If it is such a good system, how is it that Venezuela is the country in the world that has raised the minimum wage the most and is in ruins?

The only way it is useful to raise the minimum wage is if the country is productive, is rich, and can cushion the bad effect. What happens is the opposite of what you describe, which is what leftists usually defend: instead of stimulating the economy with this increase, what you do is to generate inflation, and in most cases based on debt, a debt that the state will have to repay with interest.

What happens after a year of raising the minimum wage? It has to be raised again because people in real terms are poorer than before the increase a year ago.

In other words, it is a shitty "solution".

The truth is that the nickname anonymouscoward does not inspire much confidence. And apart from the fact that it may be a troll, what usually happens in these cases is that people complain when they have the problem but not always when it is solved they come back to the forum to say that it has been solved. Anyway, it wouldn't be the first time there are delays in bitvest withdrawals, I'll keep an eye on it.

I agree, in general you have to be cautious when sharing financial matters, and regarding Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies even more so. But I wouldn't take it to the extreme either. People who know the neighborhood you live in can get an idea of your annual salary, that's why I think in a given conversation it's ok to share, unlike what the OP thinks. As for Bitcoin it's another thing because you can risk a $5 wrench attack.


But there are things you can't hide. If you live in a house worth $0.5M (which is the average price of houses in that area) and you have a vacation home worth another $0.5M (which at least your friends and acquaintances will know, there is little you can hide. Knowing that, and if they know what you do for a living, people can get an idea of your salary.

Yes, but that's like when people wonder if the price will get to $1M, it will get there, but it will take time. On the specific case of overtaking gold I estimate it will take about 3 cycles.


I find the question too simple to be honest. "Good" or "bad" are words that children use because they are not capable of using more complex expressions. If I have to choose between those two so simple, well obviously it will be good, especially for those of us who have Bitcoin, because the purchasing power will have increased a lot.

Surprise! Hot sun and wet water. What are we going to discover next today? That if you drop something it will fall to the ground?


None. He has to solve the addiction on his own, and it won't be long before he is forced to do so because one's debt capacity is limited, and even more so when one is taking out loans to gamble. Banks identify a problematic pattern quickly and stop lending. So, if he asks you for help in some way, other than economic, such as accompanying him to gamblers anonymous or to a psychologist, lend it to him, but it is something that has to come from him.

Well, these kinds of stories can never be fully believed, and even less so when faced with the reluctance of the OP to sign a message to prove it. But the way he tells it seems sincere, and as long as it is for entertainment to tell his experience it is interesting. If it were like other times that the one who tells the story wants to sell us a supposed infallible system to win in the casino it would be a different story, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

Really? I think it's simpler than that, it's understood when you join a campaign. If we get into specifying everything as it is done in the contracts we will not cover all the possible casuistry even if the OP occupies two pages. Contracts are full of specifications and even then they sometimes end up in court, which is not going to happen here.

In my case I have answered that I prefer to live in the country I live in now, as most of the votes. With that money I would travel to different parts of the world but I would not move. If I had to do it necessarily I do not have a single country in mind but it would have to be a country with an open economy, with low crime rate, with good climate and legal security.

Although I understand what you are saying, and I would agree that we are in a bull run, at least at the beginning, I always remember in these types of threads that a pattern is a human construction, which serves to understand a series of events until what happens is out of sync with the pattern and has to be rethought. I mean that it would not be impossible to go down now to $20K for example, and we would have to rethink what we call a bullish pattern. But yes, I understand that the most likely thing now is that we are in a bull run.

It looks like the protagonist of the story is going to have a lot of problems with gambling, and is going to lose a lot of money. He bets more than he can afford and does not control his emotions, two essential ingredients for a disastrous recipe.


That's another one, surely having such good odds he trusted in the improbability of losing his money to bet more, but improbable does not mean impossible, those of us who have been around for a long time know that for sure. Those who go to the casino a lot see improbable events happen every now and then.

That is a false dilemma.


That is simply untrue and what you call an unwritten rule is something you made up. It's much simpler than that:


The signature campaigns operate under a free market regime. I don't know what supposed problem there is here, and I'm telling you that I was expelled from that same campaign for leaving a red tag to a Wasabi worker. You could also have applied that same argument and with more reason in my case. But the thing is as simple as that you are free to go to another campaign whenever you want and the manager can fire you if he sees that you do something that does not favor the company that has hired him to advertise.


This is a bit O/T but Lightlord is at it again.

I don't know if the OP expected us to cheer him for such a stupid decision. To begin with, you have to enjoy life and not obsess about finances, but this decision that affects marriage may have consequences that he seems to me not to have foreseen, such as that from now on his wife's head hurts more often when he feels like having sex.

It is good to have control of finances and improve the economic situation, but there is only one life.

Well, no, that feeling you have is mostly due to a cognitive bias and not to a perception of reality. What I see repeatedly happen at poker tables is the following: a recreational player enters the table and without knowing how to play gets lucky and ends up winning. What does he do then? He thinks he is on a roll and moves up a level. But luck does not last indefinitely, and to win at higher levels you need more luck than at lower levels, so they end up losing what they won and more. This does not have to be at the immediately higher level, because sometimes the streak lasts up to two or three levels above, to end up fleeced soon after.

Yes my experience is quite similar to that of the OP. The first times I played cards was with family when I was little. Then when I became a teenager with friends betting small amounts or whoever paid for a round, but seeing that betting more gave more excitement we ended up raising the bet. In the end, like everyone else, you end up betting in casinos.

Well, on the one hand it seems to have happened what most expected, that Bitcoin spot ETFs have increased demand driving the price up. But this is a double-edged sword that just as it can make it go up it can make it go down. It also pushes Bitcoin even further away from the initial idea of P2P.


That's not going to happen, at least for a significant percentage of spot ETF investors.

Being the only exception if they have no more money than they had in that casino. Normally such barriers do not stop irresponsible gambling. It reminds me of those who win a jackpot, in a moment of lucidity withdraw the money, and after a few hours deposit it again to end up betting it and losing everything. That is why some casinos consciously put impediments and delay withdrawals.

I speak from memory but I would say that I once saw phillip say that he had problems with gambling in the past, probably that's why for him joining a gambling signature campaign is something that's not even on the table for him. And although there are other options, they are limited, although he should not have any problem to be hired. He is the human with the most posts in the forum (the first is ChartBuddy), which is attractive in terms of SEO, and the second most recognized.


Well me recognizing that NotATether is a good forum member and a high quality poster in general I have complained to him a few times that he had not read before replying in some of my threads, and with what you say I am not surprised. If he writes 18 posts in an hour it's because he doesn't analyze much in some of the threads at least.

False. LFC, philipma1957 or JJG as Amphenomenon says are examples of the contrary.


I don't know what you expect to know in an anonymous forum about them. The most you can know is about those who gave the interview but little else, and that was focused on what they think of bitcoin and the forum, not so much on them.

I understand your position but I don't think it makes much difference whether I support the flag now or next week, I just wouldn't want to rush into it. I just learned about it now. I hadn't read your thread before today. So I'm just going to wait a bit and see what other people say also.

It is what it is, they are the rules of the house, and someone very concerned about their privacy who always uses vpns or Tor may not like that rule. But the house is as free to impose the rule as he is to decide whether to play or not. If he decides to play in the casino without respecting the rule, he knows what he risks.