Governments are already incentivized to participate in bitcoin rather than fighting bitcoin, but they can do whatever they like including having fun staying poor. .. it is their choice to figure out how to get involved in bitcoin, if they have options and abilities and powers to do so... and yes, sometimes governments seize assets too.. they are supposed to be acting in the public interest when doing these kinds of things, but some governments have various injustices within their ways of operating.
I don’t quite follow up the part where you say, the government are already incentivized to participate in bitcoin.
Is that supposed to mean in the amount of allocation they have or you mean something different entirely.
I mean that the incentives of bitcoin work the same whether you are an individual, institution or a government - even though it likely takes institutions and governments longer to act because many times they have to get approvals.
Think about it.. bitcoin is the best and soundest money to ever to have had existed (so far, and there is nothing in sight that is even close to it or likely to beat it), so the longer that anyone (or any institution or government) waits before getting involved in bitcoin, then the more it is likely going to cost them to get in (they are not likely to get as many bitcoin as the person, institution, government that got in earlier).
Yes, we can go back and the charts and find examples in which someone might have bought bitcoin at the top in late 2017, and then see that in late 2022, those people/institutions/governments could have gotten into bitcoin cheaper than the guy who got into bitcoin at the late 2017 top, but that is not realistic... including the fact that if a guy in 2017 bought several bitcoin at the top, he is likely not going to be waiting around until 2022, he likely is buying bitcoin the whole time. .that would be the smarter thing to do, especially if he bought at the late 2017 top.
Let me give some examples.
A guy in late 2017 might lump sum buy $50k worth of bitcoin at $18k.. so he gets 2.7 BTC, and maybe the next 6 years, he buys
$100 of bitcoin per week, so he ends up buying another 2.855 bitcoin for an additional $31,3k.. So he has invested 81.3k and he has 5.555 BTC. Does not seem to be a bad place to be.
If a guy comes to bitcoin in 2022 and he had $80k to $100k, is he going to invest it straight into bitcoin and is he going to be able to get more than 5.555 BTC with that value? Maybe maybe not. Frequently conviction and abilities to be aggressive psychologically and/or financially build over time.
Another example might be the guy who did not lump sum into bitcoin in late 2017, but instead invested
$81k over 6 years, but ended up starting up investing in late 2017, and so that guy would have right around 7.5 BTC for the $81k that he invested over the past 6 years at $260 per weekThe same kinds of incentives exist for governments as individuals when dealing with the soundest money in existence, even if they might be able to get into bitcoin related businesses and even if they might be able to seize some bitcoin from the people, they still have other basic incentives to get into bitcoin earlier rather than later, even if they don't even realize the value of bitcoin and they don't even realize that incentives that they "should" have and that they likely will have with the passage of time, even if it might take several cycles or even a generation or two before they figure it out sufficiently enough to know that they should be designing their systems around bitcoin rather than fiat.. .even if they might need to do both during the transitionary period.
When it concerns cryptos, I could hardly imagine any government that is yet to legalize the cryptocurrency innovation, act in the interest of its possessor or interest of the public.
Fuck cryptos. We are talking about bitcoin. Don't be wasting your time talking about cryptos, thinking about cryptos or mixing up your language in such a way that no one knows what the fuck you are talking about. We are talking about bitcoin here. There is no innovation in crypto without focusing on bitcoin first.
The best they could play roles at is in issues where there is an obvious scam, haven’t used the currency for a media.
Yes.. cryptos are a scam. .they are affiliation attacks on bitcoin, and sure people can fuck around and gamble with that crap and/or transacting with some crypto might be acceptable, but they need to keep their eyes on the prize, which is bitcoin.. and don't be holding onto crypto.. except for maybe some transacting with it or holding small amounts, since the only real innovation is bitcoin and any investments are being made need to have some bitcoin connections and/or recognition that they are building on bitcoin and not getting too far detached from understanding what is going on.
Having fun, staying poor, lol…
That's what seems to be happening with a lot of people/institutions/governments who think that they know about bitcoin because they heard the word, but they fail/refuse to get a stake in bitcoin.. because they actually don't know what bitcoin is.
Those of us with bitcoin and who already know that it is a good idea to buy bitcoin or to mostly HODL bitcoin, can only do so much in order to help people in terms of how they think about bitcoin and/or to attempt to inspire them to actually take some bitcoin accumulation actions.. For the most part, they have to figure some of it out on their own and start to act upon their learning about bitcoin in order to hedge and/or to protect their own financial and psychological interests.. and yeah, if they don't know it, then they don't know it.
Holding to inspire,
That’s hardly any purpose for me as I’ve tried convincing a few persons over the years but, I got to realize it’s mainly talking to deafness and most persons wonder what’s your motive.
I frequently tell people about bitcoin, and then when they start to get skeptical and even suggest that I am trying to sell them something or to motivate them to get in, then I frequently tell them that I hardly give less than two shits about what they do and whether they get into bitcoin or not. I am largely telling them information that is for their own good to know and it is up to them to figure out how to act upon such information, if at all.. and sure failing/refusing to act is a kind of act, but failing/refusing to act does end up being an easier thing to do.. which is likely going to end up costing them quite a bit in ongoing lost opportunities to get bitcoin at cheaper prices.
Haven’t had encounters with Ponzi schemes or are familiar with its operations.
These are real fears that people have.. so I frequently will say that if they are so damned nervous about bitcoin being a scam, then just get in at a lower level of around 1% rather than 25%, even though I am suggesting a range of 1% to 25%, then they can choose their own level, even if it might seem to be a relatively whimpier level, but at least they are getting off of zero.. and in the end, it is up to them to make their choice about whether to get in and how much to get in and most people end up gravitating into the failure to act so they stay on zero, and even very few become even low coiners but instead stay as no coiners.
Besides, you don’t get to declare your hodlings to even the closest of persons as this would pose a risk to security and you leave yourself open, privacy unwise.
Probably we need to be careful in terms of providing any specifics.. and usually I avoid giving any specifics, but sometimes, I end up providing some comparisons in such a way that they should be able to get some pretty reasonable ideas of wsome of my specifics, even though I don't ever tend to say specifics, and sometimes I will even provide some low ball examples to show.. and maybe they think that I am talking about myself, and I can never be sure what they think...even though frequently people will directly ask.. .. so I might say, "let me put it like this: if you had bought $10 per week of bitcoin since late 2013, then you would have bought $520 per year on bitcoin which would be nearly $5,200 right now... so then giving some ideas. and then maybe I would pull up a
DCA chart that would show that I would have around 4.62 BTC merely from my $10 per week from the past 10 years. So then once we have a number, then we might suggest that if I had done $100 per week, then I would have right around 46.2BTC, and then that starts to get their attention because we can start with small numbers and then either 5x or 10x then numbers in order to show how the level of aggressiveness can make considerably large changes in the magnitude of the results... but the results can be considered to be the same, even if it might be difficult to see cases in which people were completely consistent for 10 years and they might well have ups and downs, and periods of buying and lump sums and mistakes and they still might have an average and to be able to see if they beat the straight DCA approach or if their amount invested ended up performing better than a somewhat strict DCA approach.
This makes that agenda of holding to inspire a not very suitable one.
Still, it becomes an inspiration for most when they realize your funds span from a bitcoin investment.
Many people have difficult times thinking in terms of moderation and even allocating some money to bitcoin and some money to other things, and they frequently think that you have to invest all or nothing, and they don't recognize and appreciate how some investments build over time, and they may even have many years in which they are not in profits or barely in profits. so that sometimes it can take a while to show the payoffs even though in bitcoin we could also say something like in 2015 I got into bitcoin by buying 100 BTC for $30k ($300 each), and this and this and this happened, and now I only have 10 bitcoin left... hahahahahaha... but maybe those 10 bitcoin (at nearly $260k) are still worth more than the $30k initial capital they had been bought for in 2015.
