Robert Kennedy Jr bought each of his 7 kids 2 BTC each!

[Silberman]

So, the question is.... Why is it necessary for Robert Kennedy Jr. to advertise to the world that he bought bitcoins for his kids? We know it is election year and that might be the main reason why he is doing this.

Politicians use gimmicks like this to garner votes and "Bitcoin adoption" might be one of his "Pet products" to use in his election campaign. Seeing that Bitcoin is still perceived as a high risk investment... it might not be a good idea to do this before the election. 

The opposition is doing everything in their power to crush Crypto currency adoption... 

Every single move that a politician makes is always geared to try to connect with a particular voter and win their preferences, and this move is not an exception, but why exactly buy 2 BTC for each of his kids? And I think the decision was politically motivated as well, if he bought too little then the perception that he is in favor of bitcoin and this market will not be too strong, however if he bought a lot of bitcoin then this may be perceived as bragging and he could lose voters with a low level of income, so it is likely his political advisors suggested to him this specific amount to show his support while offending as little voters as possible.

[1714641501]

1714641501

[1714641501]

1714641501

[1714641501]

1714641501

[1714641501]

1714641501

[retreat]

The optimal bet would be to buy 2.625 bitcoins. However, a bet of 2 bitcoins is not bad either. Why do you think Robert Kennedy Jr. bought each child exactly 2 bitcoins, not 1 or 3?

Well, buying that amount of bitcoin is like buying a loaf of bread for him. I think the reason he didn't buy more was because he was just curious about Bitcoin - like if the price of Bitcoin goes up it's great, but if it goes down it doesn't matter because the amount he's buying is less.
And this is also related to politics, you know that in America there are quite a lot of people who are pro against crypto, and maybe by buying that amount of Bitcoin people will think that he is a pro for Bitcoin and that will attract the sympathy of people to vote for him.

[Nrcewker]

The optimal bet would be to buy 2.625 bitcoins. However, a bet of 2 bitcoins is not bad either. Why do you think Robert Kennedy Jr. bought each child exactly 2 bitcoins, not 1 or 3?

He wanted to be fair with both, that’s why he distributed 4 Bitcoins 2 for each. Why he bought 4 Bitcoins? Maybe he was only afford to buy 4 or just want to spend that much amount only. But this shows that he knows the potential of Bitcoin and as his inherited property he wanted to give his sons Bitcoins as a property. Regarding 2.625, I don’t know why you have stated this exact figure here. Maybe I missed some news outside. Hope you got some clear picture regarding the division of the coins.

[Lorence.xD]

I don't know why it's necessary to question why he bought 2 Bitcoin. Imagine if you buy 2 meal for yourself and asked you why did you buy 2 meals for yourself? Then you might answer many possible answers it can be because you are hungry or you bought extra for your launch. So it might be an invested to have an equal amount of Bitcoin which is 2 since it has a huge value already. Why would you hassle yourself to buy Bitcoin with decimals sht on it when you can just simply put "2 Bitcoin pls for my children". It's not about the resources but maybe for the practicality. I just don't understand why this topic should be discussed when everyone could buy whenever they want and how much Bitcoin they would buy.

[KalOlak]

The optimal bet would be to buy 2.625 bitcoins. However, a bet of 2 bitcoins is not bad either. Why do you think Robert Kennedy Jr. bought each child exactly 2 bitcoins, not 1 or 3?

He wanted to be fair with both, that’s why he distributed 4 Bitcoins 2 for each. Why he bought 4 Bitcoins? Maybe he was only afford to buy 4 or just want to spend that much amount only. But this shows that he knows the potential of Bitcoin and as his inherited property he wanted to give his sons Bitcoins as a property. Regarding 2.625, I don’t know why you have stated this exact figure here. Maybe I missed some news outside. Hope you got some clear picture regarding the division of the coins.

It is interesting to know in the sense that it helps understand how wealthy individuals and politicians think and what size of bets they might make in Bitcoin.

[rozak]

I didn't ask why he bought. I asked why specifically 2 bitcoins for each of the children.

we never really know the reason for doing it all. buy for any amount which I don't think is the point. but he is campaigning for a vote.
they are political and want to label themselves as Bitcoin professionals because I also own and use Bitcoin. perhaps like when a candidate comes to a large farm in the country and calls himself someone who was raised as a farmer. and they promised to protect their right to be prosperous farmers.

[CryptSafe]

I am not surprised he bought bitcoin for his children as he is a bitcoin enthusiast from the beginning. The volume he had bought is dependent of his capability to invest in bitcoin. He saw the future and is trying his best to Start utilizing the blockchain technology to making sure evey process is properly utilized by both the government if elected and both his family which he has already started doing for. He is better in action than much words to be talking.

[acroman08]

I didn't ask why he bought. I asked why specifically 2 bitcoins for each of the children.

could it be that he just wanted to give his kids 2 bitcoin each, nothing more nothing less? Would you mind elaborating on why are you reading too much into it? I mean, I kind of understand you a bit since the dude is a very well-known person and you probably want to understand the reasoning as to why he bought his kids BTC, but why read too much into it?

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

The current supply of Bitcoin is 19.44 million. I believe he simply calculated how much Bitcoin one would need to own to be in the top 0.1% if Bitcoin were to replace the global financial system. Yes, today it's a bet of 1.944, and he just rounded it up to 2.

OP, I think you are just overimagining everything. But why do you think that's Robert's reason? If you are right, then he probably should have bought 4 or 6 bitcoins for each of his kids, so they could be among the 0.2% or 0.3% top holders. In my OP, I think you are wrong; his idea of purchasing two bitcoins for each of his children is not what you are thinking, you are only guessing. In my opinion, I think he chooses to keep two Bitcoins each for his kids because he just wants them to have Bitcoin, and perhaps he also has other things in his will that his kids will benefit from apart from Bitcoin. His investment in Bitcoin for his kids is because he also wants them to take a share of the Bitcoin technology in the future. I am also assuming what I have said.

[Liliana1304]

I didn't ask why he bought. I asked why specifically 2 bitcoins for each of the children.

I don't understand how you expect us to know his reasons, dude. This is a politician who uses everything as a campaigning tool to amass votes and possibly be in the good books of the Bitcoin masses. If you probably know the reason, why not enlighten us?

[Little Mouse]

I asked a simple question. Do you have any ideas why he bought exactly 2 BTC. But not 1 or 2?

Such a stupid question! I bought 0.10 BTC last month. Would you ask me why exactly 0.10 BTC but not 0.11 or 0.09? Don't you think this is a stupid question to ask? Well, no one can satisfy you since you are trying to find out some answers which you have in your mind lol. It's his choice to buy 1 Bitcoin or 1000 Bitcoin or 0.01 Bitcoin only. Finding a reason of why exactly this amount would be foolish.

[CryptSafe]

I asked a simple question. Do you have any ideas why he bought exactly 2 BTC. But not 1 or 2?

Such a stupid question! I bought 0.10 BTC last month. Would you ask me why exactly 0.10 BTC but not 0.11 or 0.09? Don't you think this is a stupid question to ask? Well, no one can satisfy you since you are trying to find out some answers which you have in your mind lol. It's his choice to buy 1 Bitcoin or 1000 Bitcoin or 0.01 Bitcoin only. Finding a reason of why exactly this amount would be foolish.

I was wondering as well what has the volume of bitcoin he bought got to do with us. Asking such questions means there is something OP is wanting to hear from us or possibly looking for what to say. What has the volume of bitcoin got to do here
 Does everyone individual not have the right to purchase what ever they deem fit investing or owning. Looking at the question asked by op one can easily decipher that OP is likely wanting to attach meaning to the purchase of 2btc for his children which does not concerns  anybody. Anybody can buy bitcoin of any volume at any time  and anywhere as it pleases them.

[FatFork]

It's kinda pointless question, we don't know why he chose 2 instead of 1 or 3. But he did the right thing, investing in his kids future, that's for sure.

Let's assume you are not limited in resources. How much would you buy for your children?

I would buy 2.625 bitcoins for each of them. How about you?

If we assume that you are not limited by resources, then why would you decide to buy only 2,625 bitcoins? Why not round up a number, like 3 BTC, or 5 BTC?

Why not 3.3333 bitcoins? It's a round-ish number.

[KalOlak]

It's kinda pointless question, we don't know why he chose 2 instead of 1 or 3. But he did the right thing, investing in his kids future, that's for sure.

Let's assume you are not limited in resources. How much would you buy for your children?

I would buy 2.625 bitcoins for each of them. How about you?

If we assume that you are not limited by resources, then why would you decide to buy only 2,625 bitcoins? Why not round up a number, like 3 BTC, or 5 BTC?

Why not 3.3333 bitcoins? It's a round-ish number.

Most people like round numbers 2, 5, 10. 2 is too small bet, 3 or 5 is too big bet. Therefore, my mathematical model shows that the optimal bet in this game is 2.625 for each player. I also want to point out that Satoshi did not choose a round number either for the maximum supply of Bitcoin, opting for 21 million.

[coolcoinz]

It's kinda pointless question, we don't know why he chose 2 instead of 1 or 3. But he did the right thing, investing in his kids future, that's for sure.

Let's assume you are not limited in resources. How much would you buy for your children?

I would buy 2.625 bitcoins for each of them. How about you?

Why 2.6? Is this number important to you somehow? If you aren't limited in resources, you should buy unlimited amount of bitcoin, right?

Bitcoin cannot be printed like fiat money and it doesn't succumb to inflation. If we take these two aspects into account, we come to a conclusion that bitcoin is superior to fiat when it comes to saving money and possessing inherent value. Having unlimited amount of fiat money means you can spend it all to buy a limited amount of bitcoin, but that limit is only in the amount of bitcoin available for sale.

[KalOlak]

It's kinda pointless question, we don't know why he chose 2 instead of 1 or 3. But he did the right thing, investing in his kids future, that's for sure.

Let's assume you are not limited in resources. How much would you buy for your children?

I would buy 2.625 bitcoins for each of them. How about you?

Why 2.6? Is this number important to you somehow? If you aren't limited in resources, you should buy unlimited amount of bitcoin, right?

Bitcoin cannot be printed like fiat money and it doesn't succumb to inflation. If we take these two aspects into account, we come to a conclusion that bitcoin is superior to fiat when it comes to saving money and possessing inherent value. Having unlimited amount of fiat money means you can spend it all to buy a limited amount of bitcoin, but that limit is only in the amount of bitcoin available for sale.

Good question. Strictly speaking, Bitcoin can be "printed" by changing just one line of its source code. And if 51% of miners reach a consensus around this version of Bitcoin, we could indeed increase the maximum supply to 30 million or 50 million. So, why is the number 21 million significant? Is it your religion?

Thus, if my resources were unlimited, my optimal bet in this game would be 0 (zero) Bitcoin. I wouldn't buy any Satoshi. Instead, I would simply purchase 51%+ of the mining power and increase the supply of Bitcoins in circulation by changing source code. This way, I could make you sell all your bitcoins for penny, and then I could easily decrease the supply again to say 21 million. This is called a strategy.

Basic C++, kids

Code:

/** The amount of satoshis in one BTC. */
static constexpr CAmount COIN = 100000000;

/** No amount larger than this (in satoshi) is valid.
 *
 * Note that this constant is *not* the total money supply, which in Bitcoin
 * currently happens to be less than 30,000,000 BTC for various reasons, but
 * rather a sanity check. As this sanity check is used by consensus-critical
 * validation code, the exact value of the MAX_MONEY constant is consensus
 * critical; in unusual circumstances like a(nother) overflow bug that allowed
 * for the creation of coins out of thin air modification could lead to a fork.
 * */
static constexpr CAmount MAX_MONEY = 30000000 * COIN;

But since my resources are limited, my strategy is to hold 2.625 bitcoins and never sell them. Basic game theory, kids.

[bittraffic]

If he bought ETH, the quantity might just be 32 ETH for each kid he has but because he bought BTC, it must be a significant amount sp why he chose 2 BTC? We can not tell for sure what the significance of just 2BTC but it's still enough compare to those with none.

I can still say RK Jr is serious about his BTC support and is now asking for BTC donations for his election campaign. Crypto will really be used for the next election and we might just be observing more politicians faking their support for crypto.

[FatFork]

<cut>
I also want to point out that Satoshi did not choose a round number either for the maximum supply of Bitcoin, opting for 21 million.

No, that's incorrect. Satoshi never opted for the round number of 21 million, not for the reason you think, but from a purely mathematical model used for the distribution of new coins through block rewards.

The maximum number of coins in the Bitcoin network is determined by two factors: the occurrence of halving every 210,000 blocks and the initial mining reward set at 50 BTC per block. Approximately 120 years from now (after the 33rd halving), when the mining reward reaches 1 satoshi per block, the max coin supply will be 20,999,999.9769 BTC (I am not taking into account coins that are provably unspendable and therefore can never reach the max supply). As a result, the network will never actually reach the total supply of 21 million BTC.

[KalOlak]

<cut>
I also want to point out that Satoshi did not choose a round number either for the maximum supply of Bitcoin, opting for 21 million.

No, that's incorrect. Satoshi never opted for the round number of 21 million, not for the reason you think, but from a purely mathematical model used for the distribution of new coins through block rewards.

The maximum number of coins in the Bitcoin network is determined by two factors: the occurrence of halving every 210,000 blocks and the initial mining reward set at 50 BTC per block. Approximately 120 years from now (after the 33rd halving), when the mining reward reaches 1 satoshi per block, the max coin supply will be 20,999,999.9769 BTC (I am not taking into account coins that are provably unspendable and therefore can never reach the max supply). As a result, the network will never actually reach the total supply of 21 million BTC.

Try. It's free.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/consensus/amount.h

Satoshi could have chosen any coefficients for this logistic function. But why did he choose precisely 21000000?

Roughly speaking, the essence of halvings lies in a very rough approximation of this function. The approximation could have been performed with a much smaller interval than 4 years while still achieving the same maximum supply. This leads to your second question. Why did Satoshi choose a halving interval of 4 years?

Code:

The generalised logistic function or Richards' curve (1959) was developed for growth modelling (extension of logistic). The model has been modified by Sugden (1981) and Satoshi (2008)

Wt[t]=W(1-(1-m)Exp[-k(t-T)/(m^(m/(1 - m)))])^(1/(1- m))

W=21000000
k=0.002625
m=0.3909
T=165.6

[serjent05]

The optimal bet would be to buy 2.625 bitcoins. However, a bet of 2 bitcoins is not bad either. Why do you think Robert Kennedy Jr. bought each child exactly 2 bitcoins, not 1 or 3?

He wanted to be fair with both, that’s why he distributed 4 Bitcoins 2 for each. Why he bought 4 Bitcoins? Maybe he was only afford to buy 4 or just want to spend that much amount only. But this shows that he knows the potential of Bitcoin and as his inherited property he wanted to give his sons Bitcoins as a property. Regarding 2.625, I don’t know why you have stated this exact figure here. Maybe I missed some news outside. Hope you got some clear picture regarding the division of the coins.

I am more inclined to the political propaganda of why he bought Bitcoin than the inheritance.  Just thinking of the possibility, why is it just now?  and why does he have to publish his Bitcoin buying event?  Isn't it to tap the Bitcoin community that he is pro-Bitcoin or whatsoever?

Anyway whatever his plan is, I believe this is a good advertisement for Bitcoin.  Rather than thinking of any negativity, I just wanted to look forward that more people influential like him will adopt and Bitcoin.