Aggressive buying is not entirely wrong as long as it is within the discretionary funds then it is fine. The concern is that aggressive buying uses money that should not be borrowed or emergency funds, with myself not going to make aggressive purchases with emergency funds even in situations where prices are falling which is certainly a situation that can be utilized, but the option I would choose is to buy more using reserve funds.
Apart from that, buying aggressively is not an obligation for anyone who invests, this is up to us to determine if we are not interested then it doesn't matter with the other hand there are investments that are run consistently regardless of the strategy used.
If aggressive buying isn't mandatory for investors because it still depends on the investor's judgment and ability, then this doesn't need to be discussed at length, although it's certainly worth reminding investors. Regular buying based on existing capabilities will always be a better option than aggressive buying under duress due to using reserve funds. However, those who are prepared for such a situation are also not wrong if they want to do it at times like these, given that moments like these won't always be present for Bitcoin.
Every person has an amount of discretionary funds and also an amount of back up funds that may or may not be strong.
They can choose how aggressive that they want to be within the scope of their abilities, and I don't see any problem with that. They are choosing how much prioritity to give to investing in bitcoin versus putting their money in savings and/or discretionarily spending.
When you are talking about spending from reserve funds or using reserve funds, that is different category than merely using discretionary funds, even though the reserve funds had been built up from prior discretionary funds.
A think about reserve funds is that they can be designated for any purpose the person might choose to designate them or alternatively they can just be additional flexible funds that are above and beyond the emergency funds.
Some or all of the reserve funds could be used for buying bitcoin, yet it seems bad logic to use any emergency funds to buy bitcoin, since normal people would not consider buying bitcoin (or a dip in bitcoin price) to be an emergency, so in some sense there is some expectation that normal people try to exercise reasonable judgement, and emergency funds may well ONLY be used after other funds have been depleted for basic expenses that cannot be deferred until the next pay period, and ultimately it would seem that the emergency funds would be the last available funds that could be used for basic expenses until having to potentially tap into the bitcoin, which if we are really serious about investing into bitcoin, then we had built up various back up funds, including emergency funds to try to build our bitcoin and to not tap into our bitcoin for 4-10 years or longer into the future, yet if we get into a situation where we have used all of our resources, then depleted our reserve funds and then depleted our emergency funds, then we have no choice except to spend our bitcoin if our basic expenses continue to be higher than our income.
We should be constructing systems and engaging in practices to avoid those kinds of situations where we would have to tap into our bitcoin at a time that is outside of our own choosing. Of course, by the time we get to the point of tapping into our bitcoin, we probably had already been not adding to our bitcoin too, since we are adding to our bitcoin from our discretionary funds, but if we are getting to a point that we are depleting various kinds of back up funds and even getting down to the emergency funds level, then we likely had already stopped buying bitcoin for quite a bit of time prior to having to actually tap into our bitcoin.
...
Aggressive buying is not entirely wrong as long as it is within the discretionary funds then it is fine. The concern is that aggressive buying uses money that should not be borrowed or emergency funds, with myself not going to make aggressive purchases with emergency funds even in situations where prices are falling which is certainly a situation that can be utilized, but the option I would choose is to buy more using reserve funds.
Apart from that, buying aggressively is not an obligation for anyone who invests, this is up to us to determine if we are not interested then it doesn't matter with the other hand there are investments that are run consistently regardless of the strategy used.
Whether someone is aggressive depends on their income especially if their needs are met and they have additional sources of income. I think someone will act as aggressively as possible. If they have sufficient funds I think everyone will act aggressively.
Level of aggressiveness is a choice within the parameters of the possibilities of what is available to any given person. They choose their level of aggressiveness, and hopefully if they choose to be aggressive, they do not go beyond their means (beyond their discretionary funds and/or their reserves).
I don't think aggressive borrowing is necessary because the money we borrow is borrowed from others.
Any time that we choose to enter into a loan, we need to consider if we believe the terms are reasonable as compared with our ability to pay it back and how much the loan is going to cost. Surely getting a loan is not part of basic bitcoin investing ideas, and it may well not even be necessary or preferable.
If we continue to use borrowed money we will maximize our short-term gains. Our goal after accumulating is only to return the money to the person we borrowed from. Therefore we must always monitor market movements.
You seem to be wanting to gamble with your loan, which surely is beyond the topic of this thread, even though sometimes loans can be used to front load investments, so that a person is taking future expectations of income to use to invest in bitcoin in the present while accounting for the cost of the loan and even the timeline that is part of the payoff within the loan terms.
If the current price is favorable we should sell to repay the capital or what we borrowed from that person.
Why? If you had already entered into the loan, then I see no reason to not go through the whole loan payoff timeline, unless the loan terms were not favorable, yet yeah, you seem to be wanting to suggest fucking around trying to time bitcoin price movements and using loans for such purposes which is beyond the scope of this thread, since maybe you don't even understand the difference between investing and trading (gambling), which surely in this thread we are trying to emphasize the investment angle, which of course, I am not a big fan of either buying or selling in ways that are overly anticipated trying to play bitcoin's price waves, especially it seems ridiculous to employ any selling techniques at all for guys who are still in their early accumulation phases, and you are talking about using a loan to accumulate but then selling to take advantage of favorable price moves and to pay off the loan, which surely seems outside of things that I consider to be from a bitcoin investor's perspective.
[edited out]
Are you suggesting that discretionary money is unnecessary money? Please explain what is necessary and unnecessary money. When explaining things we should take notes of the kind of words we use as we might be passing a different meaning while we meant to say another thing.
A successful accumulation must have a good financial planning: invest using your discretionary income, build a strong backup funds, be aggressive as much as possible within your means. Stay consistent, patient and disciplined.
Yes. The idea of discretionary income is that we can do whatever we want with it, including burning it in a fire every week.
Of course, we choose what we want to do with it within 3 categories of invest, save or discretionarily consume.
One of the trade offs of using money to invest is that the same money is no longer available to consume.
For our own psychological welfare it is likely best that we allocate some money to each of the three categories, yet there are some folks who want to consume and they don't want to save and/or invest. They can do what they like with their discretionary funds, even though they might regret later in life, just like the saver/investor might regret later in life if he never discretionarily consumes. There are needs for balance, yet we have to pick our own balance even though we might later regret our earlier choices.
Like Odohu mentioned in
his earlier post, there are a lot of folks in the world who have to quite struggle to either generate discretionary funds and/or to consistently be able to generate discretionary funds, so surely there is some advantage and privilege during times that any of us are able to consistently generate discretionary funds that some folks might ongoingly struggle to get to such an income level.. whether it is fault of their own or even just products of their bad luck in terms of their circumstances.
It's our ability to carry out this aggressive approach.
From my perspective, that sounds more like overaggressive rather than aggressive, and yeah you can do dumb shit, but take such nonsense discussions outside of this thread or maybe create your own "gambling with bitcoin" thread.
If we don't want to use this pattern, it's better not to do it. We are not interested in doing it aggressively at all. Therefore investing doesn't have to be forced because ultimately if problems arise we will also experience the same problems.
Your ideas of aggressive seem over the top.
The idea of aggressive is a relative term, so if a person has $150 per week in discretionary funds, maybe a regularly medium aggressive approach might be to divide $50 for investing, $50 for savings and $50 for discretionary consumption, and so if he chose some higher amount for investing and took that from his savings and/or discretionary consumption, then he would be relatively more aggressive in relation to his bitcoin investment as compared with the more medium aggressive approach... so aggressiveness is a matter of degree within our abilities, so then maybe sometimes we might try to be more aggressive, but if we make mistakes in our calculations, we might start to become overly aggressive because we are going beyond our discretionary funds and/or maybe getting to higher levels of using our discretionary funds that it becomes uncomfortable since we might not have much if any money remaining for either our savings and/or for our discretionary consumption.
[edited out]
Buying Bitcoin aggressively is not wrong if you have one or more sources of stable income. But I recommend staying in a regular DCA method rather than buying Bitcoin aggressively.
One of the many benefits of accumulating Bitcoin regularly is that you can accumulate Bitcoin at different prices. And keeping the DCA running with discretionary income allows you to accumulate Bitcoin in your portfolio regularly regardless of the price which is a viable investment strategy for investors of all levels and income levels.
Keep cash flow through discretionary income and buy Bitcoin in lump sums during periods of price decline. This will make allowance for you to run DCA regularly and properly assess the opportunity for price declines. Instead of be anxious during price declines, buy Bitcoin with the extra floating fund you have available and increase the size of your portfolio.
With DCA, guys can choose to buy aggressive, whimpy or some level in between.
The mere fact that a person is employing DCA does not limit them to investing in bitcoin in non-aggressive ways.
The level of aggressiveness that a person chooses is a choice within the level of discretionary funds that a person has available. He can choose aggressive, whimpy or some level in between. Increasing his income (and discretionary funds) increases the amount of funds that he has available, yet he still can choose his level of aggressiveness within the funds.
So if a guy had been making $150 per week in discretionary funds and then buying bitcoin with $50 per week for the past 6 months, and then all of a sudden he got a raise and his discretionary funds went up to $210 per week, maybe he would choose to go up to $70 per week, yet he is still only using 1/3 of his discretionary funds for bitcoin investment, which surely seems to be a similar level of aggressiveness as what he had previously been using. Or maybe he chooses to increases his bitcoin investment up to $110 per week and to leave his savings amount at $50 and to leave his discretionary consumption amount at $50. Sure we might say he is being more aggressive, than he had been when his discretionary income had been $150 per week rather than the increased rate of $210 per week, yet to me it seems that when we are talking about level of aggressiveness or level of whimpiness, it is better to compare one version of his aggressiveness and another version within the same category rather than accross categories.. so compare the $150 per week person with the $150 per week person and when talking about aggressiveness, don't compare them with the $210 per week person, even though the $210 per week person does have more discretionary funds available to work with as compared with the person who only has $150 per week to work with.
I totally agree with you, some people think that the moment they have a source of income that they are good to invest in Bitcoin, actually it is meant to be like that because it is through source of income we get our discretionary income but it is also true that there are some income that are not sufficient to use in Bitcoin Investment and most times the reason some people encounter challenge or problem is forcing this, that is trying to figure out a discrestionary income from their income even when it not possible.
No matter how poor a person is, they have a savings fund that is kept in a long-term plan. If he wants, he can definitely keep that money in Bitcoin.
You are speaking with too many definites and too much certainty.
A person cannot invest in bitcoin unless he is sure that he has discretionary income that he can put away for 4-10 years or longer and also is willing to lose such money if the investment in bitcoin goes against him.
The mere fact that some poor people might have several hundred dollars in cash that they are keeping in their cookie jar, that does not mean that they can use some or all of that money to buy bitcoin. They have to make sure, within their own comfort, that they have enough money to invest.
Some poor people do not have enough money to invest, even though we know that they can start out with $10 and they can invest $10 whenever they are able to invest it, yet they still have to figure out if and when they have extra money that they are able to put into bitcoin, and it can surely be tough for people who might not have steady income and when they get some income, the amounts are barely enough to cover all of their basic expenses, so they barely have any extra amount.. and yeah, maybe we can say that they can start to buy $10 per week or $10 per month of bitcoin, yet they have to be sufficiently comfortable to both get started and to perhaps be able to also figure out how they are going to be able to maintain investing in bitcoin without being tempted to cash out of their bitcoin for 4-10 years or longer.
To invest in Bitcoin and be successful in investment, you do not need a lot of money, but rather a strong will and a strong commitment.
Of course, you do not need "a lot," but you still need some money and the money must be discretionary funds.
However, no matter what financial situation you invest from, the money for investment must be discretionary. How you allocate this discretionary money can be your freedom.
I just want to say that the money you keep in long-term savings may keep losing value regularly due to inflation.
You are correct that there could be some poor people who are keeping too much money in cash and they would be better off to use some portion of that money to buy bitcoin, yet they still have to make that judgement regarding how much they are ready, willing and able to put into bitcoin, whether it is $10 per week or some other amount.
If you keep that money in Bitcoin for the long term, then at least you will be protected from inflation and can get some profit.
Are you wanting poor folks to trade? or how do we know that they can hang onto their investment for 4-10 years or longer? Sure, there are likely quite a few poor people who never get out of poverty because they are ONLY saving in cash that ongoingly decreases in what it can buy... so maybe they can put some value into bitcoin so that they are not ongoingly losing so much value on a regular basis, but still are they ready, willing and able to put that money into bitcoin for 4-10 years or longer?
Being poor, your investment amount and profit amount may not be very high, but what you have saved will at least be protected from inflation. Reality is different, so we cannot follow the same rule in all cases.
Of course, you seem to be presuming that anyone can invest in bitcoin, which might not be the case.
