Buckeye

You’re right, that was a bad take! Thanks for warning us beforehand I didn’t realize you were so pro big-government.

Here’s Paar saying the quiet part out loud. This isn’t about anything other than “Number Go Up.”

I think it’s hilarious that we have been hearing for 10+ years how BTC was the ultimate asset, because it didn’t need the government, or banks or regulators to exist. And now these same folks are clamoring for a government bailout of their BTC What a disingenuous group of people…tells you about all you need to know.

Hahahaha. So the poll that you posted is a joke? Why did you post it then?

Elon cared…this was about the same time that he started paying people to vote.

How many times are they going to announce this Bitcoin Strategic Reserve? Seems like we’ve already had 2-3 announcements.

Can’t you just use the yield from your BTC holdings to cover your mortgage payment?

Lower tariffs than expected and mild response from Xi?

Hahahaha. That’s pretty funny!

Poor Blake. Getting dunked on, on an online forum, by someone’s Grandpa.

Holy shit Grandpa Simpson.

Ok you’re right, I did misread your statement. But now that I’ve reread it, it makes even less sense. He won by a “landslide on the issues.” Hahahahahah, what a dumb comment.

Oh I see. That’s a very nice way for a 65 year old to talk to someone. Geez.

Hahahahaha, yeah, ok. Nice hedge with the “Landside on the issues.” Thanks Sean!

You’re right I don’t. So what’s your point? Because I don’t known the history of this thread, you should be allowed to put words into my mouth? Because that’s exactly what you’ve done.

Im starting a new thread at 12:01 titled “25% tariffs on Mexican and Canadian tariffs”

Except for he didn’t win by a landslide Sean. Donald Trump won the 2024 election with one of the smallest popular-vote margins in U.S. history, but in news deserts – counties lacking a professional source of local news – it was an avalanche.

I never said anything about a ponzi, you just did though. You are attaching all sort of meanings to my posts that aren’t saying what you think they’re saying. You are arguing with yourself. Also, kind of showing your hand about how maybe you really feel about BTC. And no I don’t invest in BRK for increased adoption. I’ve told you many times now, I would prefer LESS people own Berkshire! Something a BTC holder would never say!

Dude, I never said this, once. You are imagining my imagination. I was only trying to point out what I thought was one difference between BTC and BRK. Which I guess you are agreeing with? The only point I was trying to make was that, in my opinion, a Berkshire shareholder who discusses BRK on this board is not the same as Bitcoin holder discussing BTC on this board. You probably don’t agree and that’s fine too!

I’m not sure? Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me?

It does make a huge difference to me. But if it’s all the same to you, you are certainly entitled to have your own opinion. I like the PurpleBoot name too! It looks cool when written as Paarslaars.

Hahaha. Not bad! Maybe I should apply

Oh yea, that’s right! Apparently you and James don’t know the difference between outside capital and internal capital. It also helps better explain your current devotion to BTC.

Well Paar, in my opinion your English is great! But your choice of metaphors could use some work. Thanks for the reply.

From what I’ve seen thus far, the ONLY THING that makes BTC go up in price is increased adoption. Getting more people to buy into BTC is central to your thesis. As I Berkshire shareholder I don’t need more people to buy into Berkshire, for my thesis to pan out. In fact, I would prefer LESS PEOPLE to buy Berkshire, which would give Berkshire a better opportunity to buy itself. Can’t say that with BTC can you? See the difference?