So i don't use altcoins all that much, that's why i think i should ask this here, so more experienced users can help out.

I withdrew around $105 USDT from a casino into my Unstoppable Wallet via the Ton chain, and now i want to move the coins into an exchange, and the fees to move it is around 6.91 Ton Coin, which is $28.1, that is crazy and i want to know if this is how high the fee usually is if you want to send USDT via the Ton chain.

If you are an OKX user here, you must have found out by now that you can no longer trade crypto for Naira in that platform. E be like say our government don secretly warn this platform and told them to stop offering trading in Naira for Nigerians. First it was Binance, now it is OKX, i dey believe say very soon trading in Naira in centralized exchanges no go dey possible again.



E be like say the fight against crypto by our government no go stop anytime soon, so e better make everybody begin protect themselves and their funds, they might start blocking bank accounts at the slightest suspicion of any involvement in crypto transactions.

The Central Bank of Nigeria have amended the policy on cash withdrawal. The CBN bin ealier this month release new policy on cash withdrawal, wey some of the limits be say you no go fit withdraw pass 100k every week for ATM stand and from PoS service, and OTC go be 100k and 500k for individuals and organizations respectively, with charges of 5% and 10% respectively if you decide to withdraw above it.

Well that policy has been amended by the CBN after the National Assembly intervene, and Nigerians bin they complain about am, the amended policy now be say:

The new directive which was communicated through a letter addressed to all banks, and signed on Wednesday by the Director of Banking Supervision, Haruna Mustafa, now allows individuals to withdraw up to N500,000 weekly and organisations, N5 million weekly

Them don increase/raise the limits, so now you as an individual go fit withdraw up to 500k weekly on all channels (ATM stand, PoS service and OTC as well), whilst organizations go fit withdraw 5 million weekly as well. Them also lessen the fee/charge for people wey go wish to withdraw above this limit, the new charge/fee now na:

In the event of compelling circumstances where cash withdrawal exceeds the limits required for legitimate purposes, such requests will attract a processing fee of 3 percent and 5 percent for individuals and corporate organizations, respectively.

But if you wan withdraw above the limit, no be only this charge/fee wey you go pay oh, e get some information/document wey you go submit to the financial institution, these documents/information are:

The information includes a valid means of identification of the payee (National ID, International Passport, or Driver's License); Bank Verification Number (BVN) of the payee; Tax Identification Number (TIN) of both the payee and the payer; and the approval in writing by the MD/CEO of the financial institution authorising the withdrawal.

I think say this amendment they more lenient, and e make sense pass the earlier policy wey them bin release, they even talk say them go make sure say them assist rural and underserved communities in understanding this cashless policy of a thing, as them go carry them for mind for anything wey them they do via this cashless policy matter, see where them talk am:

The CBN recognizes the vital role that cash plays in supporting underserved and rural communities and will ensure an inclusive approach as it implements the transition to a more cashless society."

How una see the new amendment, una fit read the tori here for unaselves: https://allafrica.com/stories/202212220014.html & https://leadership.ng/cbn-bows-to-pressure-reviews-cash-withdrawal-policy/

[The sweeping measures did not include restrictions on purchases of Russian oil and gas — a significant driver of the local economy.]

It is basically clear that following the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, the only response from the U.S. U.K. and other European power houses would be via sanctions, aimed at crippling the Russian economy (i doubt the possibility though, considering how important Russia is to Europe), but having said that, these countries have gone ahead to stand true with their threats and imposed a couple of sanctions, and according to them, "many more to come", but one significant country that is yet to follow suit is China, as they claim their business with Russia with continue normally, see this excerpt:

China’s foreign ministry said Thursday the country’s trade with Russia and Ukraine would remain “normal” and refused to call the attack an “invasion.” Meanwhile, the customs agency approved wheat imports from Russia.

From the above, it does not look like China has any intentions of joining the mass in imposing sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine a couple of days ago. If China takes this direction, wouldn't it also encourage other countries to do likewise, and if the sanctions isn't a sweeping one, then it might not have the desired negative effect on Russia that the Eurpean union, U.S and U.K. wants it to have, though the U.S doesn't think that way, see the excerpt below:

China’s trade with Russia isn’t enough to offset the impact of U.S. and European sanctions on Moscow, according to the White House.

Do you agree with the above? In my opinion i think they may be correct, but it would definitely be much better and could stop Russia's invasion of Ukraine sooner if all countries unite to impose sanctions. There is another very important aspect to the news:

In the hours after Russia invaded Ukraine on Thursday, the U.S., U.K. and European Union announced new sanctions aimed at isolating Moscow from the global economy. The sweeping measures did not include restrictions on purchases of Russian oil and gas — a significant driver of the local economy.

I think the above highlights the importance of Russian oil and gas to the world, and as a result do you think it is possible for Russia to face complete isolation? Is Russia more important to Europe, than Europe is to Russia? It is also clear that any sanction imposed would affect the both parties, so to what end is it? What is the possible solution, if any?

Read the full news: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/25/chinas-trade-with-russia-wont-offset-sanctions-us-says.html

I don't think this news has been aired on the forum yet, but by the way, there has been a security breach/hack on the "Crypto.com" exchange, going by the news, the exchange has made a statement that "4,836.26" eth, 443.93 Bitcoin, and also over 66,200 U.S. dollars in other currencies has been stolen from their customers, the statement also read that the total loss sums up to over 33.8 million dollars. See the excerpt below:

Following a security breach, several Crypto.com users have made complaints that their money had been stolen.

I'm curious to know if any user here who uses that exchange was among the victims who lost their money to this security breach, or if they have received any message directly from the exchange, maybe through mail on the matter. See the excerpt below:

To safeguard against such an accident happening again, Crypto.com claims to have implemented an additional layer of protection in which a new whitelisted withdrawal address must be registered within 24 hours before the first withdrawal.

Do you believe the above will sufficiently quell the risk of this sort of incident happening again, or if it is somewhat like "medicine after death". Having said that, I think this is the reason why crypto users should not store or keep their funds on an exchange but in a non-custodial wallet were they will control the keys, cause if it's not your keys, it's not your coins/funds. I don't know if personal data was also exposed, if it was, then I think many of their customers would start receiving phishing messages sooner than later.

Full news: https://the-crypto-news.com/cryptos/crypto-com-shares-details-on-security-breach-483-accounts-compromised/

The Pakistani government is the latest country to propose a ban on crypto, I know it's a possible ban that will affect crypto in general, but to be honest I'm pretty sure Bitcoin is definitely their main target in all of this as it's the crypto that most governments see as a "threat" to their complete dominance over their citizens financial activities, see this excerpt below:

The State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) is reportedly seeking to ban all cryptocurrency transactions in Pakistan.

I know there's prolly no way Bitcoin can become the most used currency in the world in place of Fiat, and I know quite a lot of people are of the view that the government do not actually feel threatened by Bitcoin, but personally I think they are, they are mostly worried by the "be your bank" option Bitcoin offers its users, and it's something quite a lot of people are starting to understand its importance, and I also believe CBDC's were launched in reaction to the growth of Bitcoin, to convince people that it's a digital currency like Bitcoin, which it's not. They also plan to impose sanctions on crypto exchanges, see this excerpt below:

The Pakistani central bank reportedly urged the court not only to ban cryptocurrency activity but also to impose penalties against crypto exchanges.

I believe all of this is just a calculated attempt to forestall Bitcoins growth and development, but just as has been the case in previous scenarios of Bitcoin ban, it would prolly only have an ephemeral effect on the price of Bitcoin, but in the long run would be inconsequential. What do you think would come out of this?

Full news: https://cointelegraph.com/news/pakistan-s-central-bank-reportedly-wants-to-ban-crypto

The Chinese Government is popular in handing out loans, especially to poorer countries, but recent research has it that it has left majority of this developing and underdeveloped countries in massive "hidden debts", see the excerpt below:

Chinese loans leave developing countries with $385 billion in hidden debts, study says

The Chinese belt and road initiative is a scheme designed by China to support developing countries by financing numerous projects in their country, but this scheme rather than actually aiding this countries, looks more like it makes them more and more indebted to China, see the excerpt below:

China currently spends at least twice as much on international development finance as the U.S. and other major economic powers, according to the AidData report — around $85 billion a year. However, this is often in the form of debt rather than aid,

Another flashpoint of the belt and road initiative is that majority of this loans isn't directed to institutions owned by the Central government of the borrowing country, but to state-owned establishments, private organizations etc, but all with the consent of the central government that can jump in to bail out companies that prolly can't repay the loans, thus by extension, many of this debts go underreported, but this countries are actually in greater debt to China than most of the world actually knows, see the excerpt below:

These debts are systematically underreported to the World Bank’s Debtor Reporting System (DRS) because, in many cases, central government institutions in LMICs [lower- and middle-income countries] are not the primary borrowers responsible for repayment, the report said.

Having said all these, is this a way that the Chinese government intends to keep many countries of the world indebted to them through this debt trap, knowing fully well that most of them would falter in repaying the loan leaving the Chinese government no other option but to seize some of their assets, I see this to be amongst China's plan towards being the country with the best economy in the world in some years to come, and just as is typical with the dictatorial Chinese government, they want to be the only ones at the advantage, leaving others at the receiving end.

Here is the source of the news for better understanding: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/30/study-chinese-loans-leave-developing-countries-with-385-billion-in-hidden-debts.html

In the year 2010, the country of Haiti was left devastated by a massive earthquake, 11 years on the country still lives in severe poverty with a plundered economy, Insecurity, political struggle etc, but things could very well go from bad to worst for Haiti as a country, on Wednesday the Haitian president Joveniel Moise was assassinated in his home. This raises a myriad of questions, how were the gunmen able to break through the security operatives in charge of protecting the president? Could they have been aided by one or two Internal members of the presidents team?

From the ongoing investigations, news have it that most of those involved were "foreign mercenaries and professional killers--Well orchestrated" what interests could these foreign mercenaries or their sponsors have with the country of Haiti. Police claim that the total number of suspects in this assassination is 28, with 26 of them from Columbia, why is a large number of the suspects all nationals of one country, Columbia.

Finally, the Haitian prime minister Claude Joseph has take power for the meantime in the country, but for those who didn't know, mind you that the late president Joveniel Moise appointed a new prime minister (Ariel Henry) a day earlier prior to his death, but the new prime minister was yet to be sworn in before the presidents assassination, this raises a bit of controversy as to who really should be in charge, Joseph is in charge for now, but Henry feels he is the rightful person, do you think this would lead to a fresh political struggle in the country? And in your opinion, who should be the rightful Prime Minister?

Source (1): https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/07/haiti-president-jovenel-mose-assassinated-at-home-says-official.html
Source (2): https://youtu.be/6CuvE93iIsk

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

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

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

I'd like to think that some of the violence experienced post-U.S election would have been avoided if Donald Trump had simply conceded defeat from the very beginning and not now, well for people who think Trump is going to hold on to power, whilst there'll be a widespread violence, Civil war, unrest...etc...etc......well that's not going to happen, not in the United States.

Trump has finally 'agreed', not that it depended on him though, to peacefully hand over power to Joe Biden, so I expect a peaceful transition of power from now going forward, there'll prolly be one or two more little violence, but I think all that will be quelled without too much of a hassle.

But having said that, why finally accept to peacefully hand over power after so much bickering and complaining of electoral fraud without sufficient proof, which has and could still lead to violence, that's not what's expected to of a ('ex') president of the U.S., tbh, a lot of things that have happened could really have been avoided if the proper approach was taken, but...errm, 'lets make America great again".

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/07/trump-says-there-will-be-an-orderly-transition-of-power.html

We have for years now talked about how the governs keep making plans to regulate cryptocurrecies, Bitcoin and most digital currencies eliminates the governments involvement, so I can understand their desire to impose some sort of regulations, most of us (myself included) as Bitcoin users totally object to any form of strict regulations from the government, so I'd like to draw your attention to their latest ploy:

World governments agree on importance of crypto regulation at G-7 meeting

Crypto regulation was a topic of discussion in the latest G-7 meeting and it's not surprising that most governments are in support of the move, I don't know how things will develop, but it's scary and in the next couple of years there could actually be severe crypto regulations all over the world. Here is another excerpt:

There is strong support across the G7 on the need to regulate digital currencies. Ministers and Governors reiterated support for the G7 joint statement on digital payments issued in October.”

From the above, it's clear that the support already rests in their midst, so the question now is how are they going to implement this, and that's were this next excerpt is important to see:

Per speculation, the regulation would essentially forbid users from utilizing personal crypto wallets outside of regulated exchanges.

If this will ever be possible, it'll mean taking away control from crypto users which is why majority of us use Bitcoin, do you think this move is going to be possible and by extension successful?

Full source for better understanding: https://cointelegraph.com/news/world-governments-agree-on-importance-of-crypto-regulation-at-g7-meeting

This is a big news for Bitcoin, the second richest man in Mexico has just revealed that he invested 10% of his "liquid portfolio" in Bitcoin, the article doesn't categorically state exactly when, he could prolly be a long time investor, but nonetheless, the news is good for adoption and makes Bitcoin more alluring to investors when prominent individuals or corporations join the network. Even as fiat currencies and traditional institutions/economy continually plunges due to inflation and effects of covid-19, Bitcoin is on the road to cross it's ath, which shows btc rising strength and efficacy as a reliable investment and reserve asset. See this excerpt, and what the billionaire has to say about fiat currencies:

The billionaire shared a video captured in “a Latin country” depicting banks throwing out garbage bags filled with paper money into a dumpster. He asserted that “paper money is worth nothing,” adding: “That is why it is always good to diversify our investment portfolio.”

From the above, the 166th richest individual in the world, believes fiat currencies are constantly devaluing and I agree with that, saving money in the bank/holding fiat now feels wrong to quite a lot of people, and I think this will affect the economy negatively; so what do you think will be the foreseeable effect on the economy if a lot of people, both the wealthy, middle class, poor and even companies choose to invest a larger chunk of their funds in Bitcoin and other assets (that aren't controlled by the government), rather than keeping their funds in the bank/traditional institutions?

See the news/article: https://cointelegraph.com/news/mexico-s-second-richest-man-invests-10-of-his-liquid-portfolio-in-bitcoin

MicroStrategy, Grayscale, square etc, it was a year when companies chose Bitcoin as their reserve asset, if you missed some of the big news, see Fillippone's thread Bitcoin treasuries to keep track of it. That being said I found a good article that seemed to suggest that Bitcoin is the best reserve asset we've got, mind you that I'm not agreeing 100% with the writer, but many of his claims seems to be true, so why not allow the community have their say on this, see this excerpt:

An excellent way to evaluate any investment is to take $100 million and move it forward a hundred years and ask the question what happens. If I had $100 million worth of currency in any of the largest cities of the world in the year 1900, and I went forward for 100 years, and I put the money into the best bank in the city, I have two types of risks; counterparty risks and inflation risk. Regarding counterparty risk, every major bank in every major city around the world failed in 100 years. And that is a 90% probability you lose everything

I personally consider this excerpt the best part of the article and something we all can apply as we make investment plans for the future, but that's Bitcoin v Fiat/traditional institutions on the subject, and I agree that fiat is vulnerable to inflation/devaluation and manipulation and Bitcoin is prolly a much better reserve asset than just leaving your funds lying in your bank account losing its value with every year. Since Bitcoin is a good hedge, it's the better option imo. But what about Bitcoin v Gold or Bitcoin v real estate investment etc, the article has something to say about that, see:

Even gold and other precious metals run into issues when you look at them in terms of 100 years. While they appreciate over time, the logistics of holding them can be stressful. You could use third-party storage services such as commercial banks, but history has taught us that gold can get lost even there, especially during wartime or political upheavals such as revolutions. This has also happened several times in the last century. During World War II, large masses of gold were stolen by both state and non-state actors. Similarly, during the Soviet revolution, a lot of privately owned gold was seized by the incoming government

Do you think Bitcoin is the best reserve asset we have atm? Much better than Gold and others, and can we continually trust Bitcoins value to keep appreciating with the years.

The article: https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-is-the-best-treasury-reserve-asset-humanity-s-ever-had (it's much better you read the article first before commenting)

There is a mistaken belief (misconception) amongst many Bitcoin users, and that's that their coins/funds are stored in their wallets. I know it's a pretty easy term to understand that it's not, but with how many people share their seed phrases on public platforms, write them down on pieces of paper left unattended to on the table or even post them in open forums when seeking assistance, I beg to differ that many people don't understand this. Scammers do also ask for private keys and seed phrases on different kind of giveaways and other patterns they use to steal people's funds.

So i have been thinking that one cause of this could be that newbies think their funds are in the wallet in their possession and if you do not get their PC, phones or their hardware device, then you can't steal/spend their funds. Imo it'll be better for a lot of people to understand this (mis)concept(ion), I think it will help, because it could be confusing for some, notwithstanding the warning the wallet comes with. "How can someone steal my coins with my seed or private keys when I have my wallet on me"? Sounds pretty easy for us to understand how, but it may not be for others, and hell when I started using BTC newly, it wasn't easy for me.

I'll update newbies here that their funds/coins are not stored in their wallet, but on the Bitcoin network, and with your private keys or your seed phrase, a scammer can import your funds (you feel is in your possession/wallet) in another interoperable wallet and spend your funds, what that means in another form is that your private keys/seed phrase is your wallet, and any other person other than yourself who has it, is at liberty to spend the funds in it. I'll finish this off with a quote from 'mastering Bitcoin':

A common misconception about bitcoin is that bitcoin wallets contain bitcoin. In fact, the wallet contains only keys. The "coins" are recorded in the blockchain on the bitcoin network. Users control the coins on the network by signing transactions with the keys in their wallets. In a sense, a bitcoin wallet is a keychain.

The economy was shut earlier this year to accommodate efforts in tracing cases of corona virus and to stop the rapid spread, but from the news I'm about to share, I do not think any sort of wave or spread of the virus can shut down the economy again. Costa Rica as a country is a tourist attraction to people from different parts of the world, but majorly from the U.S., and that's to say the U.S. dollars plays a very important role in the Costa Rican economy.

More Americans travel to Costa Rica than any other nationality. In 2019, over 40% of all tourists to the country were from the United States.

Despite the United States of America having more than five million confirmed Corona virus cases, Costa Rica is opening it's borders to American tourists and to make things sound good, only Americans from six states:

Residents of New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine and Vermont will be able to fly into Costa Rica from Sept. 1.

Mind you this five states combined have had a total of about 694,765 confirmed cases of covid-19, which is about 20 times higher than the number of cases in Costa Rica. So it's obvious this is a move made to stimulate the Costa Rican economy, and can be said to be at the expense of health. This is very risky from the Costa Rican government and it'll cause huge backlash if it leads to a wide spread of covid-19 in their territory, as of course they will put the blame on this decision.

Another thing to note is how important a role they (Costa Rica) are playing in trying to revive their economy, do you think other nations will also follow suit and take risky measures like this one to generate funds needed for the fast recovery of the economy. Some people, in my country for example have been calling for fresh total lockdowns to be imposed as the only option to defeat the virus completely, I don't think any government can take that step again, what do you think?
Read the full news, it's a good read: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/25/costa-rica-is-allowing-american-tourists-from-six-us-states.html

At the point when the pandemic shed it's milk teeth, investors and individuals became aware of how vulnerable fiat is in a situation of an economic meltdown. After the lockdown, that left the economy staggering, we've seen the printing of more money out of thin air that can create inflation, third world economies and poor countries are as well going to be hit with recession and possible hyperinflation. What all this means is the devaluation of the fiat currencies. But I've been closely monitoring gold/bitcoin prices during this pandemic, in case you didn't know, gold price surged above 2k per ounce for the first time ever last week and analysts think it can get to 4000 in a few years.

Bitcoin has also surged to 11k despite the pandemic, imo gold and btc are somewhat "safe haven" assets, this pandemic is a real test to know how well they can hold up investors funds, when everything is crashing and they have been doing great in the market, the number of people that will turn to these assets as time goes on will continue to increase, to evade inflation and the devaluation of their money in their bank accounts, and it will continue to push their prices up.

P.S. I do not think it's early to tag them as safe assets, people previously said they were yet to be tested in a dire situation, for me, that test came this year, with the pandemic and it's effects.

Last week, America issued an order to China to close their consulate in the U.S, China responded with exactly the same order, they also want the U.S consulate shut in China. The two countries have been going at one another hammer and tongs for quite some time now and the situation isn't improving to say the least.

Imo, the United States need to live with the fact that there are some countries that wouldn't be cowed to dance to their music and China is one of them. It's about economic viability and growth, and China has established themselves as one of the best economies in the world, and aren't too dependent; it's easy to dominate when your oppositions rely on you to a large extent. The U.S and China for example, still control many third world countries because of how much money they owe them, and are still heavily dependent on them.

Don't you think the U.S and China war will end if they both cohabit as the two strongest nations, with none trying to topple the other?
With the U.S elections coming up in November, do you think situations will improve between the duo if Biden wins? Majority of the fractions has been due to Trumps strict orders.

There is news emerging from Russia that a covid-19 vaccine being developed in the country has passed the phase of human trial, an excerpt of the news reads thus:

Elena Smolyarchuk, chief researcher for the Russian Center for Clinical Research on Medications at Sechenov University, told TASS newswire on Sunday that human trials for the vaccine had been completed and those test patients will be discharged soon.

This news cannot come quicker for countries that are yet to reach their peak and still losing countless numbers of their citizens to corona virus daily. How reliable can this information coming out from Russia be, and if it indeed is true, what does it mean to the world at large and how do you envisage the commercialization process of the vaccine.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2020/07/13/russia-completes-human-trials-of-covid-19-vaccine/amp/

Today Kanye announced that he will be running for president of the United States, i thought we'd have a thread on it here by now, but here it is, this is his tweet today:

We must now realize the promise of America by trusting God, unifying our vision and building our future. I am running for president of the United States,” the 43-year-old musician wrote on Independence Day, using the hashtag “2020 vision.

The election is in November, that is four months from now (July) and Kanye West is declaring that he is in the race today, how serious can we take him? Social media has been buzzing and shocked with Kanye's tweet. We all know of Kanye West's support for Donald Trump, so why the sudden change and decision to run against him. There have been so many opinions on this:

Many on social media have dismissed the announcement as a publicity stunt, though others questioned: How did West go from being a vocal ally of President Donald Trump to announcing a run against him? Is this an attempt to draw some Black voters and young voters away from presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden?

What do you think?
Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/05/kanye-west-says-running-president-2020-348903

[opportunity cost]

It's no longer news that the corona virus pandemic has rocked every national economy, it's lead to inflation, recession, economic meltdown, hunger etc. We have been discussing it's impact (mostly on the economy) for more than two months now and I beg to change the discussion slightly...

As the government seeks a way to reopen their respective nations, I've been thinking what is going to be the opportunity cost to ensure that this 'operation' goes according to plan, bearing in mind that there is little or no funds to be disbursed to all sections of the country. Opportunity cost can be defined thus:

The New Oxford American Dictionary defines it as "the loss of potential gain from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen."[2] In simple terms, opportunity cost is the benefit not received as a result of not selecting the next best option. Opportunity cost is a key concept in economics, and has been described as expressing "the basic relationship between scarcity and choice".

The EU, World Bank, IMF and other world organizations have come out to aid various countries with loans, grants etc to raise fundings in their respective countries, so what areas of the economy or what sectors in the country do you think requires (and will likely get) more attention and what's going to be the opportunity cost.. Of course with less money, the more there is a need for a scale of preference, you can use your country, major world powers or developed/underdeveloped as a method of categorization; What sectors will likely be top and bottom (opportunity cost) In their scale of preference to propel the economy out of recession.