Cryptocurrencies

[73 Reds]

Just now, Vish_ram said:

In 10-15 years, two COBF investors starting out with same $ today, the one owning BTC will be far richer than the one not owing it. 

 

I’ll come back on Apr 21st, 2035 and 2040. #btcprediction

Great, I hope to be here then and perhaps you will be correct.  But without knowing what the other investor owns, the prediction is entirely baseless.  

[Vish_ram]

Of course VOO vs VOO+BTC.  BTC above 0%.

 

or you report in 10 years the returns you had made vs BTC.

Edited April 21, 2025 by Vish_ram

[SharperDingaan]

73 Reds. BTC is obviously just not your thing, and it is not worth your time to learn the underlying technology. There is nothing wrong in that, but there comes a time where it is just not worth the conversation, and the better path forward is to agree to disagree and move on. There is a market for this, BTC trades 24/7, and power to you.

 

SD

 

 

 

 

 

[73 Reds]

10 minutes ago, Vish_ram said:

Of course VOO vs VOO+BTC.  BTC above 0%.

 

or you report in 10 years the returns you had made vs BTC.

I don't own VOO but if history is any guide you only need 10%+/- CAGR to win your bet.  I'd hope many COBF members will do better.

[73 Reds]

2 minutes ago, SharperDingaan said:

73 Reds. BTC is obviously just not your thing, and it is not worth your time to learn the underlying technology. There is nothing wrong in that, but there comes a time where it is just not worth the conversation, and the better path forward is to agree to disagree and move on. There is a market for this, BTC trades 24/7, and power to you.

 

SD

 

 

 

 

 

So don't post ridiculous comments.  There are many lurkers here who don't post and take some of what is posted here as gospel.  I call out BS when I see it.

[james22]

2 hours ago, wachtwoord said:

For exchange one tends to use the lowest quality money though: the worst store of value. The best store of value you spend last.

 

Gresham's law: bad money drives out good

 

Bad money drives out good if they exchange for the same price.

 

Bitcoin trades at a variable exchange rate.

 

In the absence of fixed exchange rates or an enforceable government mandate to accept bad money, instead of bad money driving out good, the presence of good money signals the death knell of the debased currency.

 

https://medium.com/@jdh/bad-money-da6bc05a5d9

[wachtwoord]

3 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

Bad money drives out good if they exchange for the same price.

 

Bitcoin trades at a variable exchange rate.

 

In the absence of fixed exchange rates or an enforceable government mandate to accept bad money, instead of bad money driving out good, the presence of good money signals the death knell of the debased currency.

 

https://medium.com/@jdh/bad-money-da6bc05a5d9

 

Strong disagree. You'll use one for keeping long term and one for short term liquidity. This is also why Bitcoin's current high price instability isnt the drawback people make it out to be.

[james22]

2 hours ago, 73 Reds said:

@rkbabang Exactly!  The point of this entire conversation is, you don't need to invest in BTC.  One or more posters here (not you) suggested those who don't own BTC will be poor, which is one of the most ridiculous comments I've read here or anywhere.  Says a lot about the poster(s).  In fact, last time I looked Berkshire held no BTC on the balance sheet; "poor" Mr. Buffett.

 

There's many ways to invest, sure.

 

But just like missing out on the Mag7, in retrospect, bitcoin (like AI) will seem obvious.

 

Unlike something like Monster Beverage (MNST), for example.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

32 minutes ago, wachtwoord said:

 

Strong disagree. You'll use one for keeping long term and one for short term liquidity. This is also why Bitcoin's current high price instability isnt the drawback people make it out to be.

 

+1 

 

I use fiat and debt to finance life. I use BTC for long term savings outside of retirement contributions. 

 

Eventually I'll spend some of the BTC, but only when the marginal spend affords me significantly improved purchasing power OR when I've exhausted other forms of spending. 

[wachtwoord]

2 hours ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

 

+1 

 

I use fiat and debt to finance life. I use BTC for long term savings outside of retirement contributions. 

 

Eventually I'll spend some of the BTC, but only when the marginal spend affords me significantly improved purchasing power OR when I've exhausted other forms of spending. 

 

And when you spend you trade a larger amount for fiat in larger less frequent transactions after which you spend the fiat for everyday expenses. Bitcoin isnt made for those type of frequent transactions. I know lightning was made to "fix" that but there isnt really much of a point. Fiat exists to fill this need. Dont store your wealth in it though other than for short term liquidity.

[Dave86ch]

11 hours ago, 73 Reds said:

So don't post ridiculous comments.  There are many lurkers here who don't post and take some of what is posted here as gospel.  I call out BS when I see it.

 

In some contexts, owning a self-certifiable, highly transportable, widely accepted protocol that acts as a form of money—and can be transferred on private channels instantly just by accessing a bash terminal

can make the difference between being rich and poor.

 

Where I live, many places, including grocery stores, accept Bitcoin. This means I can run a node and pay without intermediaries, in a private manner. The Bitcoins are transferred from my node to the grocery store, allowing me to buy food using private channels.

 

Alternatively, I can use CoinJoin to mix my transactions and transfer value without intermediaries, ensuring that nobody can link these transactions to me.

 

Everything operates without intermediaries, is digital-native, and utilizes surplus energy. It incentivizes energy use as needed, anywhere on the planet, at any hour, every day of the week.

Edited April 22, 2025 by Dave86ch

[73 Reds]

13 hours ago, james22 said:

 

There's many ways to invest, sure.

 

But just like missing out on the Mag7, in retrospect, bitcoin (like AI) will seem obvious.

 

Unlike something like Monster Beverage (MNST), for example.

But, we've already discussed the difference between the Mag 7 and BTC yet you keep wanting to circle back there.  To what end?  

[73 Reds]

3 hours ago, Dave86ch said:

 

In some contexts, owning a self-certifiable, highly transportable, widely accepted protocol that acts as a form of money—and can be transferred on private channels instantly just by accessing a bash terminal

can make the difference between being rich and poor.

 

Where I live, many places, including grocery stores, accept Bitcoin. This means I can run a node and pay without intermediaries, in a private manner. The Bitcoins are transferred from my node to the grocery store, allowing me to buy food using private channels.

 

Alternatively, I can use CoinJoin to mix my transactions and transfer value without intermediaries, ensuring that nobody can link these transactions to me.

 

Everything operates without intermediaries, is digital-native, and utilizes surplus energy. It incentivizes energy use as needed, anywhere on the planet, at any hour, every day of the week.

@Dave86ch If you don't mind my asking where do you live?  I can't use it for any purpose important to me or if I can, it is not necessary.  As stated before, the issue is not that BTC may not ultimately have one or more widespread uses, the issue is owning it (vs. merely using it, like the internet), at what price and how that price is derived.      

[rkbabang]

17 hours ago, Vish_ram said:

In 10-15 years, two COBF investors starting out with same $ today, the one owning BTC will be far richer than the one not owing it. 

 

I’ll come back on Apr 21st, 2035 and 2040. #btcprediction

 

This is undoubtably true, I'm betting on it, but that doesn't mean the non BTC holder will be 'poor'.  There are other possible investments that you could hold to make you not poor in 2035 and 2040.  Unless you think we are in for a greatest depression where everything crashes for 15 years and the only thing that goes up is Bitcoin.    You can stay not poor by investing in other things.   I just happen to think investing in Bitcoin will make you very very rich in the next 15 years.

 

 

[thepupil]

5 hours ago, Dave86ch said:

 

In some contexts, owning a self-certifiable, highly transportable, widely accepted protocol that acts as a form of money—and can be transferred on private channels instantly just by accessing a bash terminal

can make the difference between being rich and poor.

 

Where I live, many places, including grocery stores, accept Bitcoin. This means I can run a node and pay without intermediaries, in a private manner. The Bitcoins are transferred from my node to the grocery store, allowing me to buy food using private channels.

 

Alternatively, I can use CoinJoin to mix my transactions and transfer value without intermediaries, ensuring that nobody can link these transactions to me.

 

Everything operates without intermediaries, is digital-native, and utilizes surplus energy. It incentivizes energy use as needed, anywhere on the planet, at any hour, every day of the week.

 

 

I don't know man...I just like to use my Amex Blue Cash Preferred and get 6% cash back when i go to the grocery store. 

 

Can I ask what you see as the benefit of purchasing food via "private channels"?...I mean i can certainly understand the benefit of purchasing illegal things or if one needs to flee a jurisdiction...but in what world is my grocery bill a matter of personal privacy?*

 

*outside of implementation of a social credit regime...but I think my purchase of a bunch of overpriced organic stuff would get me points in this regard. 

[james22]

2 hours ago, 73 Reds said:

But, we've already discussed the difference between the Mag 7 and BTC yet you keep wanting to circle back there.  To what end?  

 

Because as investments they are identical.

 

And when you can see how identical investments have performed from similar points in their adoption (spectacularly), you've no excuse if you miss out. 

[73 Reds]

12 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

Because as investments they are identical.

 

And when you can see how identical investments have performed from similar points in their adoption (spectacularly), you've no excuse if you miss out. 

No, but I give up, LOL.

[james22]

28 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

No, but I give up, LOL.

 

Promise?

 

Who will protect the gullible lurkers?

 

There is no more obvious investment today that offers a lower risk and higher reward than bitcoin. 

[73 Reds]

1 hour ago, james22 said:

 

Promise?

 

Who will protect the gullible lurkers?

 

There is no more obvious investment today that offers a lower risk and higher reward than bitcoin. 

Yes.  The argument for BTC is far from compelling and I've spoken my piece.

[james22]

55 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

Yes.  The argument for BTC is far from compelling and I've spoken my piece.

 

Give it 5 years.

 

If bitcoin hasn't convinced you by then, I'll buy you a beer (assuming I can afford to).

[73 Reds]

5 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

Give it 5 years.

 

If bitcoin hasn't convinced you by then, I'll buy you a beer (assuming I can afford to).

OK, but you have to pay in dollars.  

[james22]

1 minute ago, 73 Reds said:

OK, but you have to pay in dollars.  

 

[Libs]

Anyone who is anti- BTC is not going to change his mind because it's $300,000 in 5 years. If going from basically zero to $90,000 in 16 years, with adoption going mainstream, and (IMO) a reasonable bull case in place, if those things  haven't done the trick, nothing will. 

 

It's like Buffett said - you either grasp value investing in 30 minutes or you never will. 

 

That's not to say the bull case is a lock; or that you can't make money outside of value investing. Just that BTC isn't for everyone.

[james22]

20 minutes ago, Libs said:

Anyone who is anti- BTC is not going to change his mind because it's $300,000 in 5 years.

 

Yeah, but that's why the Early Majority, Late Majority, and Laggards are who they are.

 

And I'm betting Reds will be in that first category.

[Vish_ram]

In a decade, practically everyone (investors) will be owning BTC directly or indirectly. 

 

Just like Halal/Sharia ETFs, ESG based etfs, folks like Reds will own non-crypto ETFs (includes companies with zero crypto exposure).