Is there an effect both positive or negative to the county's economy when couples have plenty children?
In the past before the current economic era, around the 15th century and the beginning of the French industrial revolution, having many children was seen as fertility and good for both the family work force and country's also. The labour force was majorly manual and those who worked at the plantations were sort after as able bodied men or women.
But at the moment, what is the viability of having many children especially as it could reduce the per capital income.
I mean having children have both bad and good effect on the economy on the economy, but I guess it is all going to depend on you. recently I encounter a video about how the population of Japan is decreasing by a huge percentage per year as most of the people there are old, a lot of people doesnt want to have children, and that just affecting the economy of Japan according to the video. if japan is not going to do something about it the country japan could just disappear in the future. For sure having a big population is going to be a big help to the economy that just means it will increase the demand, more businesses are going to be created, services something like that. There were also going to be a lot of people that can be hired for a job for a company that could also help the economy. Meaning in increasing the manpower of a country or an economy. At the same time having plenty of children just mean you need to sustain all of there needs so it would just depend on if you can sustain them having a lot of children but not being capable of could just lead to difficult times. Also, it could affect if your country was not big enough to hold a big population just imagine if all of the people around the world are just going to stay in Japan or something like that. You are right with what is happening in Japan, the Japanese government even encourages young people to get married and have children. The fact that young Japanese people work hard and prefer to be single is a problem that has been warned by the Japanese government for many years because it will really affect the future of the whole country. Everything has its two sides, but in general for the whole world, spawning too quickly will be bad for our planet's ecology. We will have a hard time meeting everyone's needs. And the over-exploitation of forests, exploitation of natural resources, research and exploration of the earth... all just to satisfy the desires and needs of mankind. But this is destabilizing the earth and we can also see the impact in recent years. Global warming, natural disasters, floods, earthquakes are happening more and more. That is really alarming. |
|
|
|
The people living in poverty line aren't supposed to exist, the role that they play in the economy is that they are an indicator that there's inefficiency and incompetence when it comes to how the people that's in power run a country's economy. Poverty isn't something that any person should experience even if they are the lowest of the low in a society, anyone should have the access to basic needs like food and shelter. Making sure that everyone has a fair headstart makes for a competitive society that strives for greatness. I understand what you are saying, the government is the one who has a big responsibility if the country has too many poor people and the economy is underdeveloped. But if poverty rates are only a handful in a country, the government cannot be blamed entirely. I mean, why don't you question, why the people around you live a full life while you are poor? Rich or poor depends on ourselves, if you are lazy and refuse to work, you cannot blame others for your poverty. I usually don't blame anyone, because I know blaming won't make me better, I'll find a way out instead. Many people think that poor people are the biggest problem, but we have to understand that without poor people there would be no life, no one would want to grow food crops, no one would want to work as a driver delivering groceries, no one would who want to sell food so that there will be no food on the dinner table, the poor have an important role in life.
Your heart's in the right place but poor people is a generalization and not every farmer is poor. The people that thinks the poor is the problem are the type of people that doesn't think besides for themselves and lacks empathy. And the way you say it, the poor is being romanticized like they are the foundation of society when in reality it's the masses/labor force of a country. It is a mistake to think that farmers are poor people, they are even richer than office workers, business, if you live in my area. Just because they work in a struggle doesn't mean they don't have money. But society needs to have a gap between rich and poor, if everyone is equal, society will perish. |
|
|
|
Less than 4 weeks to go for the start of Asia Cup. The first match (between Pakistan and Nepal) will be played on 30th August (Multan Cricket Stadium), and this will be one of the four matches to be played in Pakistan (and the only home match for them). Three days later, Pakistan will travel to Sri Lanka and face India at the Pallekele International Cricket Stadium. The last match of Group A will be played between India and Nepal on 4th September at the same venue. The fact that two countries will be hosting the tournament adds a lot of complexity this time.
Even I agreed about this but mostly Asian sports and fans are not familiar with this all just because of this we feel complexity about this in European leagues and few times big events this all is regular just because of this we never feel any problem about these things there for me now it's time for us to have things like these because with these things can go in positive way even this all is not easy but if someone tries then most chances things can take good turn about this all. Sports it surely needs to have something positive for bringing peoples near and ending tensions and many other conflicts which are currently creating problems for common peoples and countries as well in future we need Bangladesh and Nepal also try in this way and then Pakistan with Afghanistan can also go with this same way again in future. This has actually been done before already. The 2015 world cup was hosted by Australia and New Zealand. But obviously something like this has not been done in the Asia cup. At least not as far as I know. So this is certainly going to be interesting. Only four matches are going to be played in Pakistan. Considering the fact that it was almost decided that Pakistan is not going to host the Asia cup, I see this as an absolute win for Pakistan. I think it is actually a good thing that the Pakistan versus India match is going to be played in Sri Lanka. Who knows what could have happened if the match was actually played in Pakistan! This can obviously be tried with two countries. But this is obviously not really efficient because of the travelling, that the players will have to do during the tournament. |
|
|
|
~snip~
Invasion war to Ukraine still interested topic for discussing and reason why several European Union suspend with Russia from all sector, not only with economic side but also all kinds of Russia's sport have been banned.
It is the most shameful thing the US and EU have done, showing their stalemate in the war against Russia. I remember in all sports, especially football, they always uphold and uphold the spirit of not discriminating against race, color and putting politics aside to get the most fairness. But then, the US and the EU did things that were contrary to the principles and rules they had set for themselves. And that's also why I think the establishment of BRICS is the right thing to do because we need a balance of world economic and political power. Don't let them all be controlled, manipulated by a few entities and create inequality in the world. |
|
|
|
Financial stability is basically tailored to one's understanding and perception about finance and what their satisfaction about it means. so, to some people, stability in finance means to afford their daily needs while to others, it means the ability to afford their life's wants and to some it simply means ability to reach out to a larger multitude with financial challenges and others it means their ability to live a luxurious lifestyle.
I could never had said it more simpler, your definition of financial stability is very simple as what you said is actually the whole concept of it because some humans need to feel financial satisfied once they can carter for children while others feel having that finance that can lead you to provide an extensive hand is simply the satisfaction they want, well as for me I define it to be a state where your needs and wants is easily accessible and to some extent without fear of losing it all This is what I was talking about. It will always depend on our own understanding and situations. While others see financial stability as being independent from their parents' financial help, other may view it as being able to buy everything they set their eyes on without worrying if they'll have the money to survive the next day. We all have different backgrounds and community that influences the way we see and understand things such as financial independence. No matter what it is, that is their definition of financial stability because not all of us want to have a bed of money; others only want a comfortable bed, which again is not bad for both as they are striving to get it. Others may say that their definition of financial stability is very simple; others may find it complicated, but that is what they want. Again, let's just respect one another, as we are just working hard to achieve our wants in our lives. Everyone's needs in life are different, some people like everything, they want everything others have, they like luxury and nobility...But there are also people who like things that are simple, idyllic and not too sophisticated…so the definition of financial stability or financial freedom will be understood in different ways by each person. We should not impose our thoughts on others and assume that they are not right just because they do not think like us. Respecting everyone's opinion is the right thing to do in life. |
|
|
|
India lost a wicket and now they are at 5/1 after 2.4 overs. Shubman Gill's inconsistent form continues as he got out for just 3 runs to Akeal Hosein. Suryakumar Yadav and Ishan Kishan are at the crease now. It looks like a difficult pitch to bat, and India now need more than 8 runs per over. That said, India has the depth in batting, with Tilak Varma, Hardik Pandya and Sanju Samson to come next. But they need to make sure that the required run rate remains under tolerable limits. And for that the Indian batsmen need to take singles.
This was quite surprising. I did not think that the west indies would be able to win this match. The performance from India was quite horrible. They were not able to form any good partnership. Tilak Verma who was the only one who played decent enough for India. Hardik Pandya was playing well. But he lost his composure and tried to play a big shot. Also ended up losing his wicket. If he could have been able to stay there till the end, he could have won the match for India for sure. In the end, India lost the match by four wickets. |
|
|
|
The Western sanctions are sabotaged with back room deals from India and China and some African countries. The markets just adapt and the Oil still flow through new channels to the UK and other countries that supposedly support the sanctions. Russia has shown no indication that the sanctions are hurting them, because they just opened up new revenue sources through other nations. The sanctions are just a "smoke&mirror" show by Politicians to satisfy their voters, but the money and oil are still doing business like usual.  A fine opinion, entitled to life, like any personal opinion. But there is one problem... According to your words there are no problems, but the Kremlin is screaming on every corner - lift sanctions, and the state budget reports a 50% failure of oil revenues, while the volume of production has not decreased. Don't you worry about such a severe dissonance from reality ?  PS and a question to ask - why do buyers of 90% of oil from the terrorist country pay in rupees and yuan, and forbid to exchange them for dollars, which for some reason have become so necessary for Russia ? One thing that I see is really happening is that Russia is still standing and still providing everything necessary for their war and the lives of the people in the country. Of course, it cannot be said that they are immune and unaffected by such sanctions. But those sanctions do not seem to have had a big impact, not strong enough to stop Russia. They are still continuing the war and gradually achieving their military goals, which shows that every report is not true to what is going on. If indeed their economy is going down as you say, how can they be able to fight the US and EU in the war with Ukraine? They are against a bloc alone and they have stood firm until now. |
|
|
|
~snip~
In short, we need to elect people who are capable of running the country and who are not corrupt. Even if they are very smart, if they don't have the attitude to honestly run the country, the nation will suffer. They will get rich while the people who pay taxes do not benefit from the taxes they are paying. This is probably what happens in our country, where corruption is rampant from the higher to the lower levels, leading to a degradation in the quality of service provided by the government.
I just focused my explanation on this because I believe that it's the root cause of why high inflation happened.
The question is do we have the right to elect who runs the country, or is everything pre-arranged and our vote a disguise? Moreover, when campaigning, they always show themselves as good people, but when they achieve their goals, their true nature is revealed. As a human being, I believe that there is no one without greed and ambition, so relying on others, the government has never been something that I think about. I agree with what Franky1 and Darker45 have said, inflation is an integral part of the economy, it exists and works according to its original design. |
|
|
|
Roma under Jose Mourinho coaching had a pretty good impact on their progress, be it an increase in their strength or performance in Serie A. Last season, Roma almost managed to close the season in the top 4. But the last few matches at the end of last season Roma lost a lot of points in a match that was relatively easy for them, which made Roma ranking shifted by another team. But Roma are still a strong team if we see jose mourinho is still with them because mourinho needed time to bring the scudetto trophy for Roma.
They are improving but Mourinho wants to have bigger budget for transfers and Roma failed to give him. They are not a rich club and still in their plans to construct a new stadium. Roma now is like Arsenal years ago but they fortunately have Mourinho to keep up their good performances. In this transfer window Roma management made several changes in the depth of their squad in order to compete more strongly in next season's competition. Indeed, Jose Mourinho main target is the top 4 places because they want to experience the Champions League competition. To be honest Roma have that chance next season if they can play consistently every game.
I see they mostly sign with free players and players joined them in this summer are like tier 2 players. They are not star players like Dybala but Roma and Mourinho must build up their squad with those players and grow them up because with limited budget, they can not touch star players especially when transfer market is very chaos nowadays. It is truly perplexing to fathom how a club can anticipate commendable performance from their team without providing the manager with ample financial resources. It’s not like they are giving José Mourinho money like Arsenal and not getting the results. They are not giving him any money and expecting him to bring in the results. Of course, I am not saying that he is a great manager or the best manager ever. We have seen some manager do the unthinkable and achieve more than what was expected with a mediocre team. But that does not happen every day. They will have to spend money to get results. Bringing in players for free is only going to work for so long. I know some people will also say that if it was any other manager he could have probably done better with the same team. But for now they have Jose Mourinho and they will have to work with what they currently have. |
|
|
|
NBA sent a memo regarding the Damian trade request and they basically said it's open season and he can't just pick a team to go to. He wants only Miami but the NBA said that any team is free to send offers and that means it is going to be a bit weird going forward. After all a player has a right not to play anywhere they want but that doesn't mean that he can pick just a single team with an expectation to actually go there. If that were to happen then it means teams would have to pay insane amount of money to players and then send them wherever they want, which won't work.
So all in all, maybe there is a chance Dame goes somewhere else, he could still reject it if he wants to but usually teams trade whoever they want to wherever they want as we all know.
I don’t understand. Is there any problem with the player going to the team that he wants? And I just don’t understand why he cannot join the team that he wants if everything is agreed upon. What is the reason for them trying to deny him joining the team that he wants? I understand that some rules and regulations that must be followed. But when everything seems to be agreed upon, what is the problem? Because he isn't a free agent. When you are a free agent you can play for anyone you want to who will pay you. In this case he is under contract and is screwing over the owner of his team for lessening his value on the trade market. The commissioner works for the owners of the NBA, and if this becomes the new normal than it will be huge implications for teams trying to deal their stars. I agree he needs to shut up and deal with where he ends up later. You signed a huge contract knowing you could be moved at anytime. Well, that is a problem. If he is under contract, he cannot just go out and tell everyone that he wants to play for another team. Of course, no owner is actually going to appreciate that behaviour. I agree that this behaviour also simply is going to screw up the plan of the owner. He should understand that when he is under contract, he is supposed to give his hundred percent to the team that he is in contract with. The NBA is a little different in this regard. As in European basketball or football teams, there is no order, players cannot meet with teams and express their own opinions. Actually, this is a bit silly. It doesn't make much sense to have such rules, every player should be able to meet with the team they want. But we know that NBA has its own ecosystem as the regulations on financial situations are different compared to other leagues Every different sport is going to have different rules. And every player should follow the rules. And in almost every sport, there are some rules that does not make sense. But that does not mean the players can go ahead and ignore the rules. As a great man said, “without rules we live with the animals” The thing is, if he is under contract, he cannot act against it. |
|
|
|
I also dreamed to be a billionaire, (Who will refuse this?). But as i watched the lives of some millionaires and billionaires and their family, there are always conflicts, problems and other factor that giving them a hard life. Yes, i believe they affecting the economy either good or bad. But this balance is needed for our economy pursue.
That isn't true for everyone, there are millionaires and billionaires who are living great lives without any problems as you are telling here, it all depends on you and how you manage your relationship with people from the beginning and what kind of a life you have been living before becoming a millionaire or a billionaire, one thing is for sure, problems and issues exist as long as you are alive, but it isn't necessary for you to be in trouble just because you are rich. The only problem that I can think of as a billionaire or a millionaire is that you might be under the radar of robbers and kidnappers all the time for your money, and that might affect your family's wellbeing as well, so you might need to take care of that by having some security and asking them to not go anywhere alone. In life, everyone will have their own difficulties, if it's not money problems, it's problems in relationships, health, children...a lot of trouble in life. But we cannot say that the problems of the rich are more than the difficulties of the poor, nor do I agree with that thinking. Like it or not, the truth is that no one wants to live in poverty, those who are criticizing the rich life are because they are jealous. Life is full of difficulties, but when you have money and wealth, those difficulties can be solved, but if you are poor, you are even more stuck. In today's pragmatic society, those who have more money have a more comfortable life. |
|
|
|
And I want to ask you one thing, did you become rich after getting rid of your family and after you knew how to use money? I don't know what family relationship you're talking about, if it's between your siblings, your spouse, your parents, and your loved ones. I would object to your first reason. Because we work hard, finding ways to be financially free is also taking care of them, not just ourselves. Furthermore, without those people, I bet you wouldn't be where you are today, so it's not right to consider them a burden. It's a responsibility that everyone has to shoulder, you can't selfishly deny them. Many people can still become rich but still be with their loved ones, so I disagree with your reasoning.
It's good that you think of helping your family first and foremost, and it's something that I appreciate especially since in some ways I'm a breadwinner too. But I gotta take OP's side on this one only because there's certain instances where your family's overdependence is becoming a massive toll to your financial, physical, and mental health. So much so that it's causing you anguish and sickness aside from an empty pocket. Remember that you're not born into this world to be your family's financial investment for when they can't move their asses out and go to work for themselves. And if you're going to throw me the "you wouldn't be here where you are today if not for them" then I'll speak for those who had trouble dealing with their family by saying that "they would definitely not be here if not for their family, cause then they'd be in a better financial state!" It's good to help, but sometimes you gotta draw the line. Maybe I misunderstood what the OP meant, but what I meant was that we shouldn't leave our families no matter how heavy and stressful it might be. You are right, everything must have a boundary, we can't let them completely depend and put all the responsibility on our shoulders, but don't see them as a burden that we have to throw away. As I said, no matter how bad they are, they are the ones who gave birth to us, our loved ones and without them we wouldn't be where we are today. |
|
|
|
Is Marcelo Vieira a good signing for Saudi Arabia's Al-Nassr?  ImageThe Saudi Arabian giants Al-Nassr have again taken an interest in former Real Madrid left back Marcelo Vieira to bring them their former teammate Cristiano Ronaldo. to make their duos again with their best understanding of each other. Cristiano Ronaldo and Marcelo Vieira formed a massive partnership with each other at Real Madrid. Marcelo Vieira and Cristiano Ronaldo made 332 appearances with a combined 33 goals. So is it possible for them to reunite again? Give us your thoughts. I think it is very much possible for them to reunite again with each other. I think we should remember that the Saudi club actually wanted Cristiano Ronaldo really bad. I heard the news that when Cristiano Ronaldo decided to go to Al nassr the player who actually had the number seven jersey really did not want to give up the number for Cristiano Ronaldo. The club actually terminated his contract and gave Cristiano Ronaldo number seven jersey. So I think we can say that Cristiano Ronaldo does have some influence over the decisions that are generally taken by the club. So there is always a chance that if Cristiano Ronaldo wants he might actually influence the club in bringing in the player that he actually wants. Naturally, this is only speculation on my part; however, I firmly believe that this possibility holds merit. |
|
|
|
NBA sent a memo regarding the Damian trade request and they basically said it's open season and he can't just pick a team to go to. He wants only Miami but the NBA said that any team is free to send offers and that means it is going to be a bit weird going forward. After all a player has a right not to play anywhere they want but that doesn't mean that he can pick just a single team with an expectation to actually go there. If that were to happen then it means teams would have to pay insane amount of money to players and then send them wherever they want, which won't work.
So all in all, maybe there is a chance Dame goes somewhere else, he could still reject it if he wants to but usually teams trade whoever they want to wherever they want as we all know.
I don’t understand. Is there any problem with the player going to the team that he wants? And I just don’t understand why he cannot join the team that he wants if everything is agreed upon. What is the reason for them trying to deny him joining the team that he wants? I understand that some rules and regulations that must be followed. But when everything seems to be agreed upon, what is the problem? |
|
|
|
Hard to imagine when Juventus will be able to recover from all these negative events... They have not been doing well in Serie A for a long time now, nor in the Champions League... Now they are left without European Cups next season and without a lot of money to spend on improving the club... Probably next season will be bad for them again...
it is very probable that Juventus will have a negative period again this year, with few signings so far and problems with both Italian and sporting justice! unfortunately for Juventus before buying must necessarily sell! we will see at the end of the transfer market what the new Juventus will be like! So far I am also still very pessimistic about Juventus next season, maybe because of the team's internal problems at the moment which makes me pessimistic and that results in all of them including there are no significant changes that they make for the progress of the club for next season I don't know how long the Juventus team will be like this, but I'm sure this team will definitely be able to rise sooner or later, Juventus is a top Serie A team, for sure they don't want to be down for long. The problem is, if they sell players to buy new players, they are not going to get players who are better in quality. So I don’t think it is going to be a wise idea for them to sell players right now. The only players they can actually afford to sell those whom they are not currently using. Or maybe those players who are not going to be a big part of their journey in the next season. But they are not going to get too much money for those players. But I don’t think that Juventus is going to have a bad season. I am very much positive that they are going to finish the next season being in the top four. It is going to be hard. But with a little consistency that is achievable. But at the same time, I hope they do not face any type of problems that they did in the last season. Already, I can say that some good players actually lost hope and wanted to move out from Juventus. They also cannot be blamed in my opinion. If we are talking about the transfer market, I don’t think Juventus is going to be very active in the market this season. With all the financial problems and current legal problems that they have been through, I don’t see them being very active in the transfer market. |
|
|
|
War can never bring peace to any country but war always causes unrest to every country. In order to maintain the peace of your country, you must make a peace agreement without war. The Russia-Ukraine war has been going on for almost a long time, and the outcome of this war has not gone in favor of either country. Due to the war between the two countries, the common people are in a lot of fear and many common people have already lost their lives. The impact of the war in Russia and Ukraine has directly affected the economy of various countries. Almost every country had economic relations with Russia, but due to the war, Russia's relations with many countries were damaged, as a result of which they could not export or import goods from different countries. The war between Russia and Ukraine has affected many countries around the world. Due to the war in these two countries, the prices of fuel oil or raw materials of different countries have increased so the war must be stopped.
It is true that the war between Russia and Ukraine is causing damage to many countries worldwide, but not all, there are still countries that profit by selling weapons and energy to allies at exorbitant prices or have the opportunity to create an economic crisis to export inflation. Not only Russia and Ukraine suffered losses, but many other countries also fell into the same situation, but besides that, there were also some countries that benefited, so they did not want the war to end soon. If war didn't bring any benefit, people wouldn't have maintained it for thousands of years. |
|
|
|
|
And I want to ask you one thing, did you become rich after getting rid of your family and after you knew how to use money? I don't know what family relationship you're talking about, if it's between your siblings, your spouse, your parents, and your loved ones. I would object to your first reason. Because we work hard, finding ways to be financially free is also taking care of them, not just ourselves. Furthermore, without those people, I bet you wouldn't be where you are today, so it's not right to consider them a burden. It's a responsibility that everyone has to shoulder, you can't selfishly deny them. Many people can still become rich but still be with their loved ones, so I disagree with your reasoning.
|
|
|
|
If Tottenham keep holding Kane, are there no other options for Bayern Munich to really bring Kane in this transfer window. Maybe for example, like making an option by exchanging players, maybe exchang Mane to get Kane or exchang with another player. Because after all, Mane current position also doesn't seem to be really needed in the Bayern Munich main squad. But maybe, Mane can still do well in the Premier League even though he has to play at Tottenham. If this option can be implemented, then of course it will probably be possible for Bayern Munich to see and or consider Kane performance first in at least for one season. But yes, I also think that scenario seems very unlikely to happen, but who knows if they do something that previously seemed impossible, but it could become a reality.
Sadio Mane is about to transfer to SPL. Al Nassr will most likely transfer him. Bayern Munich were really close to having a nightmare in the last moments of last season. I'm sure they don't want to have the same problems this season. But they have been very slow in the transfer of Harry Kane. They have to make more effort to convince Levy, the president of Tottenham. Because they definitely need a good striker. And Harry Kane is a very good choice for them after Lewandowski. If they want to solve this problem as soon as possible, they should sign Harry Kane. Because there are not many alternatives for them. Tottenham is really trying to keep Harry Kane in the squad. Or I think we can say that they are at least trying to get as much money as possible for him. I believe they are actually trying to get so much money for him that they will be able to bring in another really good player when Harry Kane does eventually leave. But is that a good idea? Let’s say somehow Tottenham actually be able to keep him in the squad, is that going to be the best move made by Tottenham? But for some reason, I don’t think that is going to happen. I think they are going to let him go. They just want to get a huge amount of money for him. At the end of the day, it is business for the clubs. |
|
|
|
This days lot of bitcoiners are scared of introducing bitcoin to people because of they do not want to be blame if the investment ends bad. Most people have lost good relationships with family and friends all because of introduction to financial investment with no profit and this made them to take a serious decision never to make any introduction about money to anybody again. As for me I'll always introduce bitcoin to people because it is money, people needs money for better life. It is my duty to tell about bitcoin to people and they decide to invest in it.
Because of the risk that is in Bitcoin, it won't stop me from telling people about Bitcoin which will better their life if they found it interesting.
Normally, is not bad to tell people about Bitcoin, but the issue is that people come to invest in Bitcoin, but they do different things, some will head on to put their money in shitcoins and will get scammed or lose money in the process and after which they lose money they put the whole blame on the person who introduces bitcoin to them not knowing that they have done a different thing besides investing in Bitcoin. Recently, If I should tell someone about BTC, I will give the person a list of risks that are associated with investing in Bitcoin and repeatedly tell them to invest with the amount of money that they can afford to lose. We can still tell bitcoin for everyone, but it's best to emphasize the risks rather than focus too much on the returns. And it should also be emphasized we only give them the opportunity, but whether they know how to seize it and turn it into money is up to them, we can't help them do it. In my opinion, just advising them to invest with the money they can lose is not enough. You need to hold them accountable for their decisions, because if an investment is profitable it is their profit, so if it is a loss it is their decision, not yours. Let's try to make it clear that we are just the ones who bring the opportunity, it's up to them to win or lose. |
|
|
|
This, in my opinion, would be a positive impact on Bitcoin because it would increase its visibility. Many individuals throughout the world are familiar with Bitcoin but have no idea what it is. So this type of news is extremely beneficial to Bitcoin. I feel that Bitcoin adoption is the key to the price reaching a new high. If the moment comes when the majority of the world's establishments accept Bitcoin, it is very likely that it will reach $100,000. For the time being, all we can do is teach Bitcoin to our families and friends who are interested. Your feeling is not wrong, the mass adoption of bitcoin plays an important role in helping the price of bitcoin go higher in the future because once the demand increases and the supply is limited, it will be very good for the value of bitcoin. But if you're waiting for bitcoin to hit $100,000, you don't have to wait too long. I mean, you don't have to wait for all the institutions and businesses in the world to accept bitcoin, you just have to wait until the next halving, and with current demand that is more than enough to take bitcoin to $100k. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
