I think you're thinking of those ration bars that are made of sugar and flour. The ration bars are only for extreme circumstances of life and death for short timeframes. There are other food kits that are actual food, which are a more longer term solution. Half of what I was buying was MRE (meals ready to eat) that military troops eat for months while on deployment. I used to love them.

I think Bitcoin will be safe again when:
1. The average holder is not sitting on a massive profit.
2. The average holder's net worth is less than 25% Bitcoin.

'average holder' is weighted by amount of bitcoins held.

How many of the recently announced bank account closures have actually been removed from the exchanges' deposit options?

I think your 1 million people wallets figure is irrelevant in that we still have this figure in which 90% of bitcoins are held by 500 or so people.

Non-pershable food is a great investment in any circumstance. It doesn't have to be a doomsday - it could just be a hurricane, a flood, or something like that. You could even take it camping. It will probably rise in value as a commodity. You could sell it. In a worst case scenario, if you never have the need to use it and can't sell it, you could still... eat it and save money over eating out.

First of all the 3D MACD is going on and off at bitstamp and at Huobi it is there but it is unconfirmed. You need to see two green bars for it to be confirmed.  Second, the 3D MACD cross is NOT the holy grail of bitcoin. If you look at 2011, the 3D MACD crossed up at $4 only to proceed to crash a second time to $1.9. You then had another chance to buy at $4 2 months later, this time using the 1W MACD as an indicator.

   

I saw this same glitch with the same exact amount of coins (~60K) on Bitstamp right before we broke out from $190 and broke ATH.

Banking is more relevant in times during heavy bull market rallies when there is actually fresh fiat pouring into the market every day,  and less relevant during bear markets and sideways markets when coins are just switching hands between different traders.

I think from a trader's perspective, when you get to the point where you have to speculate about something gaining mass adoption and reaching its final form, then it's time to find something else to speculate on which is at an earlier stage and will have an easier time increasing.

Though I don't think we're at that point yet.  Sparking the next rally could be simple as opening some exchanges in New York.

This isn't an ethics discussion. This is about the strength of the price. If the price is supported by hoarding, that means it's illiquid and fragile, only taking a small amount of coins to be dumped to break the mirage of the hoarded price. If the price is supported by buying, on the other hand, many more coins can be bought and sold at once without effecting the price and the decisions of a single large holder will not have an effect.

Which one of these looks like a stronger market to you?



The liquid market is much more stable, much more functionally useful, and has a much larger accessible market cap than the hoarded market. The hoarded market is a ticking bomb that could go off at any time based on the decisions of an individual.

The point is that using an average price of the long term past is useless to predict the long term future and it could end up being anything with any different trendline. I could have draw dozens of other potential charts but I am not that bearish.

What is the "trendline"? An observation of an averaging of the past? What good is that? It's another one of these lagging indicators.

For example, let's pretend we are in 2011, right before the collapse portion of the bear market began, and we were trying to convince people that this was just another brief retracement.  We could conduct an averaging of the past, and claim that the trendline is this:



We could have projected being at $20,000 by 2013. But that didn't happen, and a bear market happened instead. After the bear market and the recoveries, the slope of the 'trendline' adjusted, and if you fast forward to today, now you have the current 'trendline' you posted. Now let's say another bear market collapse happens, and we fast forward again to the future in 2016. The 'trendline' slope could have again adjusted, and look something like this:

It would be pretty bullish if the price were to return to a point where it was supported by buying rather than by hoarding.

get this wall street crap out of here

I think people have an inflated view of bitcoin's fundamentals. Just because it theoretically COULD serve as mainstream currency (if it doesn't break) doesn't mean that it WILL.

How about you ask yourself "why did it go up 60%" in the first place?

There were once days when the order books were helpful. They looked like this: