Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[bkbirge]

If you got rid of Antifa the ProudBoys and other violent alt-right groups would still be here. Not the other way around. Antifa is a response to the alt-right. If you think they are just 2 equal sides to the same coin you have not been paying attention.

"Over the past decade, extremists of every stripe have killed 372 Americans. 74 percent of those killings were committed by right wing extremists. Only 2 percent of those deaths were at the hands of left wing extremists." (and note none of those deaths have been by Antifa)

https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/08/17/are-antifa-and-the-alt-right-equally-violent/

[1714140534]

1714140534

[1714140534]

1714140534

[1714140534]

1714140534

[Negotiation]

I don't have girlfriend, only Bitcoin.

Same to you love Bitcoin.

[lightfoot]

Extremist on both sides, don't kid yourself. Antifa is just as bad.

"Antifa" is the ultimate straw-man.

Perfect tool for the "both sides" argument, which leads people to do nothing while thinking they are doing...

something.

[somac.]

For examples, why do you think the Nazis did what they did. Because they were evil? or because they thought they were doing the right thing in the interests of their country and people.

Because there was a "good speaker" who together with his "Marketing team" managed to hit the right buttons and his message(s) met the ears of the sheeps who where open to follow that ideas. In the end those who stand up against that, got hunted down (+fear for not following) and everybody got a allegiance with what-ever they could follow in hords.

That was well thought by the initiatiors and it´s still the same for many groups, that "scheme" is working. "Find the right words and offer a hand to those who have nothing else in life to follow/feel attached to etc."

That's more of the how. Listen to their writings, they honestly thought they were there to save the German race and that if they didn't it would be the end of the Germanic people. Their methods (of course evil) are irrelevant, they believed they were doing what was necessary and what was right.

My point is why did they feel they needed to save their country and people? The Bolsheviks were the same.

Groups like these are created by the government ignoring the plight of their people and instead focusing on enriching themselves by serving the rich and powerful. The war between labor and capital never ceases.

[sheenshane]

Extremist on both sides, don't kid yourself. Antifa is just as bad.

"Antifa" is the ultimate straw-man.

Perfect tool for the "both sides" argument, which leads people to do nothing while thinking they are doing...

something.

Is this what "antifa" do?


stolen in google

[nutildah]

^^^
nothing controversial about that at all. lol

[Scheede]

For examples, why do you think the Nazis did what they did. Because they were evil? or because they thought they were doing the right thing in the interests of their country and people.

Because there was a "good speaker" who together with his "Marketing team" managed to hit the right buttons and his message(s) met the ears of the sheeps who where open to follow that ideas. In the end those who stand up against that, got hunted down (+fear for not following) and everybody got a allegiance with what-ever they could follow in hords.

That was well thought by the initiatiors and it´s still the same for many groups, that "scheme" is working. "Find the right words and offer a hand to those who have nothing else in life to follow/feel attached to etc."

That's more of the how. Listen to their writings, they honestly thought they were there to save the German race and that if they didn't it would be the end of the Germanic people. Their methods (of course evil) are irrelevant, they believed they were doing what was necessary and what was right.

My point is why did they feel they needed to save their country and people? The Bolsheviks were the same.

Groups like these are created by the government ignoring the plight of their people and instead focusing on enriching themselves by serving the rich and powerful. The war between labor and capital never ceases.

Well, I´d guess: ego-driven craving for power by psychopats

[Negotiation]

Is this what "antifa" do?


stolen in google

Many of the worst conditions in the world are now losing the freedom to speak freely, many problems are being created in the world politically and that is why social unrest is being created. Big guys use their hair to stay in power illegally The picture is just one example of that.

[jbreher]

Q: What changes enacted since then to stave off the possibility of further such events have actually made progress towards that objective?

2. There are a ton of changes that have been made to the financial system since, such as the amount of margin banks are required to hold and reducing lending against toxic instruments. That lending now tends to come from shadow banking institutions and hedge funds.

The changes enacted were ostensibly to reduce the prevalence of 'too big to fail' institutions, to reduce the prevalence of exotic derivatives, and to reduce the prevalence of debt held by giant institutions collateralizing further debt held by giant institutions. Those were the stated objectives that would serve the goal of reducing systemic risk to the financial system. How are those objectives holding up?

Whether pushing the toxic crap out to hedge funds helps the stability of global financial system remains to be seen. Either way you can be assured the world’s governments would just bail the banks out again.  The precedent has already been set.

Immediately before the GFC, the FED had plenty of dry powder (such as a 5% federal funds rate as but one example) to deal with such a crisis. Today?

In short, there is no particular reason to think the next financial crisis will tip over the apple cart.

The only out they have, should it hit today, is to inflate the dollar to levels that all but ensure a loss of trust, likely ending in a Venezuelan-style death spiral. Well, either that, or let the owners of the banks take the hit (albeit with associated collateral damage). And we know that's not gonna be the route they take.

[jbreher]

If any consolation I am not really bullish for another 1.5 months. We need to wait for October.

"Wake me up when September ends"
- B J Armstrong

[jbreher]

The current bond inversion is sufficiently foreseen that this recession will be avoided.

The current bond inversion 'tis but a sideshow. Or more properly a side effect.

[aesma]

It depends what country you're talking about. A recession anytime soon is off the table for the US, but the rest of the world is in trouble.

But the effects would not be the same either. The US stock market is crazy high, so a recession has to krach it. I'm in Europe, and the stock market has been flat for years, and growth low. So going from 1/1.5% growth to -0.5/-1%, while a recession, will not be a big shock. Personally I will have no fears for my job for example, and continue to get raises even. My country isn't even forecasting a recession yet.

[jbreher]

expect large US infrastructure spends in the future. This would be enough for the US to avoid recession alone.

The US gubmint can financialize themselves any amount of currency. The problem is that those in charge confuse financializing currency with marshaling wealth. Funny thing about wealth is that it is tangible, and cannot be zapped into existence by an entry into a spreadsheet.

[aesma]

The US may not fall into recession, but a lot of the world will. US bond inversion is most likely due to the rest of the world's money printing. There is talk of the US playing around with 50 and 100 year bonds. If so, and maybe regardless, expect large US infrastructure spends in the future. This would be enough for the US to avoid recession alone. Time will tell.

With that, I disagree. First of all the US is already propping up its economy with completely crazy deficits, which is not the case elsewhere.

But more importantly, plenty of its growth comes from multinational companies, in the tech sector notably, that will get hurt with a global recession, and local infrastructure spending will not help.

[aesma]

expect large US infrastructure spends in the future. This would be enough for the US to avoid recession alone.

The US gubmint can financialize themselves any amount of currency. The problem is that those in charge confuse financializing currency with marshaling wealth. Funny thing about wealth is that it is tangible, and cannot be zapped into existence by an entry into a spreadsheet.

Well infrastructure is wealth, if of course it's targeted, not airports in the middle of deserts like sometimes happens (in Spain famously). The US should also spend a lot on education to raise the level of its citizens.

I'm very doubtful any of that will happen though, as indeed people in charge (companies propping up US politicians) don't care about the long term.

[vroom]

It depends what country you're talking about. A recession anytime soon is off the table for the US, but the rest of the world is in trouble.

But the effects would not be the same either. The US stock market is crazy high, so a recession has to krach it. I'm in Europe, and the stock market has been flat for years, and growth low. So going from 1/1.5% growth to -0.5/-1%, while a recession, will not be a big shock. Personally I will have no fears for my job for example, and continue to get raises even. My country isn't even forecasting a recession yet.

countries are reluctant to announce a possible recession publicly. if they do, investments decline and a recession becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

[Phil_S]

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/invest-1-000-bitcoin-instead-110127803.html

Should you invest £1,000 in Bitcoin instead of relying on the State Pension?

Despite the City’s doubts, Bitcoin now looks as if it’s here to stay and the crypto asset seems to have taken on a new role in financial markets.
...

These developments seem to suggest many investors believe Bitcoin offers the same kind of safe haven qualities as gold.

The two assets do have some things in common. Neither is controlled by a government or central bank and there will only ever be a limited amount of gold and Bitcoins in the world. Further, gold can be a great store of value, and you can use it to buy or sell other assets all over the world. The same goes for Bitcoin.

[jojo69]

I have a two-day trip with the Jeep, hard offroad, they are 2500 meters high mountains, there are bears, we know what bears do with bulls.

If I don't return in 3 days...

Bye guys.

merit for checking out like a responsible WO

(also you're not legendary yet so I'm more inclined to hand them out)

Bury your goddamned poop yo!

[El duderino_]

I have a two-day trip with the Jeep, hard offroad, they are 2500 meters high mountains, there are bears, we know what bears do with bulls.

If I don't return in 3 days...

Bye guys.

Haha, have fun and be careful

[jbreher]

expect large US infrastructure spends in the future. This would be enough for the US to avoid recession alone.

The US gubmint can financialize themselves any amount of currency. The problem is that those in charge confuse financializing currency with marshaling wealth. Funny thing about wealth is that it is tangible, and cannot be zapped into existence by an entry into a spreadsheet.

Well infrastructure is wealth

Building of infrastructure requires wealth. Once the financialization party is over, the building stops.