Now, a very common logic, which institution would like to buy btc at $100k or even at million dollars when the seller institution is already taking out big profits in fiat by selling their btc to the buyer Institution? Won't that btc be coming with an impermanent loss if the price dumps later? Do you think there is any point where a stagnancy of liquidity or financial crunch may affect the price of btc so badly that it can reverse down like it did in the 2018 crash?
I think what Saylor says sums it all up. I don't think all companies that buy Bitcoin think exactly the same way, but I'm sure most think very much like him. Bitcoin is the best asset you can buy today, number 1. And as such, you shouldn't sell it. Ever. If you need cash, you can borrow, use to cash flow of the company or sell other assets but never the best asset in the world. Whether you buy it at $100k or $1M, it is the most powerful and scarce asset in the world, so the value will continue to grow. |
|
|
|
This is a forum. Nobody is really required to give any support details. Thinking like you do, simply shows that you don't have the ability to go out and research. Or does it say in the forum rules that we have to give support for the things we say. I mean, can you give us some support for your idea that, "Not giving supporting details, documents, or data to your claim is not the truth. It's just you expressing your own opinion about what is happening?" I mean, if I have $50,000 in the bank, and say so, and don't give any support for that fact... that it's just an opinion? You're about as silly as the wet noodle that you should be whipped with.  As this is a forum we don't need to have done a doctoral thesis on the topics that we opine on but those who say barbarities like you and don't back them up with anything basically, it is pretty clear that you have big mouths. You have no credibility. |
|
|
|
The vaccine isn’t a cure, if you believe reports then it supposedly only makes symptoms less serious. The vaccine does not stop you contracting the virus or spreading it. The viral load is supposedly lessened which makes it less serious to you & other people if you transmit it.
Sorry but I thought so too, and at least that's what was said at first, that we had to continue wearing masks and with other measures because it was not clear if despite the vaccines, the virus was still transmitted, but the studies done later, many of them compiled by @cnut237 show the opposite. I do get tired of posting links to data, papers, meta-analyses, etc... I do get tired of continually having to post facts ... when really anyone with an interest in a topic should be able to seek these things for themselves. But here we are. Yet again. All quotes below are from the link above, which then links out to each specific study and dataset. Moderna tested all participants when they received their second dose and reported in December that fewer asymptomatic infections occurred in the vaccinated group than the placebo group after the first dose. Johnson & Johnson also reported data from nearly 3,000 phase three trial participants who were tested two months after vaccination to see if they had antibodies from a new infection since vaccination. That preliminary data suggested a 74 percent reduction in asymptomatic infection. people vaccinated with one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine had viral loads up to 20 times lower than viral loads in unvaccinated, infected people. Two others, from the Mayo Clinic and the U.K., included more than 85,000 routinely tested healthcare workers who were fully vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The vaccine reduced infection by 85 to 89 percent. More evidence accumulated in March with a slew of studies about the mRNA vaccines. One with 9,109 healthcare workers in Israel found infections cut by 75 percent after two doses of the Pfize-BioNTech vaccine. Another revealed that the viral load fell fourfold in those who received one dose and then developed an infection.
Among more than 39,000 people screened for infection at the Mayo Clinic, patients had a 72 percent lower risk of infection 10 days after the first dose of either mRNA vaccine and 80 percent lower after both doses. The New England Journal of Medicine published research letters showing reduced infections in fully vaccinated healthcare workers at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, the Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center in Jerusalem, and the University of California in Los Angeles and San Diego. an early April CDC study of 3,950 healthcare workers who were tested weekly for three months after receiving both doses of either mRNA vaccine. Full vaccination reduced infection—regardless of symptoms—by 90 percent, and a single dose reduced infection by 80 percent.
the evidence shows that full vaccination with either mRNA vaccine cuts risk of infection by at least half after one dose, and by 75 to 90 percent two weeks after the second dose. Though less research is available on the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, the trial data suggest an infection reduction of more than 70 percent is likely. With the vaccines preventing this much infection, they’re also stopping the majority of vaccinated people from passing along the virus. ... but feel free to counter all of this by either a) not supplying any supporting evidence for your claims, or b) linking to some random nut-job on youtube who is ranting from his basement. If you follow that thread you'll see that I also quote the BMJ: |
|
|
|
|
While it is true that institutional investors may take advantage of moments like the recent downturn to buy, I don't think they will wait to buy at the low point. If they have done their research, they know that Bitcoin is going to be much higher in a few years, and then the important thing is to buy, regardless of a few hundred dollars difference in the purchase price.
|
|
|
|
Thank you Brainboss, is there any update on the payments thought? Because they weren't made last week either.
Thanks.
Last time, Lightlord paid at 6 weeks, this is just the sixth week, so it is likely to pay this week, I would say. I don't know if Brainboss will know. The delay includes bonuses, so we can't complain too much. |
|
|
|
|
For me it is the opposite of how the OP puts it. Those who believe we are in a bear market are the ones who have to provide arguments to prove it, the burden of proof is on them, not the other way around. As @pooya87 says the bull market is not over and as @CryptopreneurBrainboss says those who think this is the start of a bear market are in for a disappointment. What happens is that there are people who get discouraged easily and other people who have been in Bitcoin for a short time or do not remember what has happened in past cycles.
|
|
|
|
The point is that if you present baseless conclusions like that, it's difficult to differentiate you from certain other posters.
It will be difficult to differentiate myself from other posters in terms of claims perhaps. But I think I clearly differ from them in that if I am presented with evidence that contradicts my previous beliefs, backed up in a bunch of high quality links, I am able to recognize my mistake and change my mind instead of making up that there is a conspiracy of mainstream scientists with some aliens to falsify the data, and the like. -snip
Thanks for the research, I owe you a merit. Incidentally, the BMJ at the time questioned whether vaccines were effective in preventing transmission (it said that trials had not demonstrated this): Will covid-19 vaccines save lives? Current trials aren’t designed to tell usThis was an article I cited at the time. But I have seen that later the BMJ has published articles that do talk about transmission reduction such as this one: Covid-19: Infections fell by 65% after first dose of AstraZeneca or Pfizer vaccine, data show.So, yes, I am increasingly convinced that you are right. |
|
|
|
Covid vaccines don't stop infection or transmission
Data to support this assertion? AFAIK preliminary studies do show reduced transmission (I've linked to this previously). Reduced transmission doesn't mean stopped transmission. What I am saying is not that unusual and is the argument that has been seen everywhere since vaccines were developed, saying that this is why we would still have to wear masks and follow up with other preventive measures. I was not aware of all those links you posted, and I am open to the fact that the data may change my mind. In fact, I see that they speak of significantly high reduction percentages.. But how do you explain why Chile has more than half of its population vaccinated and the cases do not stop growing? Because what is happening there seems to contradict what the studies you link say. You've said you're not an anti-vaxxer... so you would concede that vaccines work in general... except for some reason in this case, where you are making a baseless, data-free claim that the Covid vaccines don't work? Polio, Smallpox, Measles, Mumps, etc all work? Covid, though, doesn't - despite overwhelming evidence of dropping case numbers in highly vaccinated nations?
Or is the claim that the Polio vaccine has eliminated Polio, whereas the Covid vaccine merely diminishes Covid and doesn't eradicate it entirely? Which would be a bad faith argument, akin to the anti-mask anti-lockdown argument of something being pointless unless it is 100% effective, a masks-only-give-you-90%-protection-so-are-therefore-worthless kind of thing.
Yes, vaccines work in general. I was vaccinated when I was little and I didn't get a mutation in my arm or anything like that. It's all a matter of percentages, @Cnut237, if vaccines over time are shown to reduce transmission by 95%, I will concede that they can eradicate the virus or we can talk about a significant reduction. If it were 50% I understand that we could not talk about eradication. |
|
|
|
As long as people continue to mask and lockdown, Covid will stay around much longer. The fastest way to get rid of Covid is to take one of the Covid vaccines. You will die sooner that way,
Ok, give us a deadline. Be more precise. What percentage of those vaccinated will die and how long will it take on average from the time they are vaccinated? This way, if you are right we can acknowledge it and if you are not right, we will tell you that you have a big mouth. |
|
|
|
|
Apart from what @mk4 have told you, I would recommend you to just keep buying, no matter the swings in price. It is a good strategy to buy when the price falls, but if you have little Bitcoin, as it seems, it is better to buy regularly, regardless of price swings, until you have an amount where you can consider stopping buying. Don't try to time the market, if you believe that Bitcoin has a great future, and that price will reach $1M and more, just keep buying.
|
|
|
|
|
As for how long the virus as such can last, it can stay with us forever.
What I guess is more interesting is when we will be able to go back to doing the life we did before without restrictions. Here I want to be optimistic and think that the restrictions may not last longer than a couple more years. In the previous big epidemics, when there were no vaccines or medicines as there are today, in about 3-4 years they went back to normal, although in those times it was because many people died and the rest developed herd immunity, but come on, I do not think this will last 10 more years, and I hope I am not wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
The title is misleading because he only wants to double it on capital gains in excess of $1 million a year. So, he doesn't want to double our taxes as it was stated. Very few people in this forum will have those gains. What happens is that all this rhetoric against the rich always ends up the same. First a tax like this is announced, and when it doesn't work (because the rich go elsewhere, or don't sell and take loans using the asset as collateral, etc.) in the end they end up raising taxes on everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
Instead of laughing, what I do is yawn. Nothing new in the history of Bitcoin. It comes down a bit, some people think the world is ending, weak hands sell and some of us take the opportunity to yawn (or laugh) and continue to accumulate. In any case, these are entertaining times.
|
|
|
|
|
OP is quite a troll. What surprises me is to see people with seniority in the forum getting pessimistic as well. It's already been said: if you're going long term, just HODL. I don't think this is a bear market, certainly not because the OP says so. It's true that technically it doesn't look as bullish as it did until recently, but whatever. It can change at any time.
|
|
|
|
If you've been for a long time in this BTC business you already know this BTC price drop means nothing, nada.
I've experienced dozens of such drops and haven't sold a satoshi since 2013. Don't let the whales get your valuable BTC.
In other words, HODL, because every time after the rain comes the sunshine. You will be rewarded in the end my friend. But only the strong hands will remain.
I couldn't agree more. Nothing to see here, back to $60,000 before August. Weak hands don’t deserve the great riches coming in Q4 2021.
That's quite pessimistic in my view. I wouldn't be suprised if we break another Ath in may. People don't remember but in 2016 there were also some drawbacks and people panicked before the final pump. |
|
|
|
|
I don't know where the OP got the idea from, but, if normally Bitcoin is not very good for day to day transactions (I'm not taking LN into account here), at this moment even less so because of the fees. It is still the best store of value and for that the fees do not matter so much.
|
|
|
|
JP Morgan has also confirmed that if it cannot return to 60k soon, Bitcoin will be in danger of breaking down.
JP Morgan are morons who have no credibility in their claims about Bitcoin and when it comes to price speculation they confirm nothing. If anything they say what they think according to their models, or, better yet, what suits them. PANIC AT THE DISCO President Joe Biden will roll out a plan to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans, including the largest-ever increase in levies on investment gains, to fund about $1 trillion in childcare, universal pre-kindergarten education and paid leave for workers, sources familiar with the proposal said. Big sell off because of this news which provides the rest of us who are looking long term to BUY cheaper Bitcoin - Dollar Cost Averaging Yes, it affected the stock market as well. I am not worried about it. |
|
|
|
This is wishful thinking.
This. Also, I think these types of posts are typical of someone who has little Bitcoin. So, he likes to think more about how wonderful the future will be if he keeps holding than the present. Someone on the other hand who is a millionaire today thanks to having been holding for many years, may think about the great future that still remains for Bitcoin but I think he enjoys more the present moment and what is happening now. The institutional adoption is to celebrate it and what happens with the authorities in 20 years we will see, those of us who will still hopefully be alive by then. |
|
|
|
Will they keep the Bitcoin or will they use a third party to process the payments and get the dollar in return?
To me that's not as important as the fact that Bitcoin is becoming more standardized every day. If the average Joe gets used to seeing "Bitcoin accepted here" in both physical and online stores, mass adoption will be just a step away. Another thing is that I don't think it will be used much for day-to-day payments as long as we continue to have expectations of price increases like the current ones. |
|
|
|
Gold and Bitcoin are different assets with different purposes. I don't think we should compare them.
You can compare any two things as comparing is just finding similarities and differences and they are not so different. Bitcoin is gold 2.0, it's like what email is to mail. -snip
I think that's too long and too imaginary to justify that Bitcoin is better than gold. Some reasoning is good, nevertheless. Bitcoin is simply much easier to store and transfer, and much more difficult to confiscate, among other reasons. There is a long debate that Saylor and Frank Giustra had recently, quite interesting. I've seen a snippet and for me Saylor is winning but maybe I'm biased: Bitcoin vs Gold - The Great Debate with Michael Saylor and Frank Giustra (Stansberry Research) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
