1. I do not treat on-chain scaling (increasing maximum block size) as danger.
2. I don't exaggerate it since i never said it's major or serious concern. I only mentioned it as one of concern which people usually don't pay attention.
EG YOU said.. developing countries have HIGHER BUILD COSTS usually people interested in technology already have a pc.. its not like they need to "build" a high spec gaming machine.. standard pc is fine please stop using silly outdated scripts pretending that africa/india has dial-up internet or dont have pc access... fact is they have fibre/5g internet that is better then most 1st world countries i know media show africa as the mud-hut scenes of people walking 10 miles for water... but those people dont even want to use youtube if you actually look at Ethiopia in 2023 you will see cities. .. did you know for people that want to daily transact on bitcoin would need to pay $2 a day(1-2tx a day) meaning $730 a year yet they can get a desktop pc for under $400 that lasts 4 years = under $100 a year if your concern was costs.. you would PAY ATTENTION that its the fee war that ends up costing a bitcoiner the most if there were more transactions allowed per block each user pays less in fees. mos african/indian people i speak to are concerned and annoyed by the fee's and lack of transaction count. not the price of their desktop computer |
|
|
|
franky actually gave a better argument for choosing $480K lottery upfront. No burdensome money management needed when you can just put it in a savings account that yields 7% annually. You can withdraw the monthly interest for your basic necessities and side investments. When you put that into numbers then it's $480K * 7% = $33,600/year or $2,800 per month. I bet that would be enough passive income for a lot of people.
Which bank gives even 7% annual interest? I know that interest rates in recent years have been close to 1% or even less and that keeping money in the bank just to earn something from the interest did not make any sense. I still think that 20 BTC is a great offer at this point, because I have no doubt that it is the fastest option to double that $480k, and probably more than that. banks? .. you'd just leave $480k in a normal mainstreet bank account..? dannnnggg.. no, the 7% is fair interest in an investment portfolio account and yes 20btc is best option. but as stated in my posts its too obvious people would pick that. so for those that do. give me reasons for a second option i have read some good reasoning and many bad. |
|
|
|
|
what has cosmetics got to do with crypto
seems you just want to grab hold of a trend and hope to ride its fame to make your brand famous.. but the real world does not work that way
imagine you want to sell cosmetics world wide. where majority of consumers are in asia or america.. but you want to price your cosmetics in only the Egyptian pound. that alone wont win you any favours even if hundreds of millions of people are Egyptian
if you want to sell something in crypto. make something crypto associated.. maybe t-shirts with a crypto logo(merch)
if you are going to offer products for crypto. set the crypto price fairly. but then put countries fiat prices at a premium thus making your product look like a luxury and discounted if they use crypto
thu making people look into maybe getting crypto to get your product cheaper.. or making crypto community feel they are getting a default advantage to stick to using crypto rather then converting to fiat to buy with fiat
|
|
|
|
...
There is no financial gain but you can't say there is no direct advantage while running your own node, cause you don't need to rely to 3rd party to validate your transaction. Also when you run your own node the privacy of the address and transaction history seems to be more valuable than few sats.
I don't understand something here. When I use an exchange, such as Coinbase, they do all the work. Or at least get it started. When I use a wallet, such as Trezor, the request is submitted to the Bitcoin network and some number of the Bitcoin nodes validate the transaction. In the response you wrote, I get the hint that I might need to do something more to validate the transaction. Please explain a bit more. when you log into coinbase. you are not logging into any network. you are viewing coinbase website data. which they can remove your access to or manipulate the data or be hacked. yep the balance you see in coinbase is not of soe locked coins with your name on.. the coins you deposited into coinbase get co-mingled with other customers and become coinbases assets in their cold wallet. none of the coins in their cold wallet have your name on it. #not-your-key-not-your-coin by you having coin on a key which only you have the privat/secret/seed to control signing movements of. you control the funds. and then to ensure no one can edit a database/ledger of who has what. having access to the decentralised immutable blockchain means you are sure the data is clean and shows you own the funds running a node removes the middleman. you can inspect the data, analyse the data without concern that someone is telling you lies knowing you can independently see transactions destined to you arrive is more confident then relying on a third party that makes mistakes, gets hacked, cheats, lies, or simply ignores or disavows access |
|
|
|
And with Bitcoin, we know for a fact that the cost of mining a single Bitcoin will go up up up. This means the value rises, but as Frank mentioned, market price is not the value. This is why looking at a speculated value instead of the price is the preferred perspective of hodlers.
There are way too many unknowable variables to define the speculational value at some future or even present time. All we know that Bitcoin is designed to become more scarce and the demand for Bitcoin is still strong, after all these years.
That seems like a projection which sparks confidence.
you got a couple details the wrong way round although mining has many costs depending on location, electric rating and such. these variables are not "value" "value" is the baseline CHEAPEST/MOST EFFICIENT on the planet. its the bottom edge of a window find the most expensive inefficient mining practice and thats the premium, the top edge of a window the PRICE speculates inbetween the edges of the window. .. price speculates in a volatile manner. because the window has reasons why someone in hawaii has different variables than someone slovic/asian areas. but the base line value is a bottom edge no one wants to cross because no one is making profit if they sell for less. its the ultimate supportline sellers wont go below speculation is a buzzword to say random guess. where as prediction is meant as judgement after analysis you trying to say market prediction and value speculation. which is the wrong way round there is more actual numbers and data to analyse and calculate value(bottomline) so value is not speculative value is an amount below the market. value rises at a more stable slower rise compared to the market volatility.
But how do we measure value of bitcoin? I'd say it is very hard because it is decided based on supply and demand but demand is not something we can easily measure.
I'll just say supply and demand. Apart from that I don't have any further idea.
wrong and wrong the market PRICE is lead by supply and demand .. but the VALUE is not the most efficient mining value has fixed details. like a 2 year lifecycle of mining hardware, contracted electric, and obviously a known blockreward amount. so value is not demand/supply driven. its cost vs reward driven lets use dairy farmers and retail stores the dairy farmer has a firm cost of production. the value. the retailer can price milk at anything they like to customers depending on supply or demand. if no one wants milk this week the retailer has to discount the price to get rid of it before the milk curdles if there is high demand for milk but not enough production from the farm. then the retailers supply is low so they raise the price and do first come first serve basis, knowing people will pay extra dont confuse market price with value.. dont compare wholesale with retail and remember value is the underlying cheap side.. premium is the over the top expensive side value is not the market price .. though i occasionally look at market price chart wiggles. i do not get excited by the market price when i am not selling.. (if im not selling then the price is meaningless to me) instead i value my bitcoin at the most efficient method to acquire bitcoin on the planet. as that supportline locks in my wealth/value to a point no one wants to sell below |
|
|
|
2) Issue about propagation is more than bandwidth. For example, longer time to verify block which cause slower propagation to most/all nodes.
^myths of 2017 mantra of treating onchain scaling as a danger why in 2023 are people still spouting debunked scripts from 6+ years ago blocks are upto 4mb. ram is measured in gigabytes.. meaning processing thousands per second. as for internet speed.. relaying thousands of transactions or a whole block is measured in milliseconds with bitcoin being "tor safe" knowing tor is the most slowest annoying internet speeds of the whole world... it means standard ADSL is fine, fibre and 5g which in 2023 is nearly the norm is more then fine if people want to go extremes using tor. expect their node to be slow due to TOR not bitcoin if you want to exaggerate concerns.. then why are you not crying about downloading or sharing MP3 files. or doing VOIP or streaming on twitch |
|
|
|
Market Cap = Current Price x Circulating Supply
Price = Marketcap divided by Circulating supply.
If people buy more bitcoin, the market will increase, which is proportional to the price. Which means as people buy more bitcoin than selling it, the price will increase.
NO! value is not market price the best method is to look at the most cost efficient method of acquiring an asset. for instance if it costs a gold miner $900 to mine. and thats the cheapest on planet, that is the value point for instance if it costs a btc miner $24k to mine. and thats the cheapest on planet, that is the value point value is not price.. think of value as the whole sale cost and the market as the retail price. value is a different number to the market bitcoin price(34k) sits nearish to good value(23k) compared to the ATH premium(70k)(2021 high) 0 23 34 70 |||||||||||||||||||| ^ gold price(2k) sits no where near value(900) compared to the ATH premium(2.2k) 0 900 2 2.2k |||||||||||||||||||| ^ use the cryptos most efficient and least efficient mining cot on the planet to work out value vs premium.. then see where the price sits to see if if the price is in value or premium zone 2023 adjusted view of bitcoin shows there is potential premium window limit of $140k instead of 2021's $70k which puts bitcoin more into the greenzone. however we have not tested the upper limits. so playing it safe bitcoin has potential to reach 70k again meaning a 2x upside atleast. where as gold is near its all time peak meaning not much upside |
|
|
|
to correct the OP
currency is anything used as a medium of exchange
That's not correct! Currency is not ANYTHING used as a medium of exchange, you can use many things as a medium of exchange which I'm sure is obvious around you. You can purchase your shoe and other products and properties with gold or other products and properties, which makes your definition faulty. Currency is rather a LEGAL TENDER (fiat) note and others backed by the central bank of a country. currency is a broad term... then within the term there are different types of currency there are many types of currency. money is the "legal tender" subcategory of currency.. not the other way round bitcoin does have its own community and association that xBTC is worth $yyyyy bitcoin is not the money of US central bank. the US central bank just sees bitcoin as an asset currency bitcoin is OUR money |
|
|
|
|
ok there have been a few responses. so lets dig in
lets take the 2 lottery options (tax free)
do people realise if a doner keeps the $480k nest-egg and just drip feeds out $5k a month. that doner can put that $480k into a specialist account offering 7% savings interest. which means although the receiver gets just $480k after 8 years.. the principle lump has not gone to zero. the doner get to keep $150k
if however the receiver gts $480k lottery upfront and then puts it in a specialist account offering 7% interest. the receiver, if they only withdraw $2.6k a month. will still have $480k in the account at the 8th year. thanks to interest. or if they withdrew $5k a month. they would still have $150k at the 8th year in the account
obviously taking the lump and instantly buying bitcoin wont net you 20btc at todays prices. but you may be lucky if you dont touch the lump sum and wait for a small chance of a bitcoin price crash below $24k to buy more then 20btc..
and obviously DCA'ing the interest wont net you much btc per year
..
as for bitcoin yes 20btc at todays prices is a auto-win of an extra $200k ($680k instant sell today) but also looking at bitcoin historic prices. bitcoin is still at a low compared to history of ATH. meaning there is still upside into hoarding and waiting for a multiple
..
as for business. although the business is valued to $480k, there is no guarantee the business will receive $480k in pure profit in the next X years.
with building leases, employee salaries, product costs. its not a simple profit creating system of guaranteed success
those who suggested taking a business and then using profits to DCA bitcoin. will not net you 20btc due to how long you are DCAing and the bitcoin price increasing meaning even if you got $200k post-tax profit each year at ~$33,333 btc. you only get 6btc this year. and next year get less than 6btc, and following year less again.. so never achieving 20btc.
..
as for housing
with all the legal costs of transfer and taxes of gains. and also then land/stat tax on the property. and repairs and maintenance. you better hope that the neighbourhoods market of 'comps' grows to allow you to in the future sell for a profit to cover the ongoing costs initially being paid
..
as for gold. gold is at its ALL HISTORY ATH meaning there is more scope/chance of a drop from peak. rather than multiply higher/further
and i also gave some upside wiggle room by saying 1800 buy price months ago. meaning the instant you take gold 266 at $2k would get you $532k if sold instantly. however still not as good as bitcoin which is a instant $680k sell win. but if hoarded has more change of multiplying up even higher/further
|
|
|
|
I've read multiple times from lawyers in the crypto space that these clauses are just for regulatory reasons — pretty much some sort of "catch all" clause to protect them from whatever happens in the future; knowing how uncertain a lot of things are.
yep, agreed but it is still funny to see people take a snippet of one clause out of its context to blow up some nonsense story, without putting it into the context of the very next clause which satisfies the details of the first clause |
|
|
|
|
to correct the OP
currency is anything used as a medium of exchange
MONEY is a specific currency used by a community/nation and ratified as the official currency of that society.. money in history has been controlled by the rulers of that society and distributed/taxed and accounted by those rulers(legal tender)
much like europeans claim euro as their money, much like americans claim dollar as their money
we in the bitcoin community/society deem bitcoin as OUR money with a different method of distribution and control..
but europeans do not claim dollars as europeans money. but still recognise dollar as a medium of exchange foreign currency vs euro
|
|
|
|
- Do you think this can be a secret operation by the us government with Blackrock to take control over the network or is this just nothing more than speculative thinking?
Take off your tinfoil hat buddy, there mustn't be a conspiracy theory in these things as people always try to make out. Why would Blackrock want to try to take over a decentralized project, how do you even take control of a network that does not have a single point of failure. Take note that no matter the influence you have over BTC businesses like exchanges and other BTC tools like mining, you can't control the network in itself, that is why it has no single point of failure. Blackrock are here to make money and not to spoil their name with negative news or to get involved in a 'secret operation'. dont be so sure USER NODES cannot veto a fork. they are limp nodes that just accept anydata as "isvalid" if they dont understand a change. the whole DCG sponsoring the core devs and the NYA clan of economic nodes did cause an UNNATURAL 100% consensus vote without needing user nodes so the right fingers on the right puppets can change the protocol. and yes core is a point of failure.. its literally in their descriptor of their role. they are the reference client. and any other node brand that tries to change the main protocol rules has faced REKT campaigns being treated as the enemy and not a proposal option for network upgrades there is a central point of failure. which is the core devs. which is why we should review, scrutinise and critique their code to ensure they do not abuse their power, and also keep an eye on their sponsors to see who is influencing code changes |
|
|
|
the very evidence that the SEC gave rejection response SOLO to grayscale alone and not a multi ETF rejection on same day as grayscale is proof they look at each applicant differently and respond on different dates/deadlines
My rationale are: - SEC has got a beating in court against Grayscale, that was rejected for “inconsistent and capricious reasons”. The SEC was respectful of this sentence, as they didn’t appeal (and didn’t use the “fake news” pump to their advantage). This made the SEC realise they had to move on with their “passive aggressive” strategy.
- SEC is actively working with major issuers to fine tune their filing. We saw many filing update from many issuers over the past weeks. This make me think all the filings are approaching their final state
- SEC realise that there is a huge “first movers advantage” in the ETF industry. Authorising only a few ETF, means picking a winner. After months of filing negotiations this could lead to so many causes for so much amount of money the SEC could be destroyed in court.
For all these reasons I guess all the ETF will be approved in the immediate vicinity of the final deadline in January. SEC has never responded to all applicants with progress at the same time SEC has never responded to all applicants with adjustment requirements at the same time SEC has always let the time run out before responding to applicants individually to that applicants own deadline even the decision not to appeal was not a mid week announcement. the SEC let the timer run out the SEC has never shown any reason to respond early before deadlines nor shown multi response to all applications at the same time the ETF applicants that did not file first know they wont get responses first/equally... their only HOPE to skip the queue is by having a better application that ticks all the SEC requirement boxes avoiding any back and forth communication/adjustments. to fast track one before the other by just being the best candidate.. but thats a hope.. SEC still shows they wait til deadline day even if they know they will reject one |
|
|
|
however if they all applied on the same date and had a deadline response of the same date. then you might have atleast a foot in the door point where some companies can sue if they are rejected(for dodgy/absent reason) even if their offering sounds the same as the successful applicant
Absolutely not. Each application has different submission date and different deadline, and usually the SEC took all the available time in the deadline before procrastinating. But this is not the norm, it is not a first in, first out process, it’s a parallel process for various filings (Gary recently stated they are looking at 8/10 of them) that ends when the paperwork is ready, even before the deadline. Every decision at the SEC is taken when they are ready, before the deadline. This is how it works on every other product. everything you have said does NOT show that the SEC will make a multi-acceptance decision on the same day before deadlines where are your logical responses of indepth thought and proof that there will be a multiple acceptance day.. so far in your many posts you have not shown any reason or rationale or evidence that multiple ETF will get accepted on same day before deadlines, you have only shown your hopes (dont get me wrong, i share your hopes.. but rationally and logically, expectations differ from hopes) the very evidence that the SEC waited until the very last minute to give rejection response SOLO to grayscale alone, shows the sec dont rush to respond before deadlines, nor give multiple applicant responses at same time real life examples show the situation of grayscale is not a multi ETF accept/rejection on same day.. emphasis: grayscale is proof they look at each applicant differently and respond on different dates/deadlines in short and double emphasis: they did not give all applicants a response when they gave grayscale bad news this year |
|
|
|
nope. each application has different review/deadline dates..
<...<
i believe there would be a first mover advantage. followed by other applicants adjusting/editing their applications to be templates of the blackrock application to then "fast track" their acceptances
I respectfully disagree with this one. Once again, for the exact reason you just stated, the first-mover advantage is so relevant that anyone excluded from such an advantage will sue the SEC so quickly and for so much money that they will obliterate it in any court. I'm sorry, but I can't imagine Gary letting the agency go through this yet another time only to lose another time (embarrassing his sponsors in DC). each application has different submission dates and deadline dates.. so you cannot assume that companies will sue the SEC simply for choosing one first. applicants know they wont all get an answer at the same date normally.. its a queuing system of first in first out. and no, first in does not default to first success. however IF they all applied on the same date and had a deadline response of the same date. then you might have atleast a foot in the door point where some applicants can sue if they are rejected(for dodgy/absent sec reason) even if their offering sounds the same as the successful applicant but it still requires the SEC to give dodgy/absent reason to reject others with same deadline, same offering. however if the SEC gives good reason to reject majority or each one didnt have same offerings, meaning they missed certain sec demands/requirements. SEC can reject them and it sucks to be the loser. the loser just need to take the advice tweak the application and submit again |
|
|
|
i find it funny how people take one snippet but dont then read the next paragraph all those institutions say they will base the choice on which fork wins the brand name of bitcoin based on: the core devs maintaining it and economic nodes follow it.. in short they are advocating that core devs and "NYA" economic nodes are the sole authority of bitcoin law. and these sponsors of ETF will follow these prime authority (core devs and NYA participants) In the event of a hard fork of the Bitcoin network, the Sponsor will, if permitted by the terms of the Trust Agreement, use its discretion to determine which network should be considered the appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes, and in doing so may adversely affect the value of the Shares.
In the event of a hard fork of the Bitcoin network, the Sponsor will, as permitted by the terms of the Trust Agreement, use its sole discretion to determine, in good faith, which peer-to-peer network, among a group of incompatible forks of the Bitcoin network, is generally accepted as the Bitcoin network and should therefore be considered the appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes. The Sponsor will base its determination on whatever factors it deems relevant, including but not limited to, the Sponsor’s beliefs regarding expectations of the core developers of bitcoin, users, services, businesses, miners and other constituencies, as well as the actual continued acceptance of, mining power on, and community engagement with, the Bitcoin network, or whatever other factors it deems relevant. |
|
|
|
Since I can choose bitcoin as first choice here and get option to take 2nd choice. For this I will choose Bitcoin as my first choice, and I will definitely choose Business as my source of income. Now if I had no source of income, and if I could not choose any other asset after choosing Bitcoin, then I would definitely take business as the first choice. Because investing in Bitcoin requires a long-term hold, business is very important to my daily life. I think to invest in bitcoin, first must have income source. If I had only one option to choose, now I would consider whether I have an income source. Now if I had an income source I would definitely choose Bitcoin.
you only get one win one option, but its about which preference.. i knew many would default choose bitcoin. but for those i wanted to know their thoughts if they chose something else INSTEAD as to the rest. i want to see who can figure out which is the best deal of those options. i already have my own thoughts/calculations of them, but i want to see what others think about the options and their rationale/reasoning for their choice |
|
|
|
|
which would you prefer to receive?
a. $480,000 lottery win as payments spread over 96months(8 years) of $5k a month
b. $480,000 lottery win as payment lumpsum $480k
c. $480,000 of bitcoin at(~$24k/btc buy price recent months allocated to the donator) 20btc
d. $480,000 value house
e. $480,000 value business
f. $480,000 of gold at(~$1.8k/ounce buy price recent months allocated to the donator) 266ounce
pick one and explain your rationale..
if you pick bitcoin as first choice. also pick another and explain rationale of second choice
(im mainly looking to see people opinions/rationale on choices that are made about not option C and compared to C)
|
|
|
|
Employers are making problems but they're the solutions remember that. You've said ppl live on less $5 a day I've seen it where it's $5 or less a month so we know life isn't fair. The balance isn't equal when comparing typical incomes from residents in MENA to Europe or America because they've got more dispoable income & can handle expenses for living. Tax policies don't make poor ppl rich so that's another problem when the system's set to fail the poor.
forget the £$5 amount.. its was just a demonstration ok take ANY COUNTRY take that countries minimum wage per hour and call it 100% hourly now imagine someone told you they are paid contracted 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for 52 weeks now also call that 100% yearly now that someone wants to convince you that he is getting better than 100% contract. by saying out of the 52 weeks he is paid he is only physically working 48 weeks due to paid vacation meaning he calculates it as 108.3% for physical labour time then you counter argue by asking him of the 8 hours a day PAY, how much TIME is he away from home to comply with businesses policy needs of his time and he says 9.5hours at the hourly rate that means he is paid on average, not 100% not 108% but 84.2% now if you calculate it out whilst he pretends in first debate he only physically is working for 8 hours for 5 days for 48 weeks (1920 hours) to get the yearly sum of 100% (2080hours pay representing time including the 4 weeks vacation). the guy does not realise he is for them 48 weeks actually in attendance at work for 2280 hours which means the sum of 8*5*52 yearly pay is 2080 but his physical presence of 9.5*5*48 is 2280 so he is working an extra 200 hours without pay per year even while taking a vacation that is more then one months labour unpaid. even though he thinks he is getting paid more then minimum wage. he is getting less than minimum wage .. people on minimum wage no matter the country, no matter the denomination or amount of currency. need to realise how much these early starts, late ends and unpaid breaks that are restricted soon add up and how much lost income it equates to. then not imagine it as a insignificant 15mins here 15 mins there, not worth arguing over.. but instead realise its 200 hours the boss has taken from you per year |
|
|
|
imagining being told your life was only worth £$10 an hour where they will compensate you for taking time out of your life to do things for them, under their policy.. but then not even getting £$10 an hour for your actual time spent out of your life
so folks. the gist is.. if a business requires you to be away from home and performing activities that benefit them from 8:45-6:15 make sure they pay you for all of that time ESPECIALLY if its minimum wage
This isn't another presentation to tell ppl they've got to buy Bitcoin for their retirements. Working the old way isn't going the benefit we've got to think ahead for when we're older because we can't rely on other to help. i never said anything about any retirement nor bitcoin nor investing this topic is about peoples moral/labour worth at the time of getting income.. yes people need to plan for the future to secure themselves.. but if thy are being abused at even the most basic income at the start. then they cant build from that abuse to even be able to consider securing themselves later this is where topics then begin about not even being able to afford $£5 a day (30minutes extra pay) to DCA because they live paycheque to paycheque where all of their income is gone before the month even ends.. securing your income fairly.. even at the bottom pay limit to ensure you are getting paid for even the most basic demands of the business. is a starting point.. too many people think they should "put-up and shut up" and do nothing because they feel even a min wage job that keeps them poor is a benefit. they try too hard to justify being grateful for remaining poor and being used.. but if they cannot even survive on that income and are not even ever going to have anything spare to go towards their future.. they are not helping themselves now or in the future (so lets talk about future) imagine putting just that 30min extra time £$5 each day. 5 days a week 4 weeks a month (£$100) into bitcoin. lets go with starting week of end of october 2019 -october 2020.. just one year DCA average btc price that year £$9500 so £$100 a month = 0.01052632, over a year thats 0.12631584 they do nothing. then when 2021 ATH, they dont cash out at exact peak. but at a rational $60k/btc they take out £$7578.95 so DCA for a year. then leave it alone for a further 9 months. that $£1,200 turns into £$7.5k and thats just using the 30minute extra no one cares to quantify each day... now imagine in 2022 taking that £$7.5k and re investing at £$20k/btc at todays £$34k/btc. that $£7.5k is actually £$12.8k if people can consider how that neglected £$5 a day of 30minutes time they ignore asking for.. they should realise how much they are harming their future by not getting full benefit of their time.. .. ok another way to think of it..(the topic) businesses get away with it because employees dont see it. dont want to think about it or dont think its worth the debate asking for it. imagine this. for the 48 weeks of being present at work. thats £$ a day for 48 weeks is over a year of labour.. $£1200.. now imagine you work each day and got paid every minute of the time you devote to the business.. and at the end of the year. your boss came up to you and told you that he wants you to hand him £$1200 in one lump sum right away no questions asked would you be so lax in debating. or would you question how he can make such a demand of you your boss wants to steal £$1200 from you per year.. which if you worked for him 2019-2020 could actually be a future theft of $£12k he has made you unable to have accumulated is it now worth your time to consider asking to be paid fairly |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
