Memang tidak selalu menaikkan suku bunga dan mengurangi pembelian obligasi, namun itu hanya salah satu contoh kebijakan yang mereka lakukan selama tapering off terjadi. Jika market crypto akan mengikuti market yang lebih besar artinya dampak buruk yang terjadi di pasar modal akan berdampak juga dengan crypto, begitukah om? Bukankah saat ini, pemain crypto merasa pasarnya jauh lebih sexy daripada pasar modal karena tidak terpengaruh dengan kondisi ekonomi.

Even though it is considered a benchmark for countries that use BTC, there will definitely be many evaluations, especially since El Salvador is a small country so it will be much easier to manage it than in a large country.  Seeing the use of energy sources that are less environmentally friendly creates new issues if in large-scale countries it is legalized.  I see this as a good policy but not very appealing to the whales.

Sehubungan dengan artikel yang saya baca beberapa minggu yang lalu bahkan menjadi pembahasan BI kepada publik terkait ancaman kebijakan The Fed terdekat yaitu tapering off. Sejauh yang saya baca, Tapering Off adalah salah satu kebijakan moneter yang dilakukan Bank sentral US dalam bentuk uang ketat. Itu bermakna suku bunga The Fed akan naik, dan pengurangan pembelian obligasi oleh The Fed.

Menurut pandangan saya ini akan menjadi mimpi buruk buat obligasi nasional dan pasar modal umumnya. Kebijakan uang ketat juga akan membuat ekonomi AS melambat yg juga akan berimbas pada ekonomi kita.Jadi bukan hanya tappering off. Semua kebijakan AS utk melambatkan ekonominya; utk tujuan apapun; akan berakibat buruk pada ekonomi mikro maupun makro di Indonesia. Tambahannya, kalau suku bunga the fed naik, investor akan terbang dari Indonesia karena lebih tertarik dengan kenaikan suku bunga tsb.

Apakah kebijakan ini juga akan mempengaruhi buruk pada pasar crypto?  atau ini menjadi solusi untuk masyarakat dalam berinvestasi karena mayoritas fiat akan terpengaruh dengan kebijakan ini sehingga crypto yang terlepas dari bank sentral akan memiliki kesempatan untuk naik walau hanya beberapa persen saja.

CMIIW..
https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/investment/20210608082030-21-251271/ditakuti-jokowi-sri-mulyani-apa-itu-hantu-taper-tantrum

I'm a bit behind on the info it seems, which altcoin isn't as bad as BTC and ETH when the dump happened?  Because so far what I have seen is that if BTC drops, the overall market is red, especially altcoins that are not popular enough.  Because if you look at the market capitalization, BTC and ETH dominate around 70% so that if BTC goes down the market will also go down and vice versa, the both of coins will recover first.  CMIIW

What you say is not entirely wrong because from your perception it is your experience.  If you are like me who saw the phenomenon in my circle of friends who bought BTC without knowledge and bought it at the highest peak of 64k USD for 600USD, currently the asset is only worth 318USD (a loss of approximately 50%).  This means that if he just holds it and lets it go he needs to wait for the price of BTC to go up by 90%.  So, it is much more difficult if he does not buy again at the lower price to reduce the difference in his losses.

When you decided to hold ur asset, u should be aware that hold isn't always safe ur asset but u need to use another strategy. Maybe hold can work if u buy BTC at the lower price since several years ago, but if you buy at the top price, ur asset become shit if u still hold without take average down strategy. For example, I decided to hold without take another way then I got loss so much. My unrealise gain become realise loss, and give me much hit. This is pure my mistake because didn't watch my portofolio as well.

Talking about CBDC is inseparable from China's initiation in it, after BTC became hype in the community, central banks began to create new strategies to counter the threat of fiat they manage. This condition is indeed being politicized by the Chinese government to raise the image of their CBDC so that the FUD that is spread is used by the whales to manipulate prices. Today was the lowest level for BTC after the bull market ended.

True, diversity should be supported even in financial assets. We always shout that diversity should not be banned in life, such as the legalization of LGBTQ which is even considered taboo in some countries but the majority of the world's people support it even though it is clear that the presence of this diversity can threaten the human population regardless of whether I support or not. Returning to the initial topic that BTC exists as a diversity and the result of human creative work that provides solutions to many problems, one of which is people who are unbanked due to poverty, etc. However, because of its existence that threatens the financial system that has created a large gap between the rich and the poor due to inflation and banking manipulation, this has become a controversy among centralized economists. They voiced that BTC does not have an underlying asset even though they do not look in the mirror the money that is currently used is only guaranteed by the country's central bank. Whereas real examples of why fiat is currently not much better than BTC exist in several countries such as Venezuela, where fiat is no longer valuable even though the central bank guarantees it. Talking about diversity is very unfair in the financial system.

I really interested to see what is the next strategy of MSTR if the price down and reach the lower level at $26.000. Whether they will hold if they lose or add some BTC again? At this time, the price of BTC is $29400, so it means that the difference is only about $3500 from MSTR's average purchase price.  If the market continues to be in a bearish condition, it is possible that the price will be below their purchase price.  The BTC support point has been crossed until it becomes the lowest level since the bull market.  Will the average down strategy be effective for now?

Bitcointalk Profile Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=387544
Current amount of posts(include this one):    1619
bech32 BTC Address: bc1qskffn8acumqfv662k7rh3xrftqaqalhratgjne
Amount of EARNED merit in the last 120 days: 10

I want to join in this discussion, firstly I sure that MSTR management have their good strategy on their bond.  Yup, Bitcoin and House is the different kind of investment based on the liquidity, but here althought I sure that my ability to analyze their strategy is still need to be questioned, what is their next strategy if the asset value on their obligation is down and  even they are loss because their asset value is lower than their leverage.  Is it true if my mind think that they will use the next strategy such as sell their new bond to pay coupon of their previous bond?

I dont think so, this is just how the way we think. When we have a strong mentality, we will not think that money is the root of all problem. We will survive of our life, and consider every problems become our challange. This is the simple way of thinking whereas if we have a weak mentality even though we are rich, the wealth will not be with us.  Those who are rich are those who are lucky in their ways and mentally.

This is the choice we have today.  There are many choices of instruments that can be used to avoid inflation that occurs.  Indeed, 4 percent is still considered normal and not too high.  But if it is not controlled properly then it can exceed normal limits.  This new kind of gold is still not common in society and those who are less literate find it too risky.

Yes I agree, bubbles are not made by those who are amateurs but those who are experts in investment management and have big pockets.  They can only spread rumors directly to move the market so that the market can be more manipulative because of them.  This is where the amateur traders, they become supporters of the issue so that it becomes a bubble.  They are not the main factor but only the supporting.  The intelligence actors are still big-pocketed players with their investment knowledge.

I've also read articles about the richest man in the US not paying his wealth tax.  Even the funniest thing is, after the data was published they took the issue of data leaking to legal action.  If the data is not leaked then people will assume that they are always good and obedient to taxes, in fact they are just rich people who are very stingy and do not want their wealth to be reduced by sharing in the development of the country.  Yes, this is human nature.  Greedy with the results of his wealth even though there is a meaning to share from excess wealth.  If the Biden government is wise, the tax policy should be tightened for the richest people in the world.

If we look at the difference between China and the US, it's not just about the money they have.  Because China is also a big country even with very competitive in many ways.  Money is indeed a basic thing but it is not a contributing factor to why there is such a huge difference between US and Chinese gains.

The Chinese government will never stop in its tough policy towards world innovation. Not only for innovations in the financial sector that clearly affect the economy, for things like social media that only impact the social life of the community is strictly limited. I feel Chinese people are also very used to this kind of ban and it's not something new.

For other repliers, they focused on China mostly. I looked at another side of this thread, why the US became the 1st gainer country among others? The first reason is the US society have a good financial literation, how they manage their active and passive income. Its society jobs are the same as another country's society jobs, but the level of financial literation is so far different. The second reason is the US government policy on BTC is flexible than other countries, for example, the China government policy. The government is too strict forbids their society to invest in BTC. This is just my simple view of the data which is OP shared.

If I live alone then I choose to buy a house with a loan. Because I will be looking for a side job to increase my income. But if I were married, my expenses would be much higher and 40% of the total income for the house would likely starve my family to death so renting and saving until there was enough money to buy a house in the countryside was cheaper for sure.

Yup, the analogy of this case is like this. If hacker attacks the google and ask google pay the hacker with A tesla. Is the Tesla can be banned to be produced? the victim of this criminality is BTC. The hacker use the ease which is have by BTC as their media to get advantage. I dont think that BTC is a danger but the best innovation that have been found.