Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stsimon who wrote (168782)	2/20/2021 9:20:42 AM
From: Maple MAGA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218918

Speaking of the US Federal Government I’m surprised they let Bit Coin establish itself on these shores. As skeptical as I am about gold I’m starting to find myself a believer, but not at high retail prices.

To: stsimon who wrote (168782)	2/20/2021 4:53:52 PM
From: sense	1 Recommendation Recommended By Lee Lichterman III Respond to of 218918

Having poked at it a bit over the last few weeks... My take on it now... big picture market perspective... is that bitcoin is clearly the innovator in the space that founded the market. The "first mover advantage" issue is probably an appropriate way to view that... without granting crypto any magical powers to ignore market dynamics that have always controlled every market. Look back to the dot.com bubble... to see who the "first movers" were... at a time when there was a deliberate gold rush going on in dot.com stocks... huge sums of money backing vapor... in order to stake out a claim as the "first mover" in the space to dominate selling... socks... pet supplies.... or groceries... on line. Remember the names of any of those... today ? And, relative to the market issues in silver, today ? Hypothecation and re-hypothication... means bankers have figured out how to make more "physical" silver in the market than actually exists... and they use that to control the "price" of silver. Evidence exists and is increasing rapidly... that the unchecked fraud in silver markets... conducted with the regulators knowing but willfully ignoring it... is becoming unsustainable. But, the point in context of this post... is that if you can do that with something that does exist physically... why would you assume you can't do that with something that doesn't ? Bitcoin does not appear to have solved the problem of preventing financial fraud. More innovation required.

To: stsimon who wrote (168782)	2/20/2021 5:59:34 PM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Recommended By ggersh Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218918

Re <<The cool thing about the USD and Bit Coin is neither currency is backed by anything. ... In a nuclear war between Bitcoin and the USD, my money is on the dollar. There will, however, be a lot of collateral damage in such a war.>> Within the borders of USA, yes. The $500K question is whether the folks who can afford a bitcoin care about what happens in, and remains in USA, or would be happy to remember key phrase and meander to Vancouver or Bahamas etc when push comes to shove. The $1M question is whether the USA authorities willing to do more than jawboning when BTC global market cap is less than US$ 5T, w/ 1T attributable to USA. The cost to USD of nuclear-hitting Bitgold might be (they cannot be sure) high. Should ‘they’ hit bitgold by KYC laws and regulations applicable to currencies and banking, fair, and in truth would help BTC, especially if BTC holders intend the BTC they hold to be last line of defense against fiat depravity, for they have no intention of paying the last bit of exit tax from any domain, and the rest of the holders counting on such deep BTC value. Should ‘they’ hit bitgold by outright ban within the confines of USA (and even G7), they will have sounded the bugle call for all to decamp fiat currencies by any means possible in accelerated hurry, just as they would should 100% of sovereign debt yield negative % and fully expressed at the local bank. Both hits likely, but first hit is going to encourage BTC insurrection, and the second will be ignored by domains likely to be recipient of escaping capital. The P2P feature of BTC is interesting even as it is traded on exchanges. Nylons, cigarettes and chocolate were considered trading currency at various moments. Why not BTC? IOW, should ‘they’ nuclear-hit BTC, my money might not be on BTC, but for sure not be on USD, as the nuclear-hit hints at bad stuff still to happen to the USD. Gold in the backyard often worked well in the course of troubling history. Even more strange (cool) that BTC is invented by no one we know, made in the majority where all sorts of items are made, sold all over the planet at rising valuation, held by millions of the faith, almost religiously, and flumfluxes the authorities, daring them to do whatever to what they might well not understand. They intuitively fear that a wrong move brings down the casino. No single individual dares to make a quick decisive but might ultimately be the wrong decision even as millions already decided. Let the individuals on Capitol Hill stand up and be counted, to do precisely the wrong thing.