...and I am so “foolish”, I lack
faith that the previous cycle top can never, ever be revisited—let alone broken. <jay>
</jay>
Yes.. I agree.
You are foolish and/or you have foolish tendencies.
Even in non-inflation-adjusted nominal dollar terms, we are sitting on the previous cycle top
right now after having broken several times below it.
So what? Who cares? It seems that you are attempting to buy into or propagate some kind of a nonsense framework that bitcoin has to do at least "this much" otherwise "emergency conditions" exist. There is no emergency. Yes bitcoin's current spot price is at or below its 2017 top. So fucking what?
If you might not have noticed, for more than a year and a half bitcoin was trading 2x to 3.5x above current prices, which continues to pull up the 100-week moving average (
currently at $36,417), and also pulls up upon the 200-week moving average (
currently at $22,560).
I will agree with you, to the extent that you are proclaiming that BTC prices are low and they are at historically low levels and that there seems to be a lot of continued ongoing price pressure pulls to go lower, but I am not going to agree with you that BTC prices have to go lower or that there is anything broken in the BTC space and./or the various models that are looked at in order to attempt to fairly look at where bitcoin is, how it got here and where we might be going - especially in the long term rather than getting all worked up about the short terms (except appreciating that we continue to be in buy territory - including the potentiality that ongoing "cheap" prices could continue, including but not limited to lower prices, too).
That has never happened before—not even close!—not since Bitcoin became old-enough to have any previous “four-year cycle top” for comparison.
Again.. so fucking what?
There have been price dips previously, and the fact that the BTC price has not dipped below its previous tops ("ever before") remains a BIG so fucking what?
Prior patterns do not guarantee that they will repeat - even if they had previously held a lot of synchronicity with earlier patterns, and also we should expect for changes to take place in the price dynamics of an asset class such as bitcoin as it matures, more financialization comes into the space, potentiality for political battles over it and also the taking advantage of a lot of reckless players who had been overly leveraged in their having had gambled with BTC and BTC related products (some of them obvious ponzis that we were not able to see until after they started to crash and show that they did not have the assets/bitcoins that they claimed to have had.. who would-a-thunk that some entities did not have the bitcoins that they claimed that they had?.. duh!!).
So stated to inform future readers of the context.
Also ending up being dramatic in terms of failing/refusing to capture proper context, and trying to make your specific facts seem more important than they actually are. That comes off as "exaggeration" to me, and even "foolish" if I must say so my lil selfie.
In that context, I will let the above unedited quotation speak for itself.
Me too.
I have them [new ideas]. Thank me for being bullish while others are discussing a death spiral, instead of flipping off at me over nonsense.
That's strange. Why would I want to discourage ideas - unless they happen to be detached from reality in the sense of lacking in logic and/or facts to reach bad conclusions?
You have not addressed the substance of my ideas here. You have only taken irrelevant snipes at cherry-picked quotes.
I addressed whatever needs to be addressed from my perspective. It's ok to have differing perspectives about price, price dynamics, where we believe BTC is going, whether it is broken or not, what kinds of probabilities to assign to various price directions and how to assess that, and whether we feel that we need to stick our heads up our asses or not.
Free I tell ya.
Free.
My basic thesis is an answer to all of the people who are worried that Bitcoin, allegedly a sound hard-money store of value, is performing very poorly right now. I believe you noticed that some are even claiming that Bitcoin has somehow failed as a “store of value”.
Sure.. you can make those kinds of non-zoomed out nonsense claims if you feel that they make you feel good.
Yes.. in the short term, there are going to be feelings that this asset is not serving very well as a store of value.. but again, so fucking what? zoom out a wee bit to attempt to understand a wee bit MOAR better in regards to what you are looking at in terms of bitcoin as compared with other possible asset classes in which you would like to store (or invest) your value.
Sure, if you have either a low time preference or you need your money in a short period of time, then you may well get fucked if you expect to be able to cash out of your BTC at a higher price than you bought. Do I need to elaborate further on this idea? either in terms of facts or logic?
Even gold can have a bad bear market.
Fuck gold.
When there are many complicated global economic and political factors impacting its market, even gold can have poor economic performance for awhile. No reasonable (or even sane) person would claim that gold doesn’t work as a store of value. Even when it crashed, gold was fine. When it crashed, smart holders held, and smart buyers bought.
Again.. fuck gold.. you are muddying up your thinking with that and even bringing it up here as if it were a significant enough comparison point in order to be relevant to the discussion.. In other words, it is likely more distracting as a talking point than it is worth. It seems better that you attempt to understand and discuss bitcoin a wee bit MOAR better rather than bringing in largely irrelevant, immaterial and distracting talking points, like gold.
Mutatis mutandis, apply the same principles to Bitcoin. If you feel an itch to overextend the analogy, to toss in red herrings, or to cherry-pick pieces out of context, then you may want to look up what “mutatis mutandis” means.
Seems like you are getting off on a tangent.
I am NOT predicting a two-decade bear market for Bitcoin. Only an illiterate simpleton would read that into anything that I have said.
I am NOT performing TA to read tea leaves about Bitcoin from historical gold prices (!), like that idiot dragonvslinux.
I was NOT using the analogy to make price predictions about Bitcoin.
I am glad that you let us know what you are NOT doing.
That's helpful.. right?
rrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiggggggghhhhtttt?
I am proclaiming that a hard-money store-of-value asset can temporarily suffer poor performance in extraordinary conditions, and that the asset will recover.
Ok.. It seems that most of the bitcoin OG folks (or even longer term participants in this thread) would agree that bitcoin is a hard asset and it is likely to recover. So what else is new.. that kind of a claim is not anything innovative or even contrary to underlying assumptions that a likely large majority of the bitcoin OG foks consider to be the case.
I am saying that even if the bottom is not yet in, even if the bear market gets worse for awhile, I will not panic about Bitcoin’s long-term future as a store of value. I am not positively predicting worse incoming crashes—but just in case, I am psychologically prepared for the not-insignificant probability of such events.
Ok.. good for you.
You are trying to proclaim that you are "normal" within expectations of this thread, or are you suggesting that this expectation of yours is unique in some kind of a way?
By comparison, looking at the Gold chart using Monthly MA Ribbon (SMA) with intervals of 12 (1 Year) starting with 12 (after it's decade long bull market and 25x increase):
In summary, I think the worst (or arguably best) case scenario is a bear market based on an extended amount of time, not an extended correction of price.
Seems to me that there is something fundamentally wrong (or off) with using gold as a comparison when we are talking about an emergent asset class versus a 2,000 year old asset class..
Seems to me like there is something fundamentally wrong with using charts from a different asset in different historical circumstances to make any kind of price forecasts about Bitcoin. It is the distilled essence of the worst TA-addict mindset.
Within some contexts there can be some validity and usefulness in cross asset comparisons and even looking at various points in time, so long as there are also attempts to appreciate the various ways that bitcoin differs too.
Edit, P.S. (and inb4 anyone else): What do you mean, Jay, by a “2,000 year old” asset? That is a drastic error in describing how long gold and other PMs have been used as money.
The number of years does not really matter that much, we might even say 200 or 500 year asset.. .. The main points are that there is a longer history with gold even when there are also changes in modern market dynamics with the overly monetization (and manipulation) of gold including paper products, while at the same time bitcoin emerged as a new kind of asset that had some intentions to replace and improve upon gold properties that had been manipulated away... so in that sense bitcoin aimed (aims) to replace some of gold's manipulated properties, and even to be less manipulatable than gold... So if bitcoin did not exist, then gold would likely serve as a potential way to gravitate back into sound money after the fiat systems (USD and others) blow up this time around, but instead we have a newer asset that we called bitcoin that is less than 14 years old. Have you heard of it? Anyhow, more recent history of what is going on is more important than specifying how many thousands of years gold existed in a world that was more physical in nature and more lacking in communication tools... Had you heard that bitcoin is a kind of innovation that facilitates that an actual bearer instrument (namely king daddy) is value that flies through the air and is communicated and transmitted at the same time. Nothing so comprehensively like it ever existed previously.. even though it has several similarities to gold.. gold cannot be transmitted through the air so easily (if at all). did you know that?
In essence, part of the point is that there are similarities and differences between bitcoin and gold, and it is quite likely that focus will be lost and wrong conclusions will be reached if there is an attempt to start out these kinds of analyses by attempting to understand gold first, rather than attempting to understand bitcoin and then to the extent that it might be helpful to understand the historical or current role of other assets/currencies, to attempt to understand those other assets/currencies through the understand of bitcoin first. It will likely save a lot of time to attempt to figure out bitcoin first. That's why we be here in this thread... to attempt to help peeps to understand bitcoin first... and if they want to get distracted into some other nonsense or talk of other assets/currencies or even get distracted into various historical specifics of various off topic matters, they likely need to do that in other places rather than in this here thread..
TLDR: Pro-tip.... Don't get caught up in the weeds of off-topic shitcoin details D_W.. Try to keep ur lil selfie focused on the prize.. aka my lil precious.
Poll
