caused by being in what I still believe to be no man's land.


I am thinking something in territory of 0.001BTC or 0.002 BTC.  For me, it would be more about the principle of the commitment of the bet rather than the amount of the bet... yet at the same time, it should be enough so that it makes sense in regards to managing UTXOs.


We might have to see if any taunting scenarios might come about.


I had not thought about it like that... and yeah, which one comes first ($40k or $80k) might be more favorable to me, but still we have to break a further $6,206 additional price appreciation for me to win the bet, and are we conceding that reaching $80k is enough or does it have to break above $80k?  You know that Bitstamp no longer permits the placing of orders in fractions of a dollar so there is no winning of bets based on cents... and for me.. I think actually reaching $80k first before breaking below $40k, which means going above $79,999 should be enough for me to win the bet.  


Setting a date would not be a necessary component of the bet if we have the breaking range of $40k to $80k - and the only other bet propositions that I recall making were that 1) the BTC spot price will not go below 20% above the 200-WMA in either 2024 or 2025, and the other one was that the BTC spot price high would be higher in 2025 than in 2024, because you were suggesting that we might peak in 2024, and I think that is also bettable.


Personally, I am not going to presume a failure to go up merely because there has been a failure to go up over the last week and the previous weekend..

At this point, I believe that there is no presumption in either price direction.

Well on that site you can plug in specific dates, and sure, you can see that the slope of the 200-WMA is getting less steep, but you can also see that the variance between the spot price and the 200-WMA was way greater in earlier years.

So for example, the early 2021 peak of the BTC spot price was 4x to 5x higher thant the 200-WMA, but the late 2021 peak was only 2x to 3x higher than the 200WMA.  

The 2017 peak of the BTC price reached around 14x higher than the 200-WMA, and the late 2013 peak of the BTC spot price reached close to 27x higher than the 200-WMA.

So there are extremes, but there is no guarantees that the peak of this particular cycle is going to be lower than the 2021 cycle merely because the 2021 cycle was lower than the 2017 and the 2017 cycle was lower than the 2013 cycle.  I am not going to claim to know about limits, but I would not be surprised if we were to be able to get higher magnitudes than the 2021 cycle, but even right now (today), we are currently right around 2x higher than the 200WMA, yet  if we were to top at 4x higher than our current 200-WMA, then that would be a price of double today's price, which is $120k-ish - yet at the same time, the 200-WMA is continuing to move up right around $50 per day, so the target is getting higher, even if we were to merely have a top that is around 4x higher than the 200-WMA.

Regarding your points about the spot price only having infrequent periods below the 200-WMA.  That is certainly true that even before 2022, the BTC price did not spend very much time at all ever below the 200-WMA, so when BTC spot prices were at their lowest points in the cycle, they were usually either barely touching the 200-WMA or alternatively, they might shortly spike below the 200-WMA for a few days at most.

So the period between mid 2022 and October 2023 were the most unusual for all of BTC's history in which there were months and months and months that the BTC price was below the 200-WMA and it had gotten as low as 35% below the 200-WMA... so even with that level of unusualness in the lowness of the BTC prices relative to the 200-WMA, the 200-WMA continued to go up and even went up at a rate of about 20% annualized during that record-breaking price slouching period.

So yes, we could have those kinds of low price periods again in bitcoin, yet I still consider the 200-WMA a good way to valuate your BTC holdings in order that none of us gets overly exuberant about the value of our BTC holdings merely based on BTC spot prices (even though if we are going to shave off any BTC, we are going to shave it off at spot prices and we can also consider if we might want to shave off a bit extra if we can see that the BTC spot price is at historically high levels as compared to the 200-WMA.. and so at the same time, historical levels might not give us any kind of specific picture regarding future BTC spot price performance... so we should attempt to do the best that we can with the tools that we have.

Regarding looking at the chart in logarithmic or linear scales, I understand that it is difficult to see the historical levels on the linear scale, so I believe that bitmover is still working on a way to be able to zoom into the earlier timeline and to look at the earlier times of the chart within a linear scale framework.

Personally, I doubt that Ledger is a good solution.   

We can ONLY rush as much as is within our capabilities - since we should not want to rush so much that we end up losing some or all of our investment because we were sloppy and/or we were taking too many risks.  We have to figure out how to consistently be as aggressive as we can without putting ourselves into a position that we are going to lose some or all of our coins.. and sometimes we might not know how badly our situation can end up until perhaps some kind of emergency happens and we are not sufficiently prepared for it, while we might have had been telling ourselves that we were sufficiently prepared, and then if the emergency comes, that ends up being a BIG test regarding the reality of our actual preparedness.


A guy who invests $10 per week will have invested $520 per year and $5,200 after 10 years, and a guy who invests $100 per week will have 10x that amount, which would be $52k after 10 years.  Of course, a guy might try to be as aggressive as he can, and maybe he will have some weeks that he is able to invest $100 and other weeks he is ONLY able to invest $10, and maybe by the time he reaches 10 years, he does not quite have $52k invested but he may well be close to $52k invested, and then the other question becomes how much has his investment gone up during that time.. Surely it is likely that his earliest of investments would have appreciated more than his later investments, but there also may well be a lot of ups and downs along the way, especially over an investment time period of 10 years or longer.

And, even though it may well seem that 10 years is a long time, it also will seem as if it goes by really fast, especially after you get there and then the question might be whether you have anything to show for your 10 years worth of investing, or were you just spinning your wheels and not getting anywhere.. which is part of the justification for ongoing employment of consistency and persistency and sometimes a combination of strategies to accumulate BTC in a prudent way.. even while potentially trying to be aggressive while attempting to be prudent.


There is likely going to be variance with pensioners, and part of the presumption is that any kind of pension is usually not going to keep up with the cost of living, so some pensioners might have other sources of income and other pensioners might ONLY have the pension as their main source of income.  So early in their pension time, their pension may be covering all of their needs and they might have extra that they are able to invest, and perhaps investing in something like bitcoin could help to off-set their pension payouts so that if a pensioner might invest in Bitcoin for 4-10 years or longer, then at some point he might start to draw from his bitcoin investment and the amount that is drawn would then supplement his pension income when the pension might no longer have as much purchasing power as it used to have in its earlier years.

Oh yeah.. whoops, of course.  I participated in that thread as well as the flaming thread that was related to it.

It seems that I already addressed this idea, more than a couple of time.  I both said that I am into quantity over quality, I gave an explanation for why I am into quantity over quality, and I also said that from time to time I am already changing my form depending on how I feel, and I also said that I might be willing to further change my form down the road upon my discretion... but you still think that I should change my form, even though I already provided several reasons why I am sticking with quantity over quality?

That is pretty vague, and I probably would even agree with the proposition that the chances are greater than 50% that there will be a drop of 50% or more in 2024, and there are a lot of ways that could end up happening, so it is hardly even revealing that it is possible to come, but since I already said that I believe that the BTC price is not going to drop below $40k (that I am willing to bet on it), then I have already suggested that I believe that there is not going to be any 50% or greater drop until the BTC price gets at least above $80k..

And, yeah, maybe I am ONLY slightly more confident than 50/50, and i would even be willing to lose such a bet because I think that my bet is reasonable within our current circumstances... Of course, the closer that we get to $40k, such as even breaking below $60k, then I am going to lose confidence in my assertion that we are never going below $40k and I may well withdraw my bet if it were not to be entered into prior to breaking below $60k.. because if we go below $60k and stay there then maybe the odds become less than 50% at that time that we would never go below $40k.


I am not sure about wise.. since ultimately, if either of us were to identify a potential bet, we would still have to narrow it down, and by the time we narrow it down, then it may well become too unbettable...or maybe the terms might not even be sufficiently interesting.


It is possible, but I would place it at less than 50/50, and that was part of the thing that I was getting worked up about either your earlier assertion that we would go to the lower $30ks (from the correction at $49k, remember) or your later assertion that we would go to the mid to upper $30ks from the upper $60ks.. and so those were the points that I had considered to be bettable in terms of my thinking that you were expecting too much of a dip in these here kinds of times.. which also put us back to either going below the 200-WMA or getting pretty damned close to it.. which I also stick by my prediction that we are not going to get within 20% of the 200-WMA in either 2024 or 2025 - and yeah, those are pretty bold claims coming from my camp, but I am willing to stand behind them in terms of my thinking that they are greater than 50% odds, so that if I enter into a 50/50 bet, my odds of winning are greater than my odds of losing... at least at this point in our bitcoin journey. and if the conditions change, I may well prefer to retract my bet.. .. I don't have to stick to such bet, but if you catch me right now, those bet proposals are still on the table... and I think that either one of them would still be fun, even if they end up not being a winner for me.


I probably was just getting worked up over the way that I was interpreting the way that you were talking about some of those lower price scenarios as if they had odds that were much greater than 50/50.. Earlier, from my perspective, you seemed to have had been talking about those lower price scenarios as if they had 70-80% odds. .. and yeah, maybe I misread you, but that was how I understood your words, even if you did not assign actual numbers, words also can carry meanings related to likelihood of happening.. .and you may well appreciate that some of us will get on the case of others who are describing fringe scenarios as if they were even close to base case scenarios..   Nothing wrong with being prepared for extremes, even though there are problems to discuss extreme scenarios as if they were base case scenarios..


It is hard to say what might be causing the failure to go up.... except surely the GBTC selling seems to be offsetting the buys from the other ETFs... but I hate to ONLY focus on single theory explanations, since there is always going to be some concern when the price goes up so fast, and you can just look at the chart and see that there had not been very many significant price corrections between October and currently.. so for those kinds of reasons there could be some advantages to slowing down the UPpity a bit.


That is part of the issue with consolidation; it can be difficult to figure out how long it will last.. a few days, a few weeks, a few months or longer. 

I am still going to stick with the consideration that between $55k and $82k-ish is no man's land, so I have my doubts about really hanging out in these here parts for very long, and sure maybe if we got all the way through no man's land, then it could be fair game to come back into no man's land. but I even have my doubts about the likelihood of something like that (a regression back into prior no man's land for consolidation - it seems like an outlier theory - even though anything can happen, but from my perspective, it would not be a base case way of thinking about the matter).


I might be willing to consider that bet.. but I find it problematic that you are not willing to enter into such bet unless we get below $60k first.. .. but I must admit it is close to bettable.. even though fuck Coinbase.. We use Bitstamp in these here parts.. why the fuck would any of us want to rely on Coinbase for figuring out our price points for any potential bet when those twats cannot even keep their fucking exchange operating during supposed high volume times.  There is a reason that Buddy is coming at us with Bitstamp prices for the past 10 years or so.., even though he took a break for a few years... (went on strike)


I might have to think about it.  It is getting close to bettable, especially if you would be requiring a 50% correction from the current top, which is currently $73,794 on bitstamp and therefore $36,897.. so you would ONLY win if the price dropped at or below $36,897 on Bitstamp... which I am thinking that may well be bettable, even if you would require the BTC price to go below $60k before the bet would trigger otherwise I don't get shit.      which you should appreciate how that is a little bothersome...

Another issue is that there are limited ways that I would win the bet, but what about a timeline for the bet or other ways to invalidate the bet?  The bet becomes invalid if the BTC price goes back above $69k?  or you just seem to have too many ways out of not losing the bet.
 

That's true... that could be another way of framing a bet that might be bettable; however what do we need for a break of $60k?  just a dip below $60k should be enough, no?  Do you need a closing candle, too?  hahahahaha..  We had gotten a low of $60,760 so far, which was about 2.5 days ago as I type this post... I am talking about Bitstamp.. Let's stick to Bitstamp.. fuck coinbase... those twats.


Well yeah. you would not be getting quite 50%, and it could be true that the BTC price could barely break below $40k and then not go any further... that is pretty low.. so I am having my doubts, and I think that the bet needs to be that the BTC price has to break $40k it cannot just touch on $40k in order for you to win...especially since you are already making several conditions, but it is still seeming bettable. even if I am barely feeling much greater than 50% odds in terms of the current framing...  it is not like a slam dunk, but it still seems to be within my parameters of a potentially acceptable bet.. despite your lack of commitment to enter right now and you have some additional condition prior to feeling strong enough to enter such bet.


If the BTC price reached $80k first, and then it later corrected down to sub $40k then you would feel that you should have had been the rightful winner of the bet.  You are trying to make sure you win no matter what?  hahahahaha

I did already suggest that I don't think that the BTC price is going to ever go below $40k again (at least not in 2024 and/or 2025).. which surely I did make a pretty bold claim, but if we bet on something like that, then it may well take some time for the bet to play out, so now you are wanting to change it to some higher number rather than $80k.. so I would not win.. until it got above some higher number and you are finally willing to give up on sub $40k ever being reachable in 2024 or 2025.. 


I have no problem with any guy wanting to shave off some BTC exposure.  I was more bothered by what seems to be UnDerDoG81's motive to sell and then to buy back cheaper, so I personally believe that it is better to be willing to accept the finality of any amount that is sold.. but sure, no problem if the price drops and he can buy back, but he should not sell with that expectation.. .. although we know that the odds of being able to buy back cheaper does go up with the more that the BTC price goes up, but at the same time, from my way of thinking about BTC investing (and any sales that I make), we should never expect that we will be able to buy back cheaper after we had sold.

Regarding the 100%.  I believe that you (dragonvslinux) are misunderstanding what UnDerDoG81 means.  I  believe that UnDerDoG81 is saying that BTC is his only investment.. so he only has bitcoin and dollars (or whatever fiat that he uses), he does not have any other kinds of investments besides bitcoin and fiat.  He did not say what his allocations in fiat versus bitcoin is, so how much fiat savings that he has, so I imagine that part of his issue is that the value of his BTC (in terms of fiat) is causing whatever fiat savings that he have to be dwarft.. so that maybe he ends up being 90/10 or something very lopsided and he will feel better to not be so lopsided, especially since we know that fiat does not really hold its value, but there could still be stacking of fiat to offset the growth of the BTC, but maybe that is part of the issue in that the BTC is just growing too fast and UnDerDoG81 is just becoming a bit too fiat oriented since he does not have other investments... which I am not even against any of those kinds of considerations and/or calculations.

I am personally largely just against the idea of selling BTC with an expectation of being able to buy it back cheaper.. and UnDerDoG81 should be able to figure out various amounts of BTC that he is willing to sell without worrying about being able to buy back cheaper, even if he spreads out his 10% sales over a larger price range. .but the whole thing that he is wanting to do is to sell 10% and then to be able to buy it back cheaper...even if he spreads the orders (10 orders) out for 1% for every $10k  price rise all the way up to $159k..and from my perspective, none of that is a bad plan.. just having the expectations of being able to buy back cheaper.

I surely have no problem with guys who sell BTC in order to shave off some profits along the way, and they can surely figure out how much profits to shave off in accordance with their own circumstances and they should be able to be happy either if the BTC price goes up or goes down after they had shaved off their profits.

I do have some issues when guys are selling with a belief that they are going to buy back cheaper.

But hey, people can do whatever they like, yet I am going to surely do my own complaining if guys are selling with an expectation to buy back lower.. which seems like gambling rather than investing.. and also the reason that they are questioning themselves is because they perceive themselves as not having enough coins... and from my thinking the better (if not the best) of ways to get enough coins is to buy more rather than to sell and expect to be able to buy back cheaper, which may or may not end up working out (hence the gambling label).


For sure, we are all going to have potentials for being emotional about our bitcoin, so then there can be questions regarding how to deal with the likelihood that some aspect of the emotions might be coming from being over invested - but it still does not make sense to want to sell in order to buy back cheaper.. that seems to be more of a greed and/or gambling tendency in which UnDerDoG81 is getting worried because he is thinking about a play in which he is trying to time the market and to just play one direction rather than either direction - which seems to make matters worse rather than better.. at least from how I am seeing it.

The better situation is to figure out how much you are going to sell and at which price points, and figure that whatever you sell you may well never be able to buy back and to be able to live with that result and to accept it.  Not going to stop people from their desire to gamble, and I have nothing wrong with gambling either as long as we might go into it realizing that we are gambling with an amount that we are wiling to lose.

Oh.. so there was potentially another removal, after the removal of Symmetrick (Ratimov).

Ultimately it is good for each of us to get our priorities straight, including that a lot of people fail/refuse to invest, and maybe they do not have opportunities to invest, so they may end up working their whole lives without really being able to stop because they don't have enough money to be able to stop or even to slow down without suffering from their lack of any kind of meaningful nestegg.

Bitcoin provides an opportunity for anyone and everyone to invest, even with a relatively small amount, but like you suggest Sim_card, there should be some kind of a meaningful amount in order for the outcome to have some kind of potential for meaningfully impacting the person.

Frequently, I suggest to shoot for 10% of your income and/or expenses, so then at least after 10 years, you would have had invested a whole year's of income. even though surely income levels and expenses are likely to increase over the years, but it seems that investing in bitcoin has a good chances to keep up with and perhaps even outperform inflation(and/or the debasement of fiat currency values).

In the end, it seems to be a matter of priorities, even though surely there are some folks who really do struggle to figure out ways to earn an income that is high enough that they are actually able to invest, so it is hard to blame people for those kinds of circumstances, even though bitcoin does seem to be amongst one of the best ways forward if they are actually able to figure out a way to earn more than their expenses and to stock (stack) some of their value away in some kind of savings/investment - including the need to maintain an emergency fund, too.

You take my post and you twist it into your seemingly anti-Bukele agenda...and largely you seem to be taking somewhere close to the exact opposite position as me in terms of the extent to which Bukele might be overly aggressive in his investing into bitcoin rather than the ways he is spending in other areas on behalf of the taxpayers.  I did not even suggest anything in regards to other ways in which government funds should be used - outside of mentioning that Bukele's amount of investment into bitcoin is pretty whimpy, since it is largely not even 1% of the government's general revenues..... and after 2.5 years investing into bitcoin, he still has barely accumulated 5% of the annual budget in bitcoin. - and some of that value is due to bitcoin's appreciation rather than an amount invested into bitcoin.

So you seem to be suggesting that bukele should be investing and/or spending in other ways (which personally seems like nonsensical claims that lack evidence), while I suggested that Bukele could be more aggressive in the investment of more funds into bitcoin without hardly feeling a dent in terms of disadvantages to El Salvador's current spending and being able to have great potentialities for profits and more options into the future, which is the reason that a lot of folks invest, and institutions and governments can be considered in similar ways.

Surely investing into bitcoin or investing in other ways rather than spending on government services is a choice in regards to spending now (or investing now into certain things or other things that have trade-offs) versus having more options to be able to spend more later - which surely are the kinds of trade offs that individuals make and the leaders of institutions and/or governments are taxed with representing the interests or their shareholders and or their citizen's.. including in the realm of investing and/or deferred gratification that may or may not end up paying off... Probably Bukele is so popular based on some of the trade offs that he is making and El Salvador citizens seems to be overwhelmingly quite satisfied with the various ways that he is exercising discretion on behalf of the citizens.

Of course, in this forum many of us are bitcoiners so we believe in the investment into bitcoin including figuring out proper balances that are likely different for each of us, even though many of us will still have parameters that are comparable in terms of measuring things that we might want now versus what kinds of things we might be able to defer, and most likely I am suggesting that Bukele and/or his government could be multiple times more aggressive in the investment into bitcoin purchases and still end up being a responsible fiduciary and/or representative of the people.  I am saying that Bukele seems to be whimpy in regards to his bitcoin investment in order to offset when others are making proclamations that he has too many BTC blah blah blah. .which does not seem to be true, even though he did suggest that the public wallet that he shared with around 5.6k bitcoin did not represent all of El Salvador's bitcoin holdings. 

People conclude that Bukele has purchased a lot of bitcoin, and my argument is that from the way that I analyze allocations, the amount remains pretty damned whimpy, relatively speaking even if they happen to be a government rather than an individual or and institution.


Sure in the short-term a lot of us are going to feel better for buying on dips, yet if we are really in for the long run, it may not make a whole hell of a lot of difference whether we buy more BTC at $65k or if we end up being able to catch a dip down to $61k or some lower point, especially given the trade-offs that we have hardly any clue regarding whether or how far such dips will happen.  They may or may not happen, so it is likely better to have a more solid plan regarding just buying regularly rather than trying to figure out the extent to which there is going to be more dip or even trying to perfect the level of dip because many times those folks trying to perfect the dip may well not be buying as frequently or as much as they should be buying because they are spending more time waiting rather than buying.


Anyone who has a regular income can just buy bitcoin regularly,, and some of that could be somewhat automated and other parts could be manual buys, so I don't see where the waiting comes into play except to realize that it takes a whole fucking long time to build up an investment, so it can take time to have enough salary to be able to buy as many BTC as you would like to buy.


Well, since it appears that after 2.5 years investing into bitcoin, el Salvador has gotten to nearly 5% of its annual revenues in bitcoin, just consider how many bitcoin the USA, Canada or any other developed country would have to buy in order for bitcoin to constitute 5% of its annual revenues.  Any country could try to buy BTC, but surely it would put way more price pressures on BTC if larger countries were engaging in BTC purchases, and in the whole scheme of things, El Salvador is pretty tiny - even though it could buy way more bitcoin without really affecting bitcoin's liquidity or to cause great slippage in the BTC price. 

As I mentioned earlier, El Salvador could be justified to buy close to $1 million worth of bitcoin per day, and that would still ONLY be around 5% of its revenues, and maybe some other countries might feel that they need to catch up to El Salvador in terms of percentage of their revenues, which would be much more difficult for larger countries to do without really greatly affecting BTC's price, which largely should show how early we still are when it comes to bitcoin's adoption and how much liquidity that bitcoin truly could absorb if some additional countries start to buy bitcoin and/or try to catch up to El Salvador in terms of percentage of their annual revenues.

I was not saying that the person has $100 per week income.  I was saying that the person has $100 per week that he has dedicated to investing into bitcoin, which presumes a much higher income since we should ONLY be investing from our discretionary income.

Of course, there is another guideline about trying to save or invest 10% or more of your income, which surely is another kind  of target that a person could have so then there would be an attempt to make sure that expenses are going to be less than 90% of the income, but then investing 100% of disposable/discretionary income is usually not a good idea until a person has gotten all of his shit together regarding cashflow that includes considering cashflow variance, emergency fund, reserves and/or float.

If we go with your example of a person who has $100 per week income, then that would be something like $400 per month - so surely there would be needs that all of the expenses would be less than $360 if he was going to choose to invest $40 per month or $10 per week into bitcoin (which yeah is 10% of his income).. now if that same guy had expenses that were $360, but he received a raise or a promotion or was able to increase his income to $800 per month, then maybe his expenses might go up too. .but he would be in a position to potentially invest a higher percentage of his income into bitcoin.. which has to do with refiguring what is his disposable/discretionary income. and surely if the guy is investing into bitcoin, then he likely need to establish an emergency fund that is 3-6 months and also some reserves so that he does not have to dip into his emergency fund unless it is truly an emergency.. so if the guy has expenses of $400 per month, then his emergency fund should be a minimum of $1,200 and perhaps even up to $2,400 and perhaps the first three months would be the most liquid in cash or something like that and the additional amounts could be a bit less liquid as long as he could get it within 3 months. as he is using his liquid portion of his emergency fund.

Of course, how much and how long a guy is able to invest into bitcoin is going to make a difference, but he also has to figure out ways to stay in the game and to attempt to be as aggressive as he can but without over doing it. and another part is to get off zero and get some kind of a regular practice of investing at whatever level he can to get started and then to put various systems in place to keep him investing and keep him in the game at whatever level he is able to and he can adapt as he goes if his income goes up or his expenses go down or whatever might end up happening..


Yep.. that sounds right.

Whether we are talking about shore term or long term, there is no guarantee of profit, yet I frequently like to suggest that we are not really investing unless we are planning to stay in at least a whole cycle...otherwise there is just an attempt to play the swing.. and even someone with a 4 year timeline might be trying to play the swing of the whole cycle.. which I would not really consider that to be investing either..

But any event, anyone who has been investing is advantaged by having had been investing... surely you are correct about that.

So then the next question for everyone else is that if they have not been investing, then they have to figure out if they are able to establish some kind of confidence regarding their disposable income and if they have any of their disposable income that they are able to allocate towards bitcoin.. even if it might ONLY be $10 per week... it is likely better than nothing.. but surely, I like to suggest $100 per week, even though I know that some people do not have that level of disposable income, so they just have to figure out how much disposable income they have and that they can allocate towards bitcoin in order to have good chances of having more options for themselves 4-10 years or longer down the road.