Bitcoin VS Gold and the Gold Comparison - Bitnewsbot

Binance Support Number (+𝟏) 445*𝟗𝟎0*1𝟒𝟐𝟓 ♚ USA Help Phone

These days, the overall economy is just moving towards an all out cutting edge eco-system and subsequently everything starting from money move to theory are going paperless. Also, the cryptographic cash is the latest similarly as the most capable development to the field of electronic portion. The cryptographic cash is basically an exchange medium like the standard money related structures like USD, yet it is essentially planned for exchanging progressed information. Besides, here are a segment of the reasons why computerized Binance Support has gotten so celebrated in the continuous past. Asset moves: The budgetary specialists every now and again portray computerized cash as the technique that on a particular level can be used to actualize and execute two-party contracts on the things like land and vehicles. In addition, the advanced cash condition is similarly used to encourage some master Binance Support methods. Binance Supports: In the normal techniques for proficient connections, legitimate representatives, experts, and mediators can incorporate some unprecedented cost and enough unpredictability to even the immediate Binance Support. Moreover, there are operational expense, commissions, regulatory work and some other unprecedented conditions that may apply too. Of course, the cryptographic cash Binance Supports are adjusted issues that essentially happen on some common structure of frameworks organization. This thing achieves better clearness in setting up audit trails, more important obligation and less confusion over creation portions. Binance Support charges: Transaction costs normally trim down the advantages of an individual, fundamentally if the individual performs stores of cash related Binance Supports every month. Nonetheless, as the data excavators do figuring that generally makes different sorts of cryptographic types of cash get the compensation from the framework being referred to and hence here the Binance Support costs never apply. Nevertheless, one may need to pay a particular proportion of outside costs for associating with the organizations of any untouchable organization organizations to keep up the computerized Binance Support wallet. More mystery methodology for Binance Support: Under the credit/cash structures, the all out Binance Support history can transform into a reference report for the credit association or bank included, come what may while making Binance Support. At the most clear level, this may recall a check for the record acclimates to guarantee the openness of good resources. Regardless, by virtue of cryptographic cash, every Binance Support made between two social events is considered as a stand-out exchange where the terms can be agreed and organized. Additionally, here the information exchange is performed on a "push" premise where one can definitely send what he/she seizes the opportunity to send to the recipient. This thing thoroughly guarantees the security of the money related history similarly as the threat of character or record theft. Less complex trading system all around: Although advanced monetary forms are commonly seen as the real tenders on the open levels, these are not dependent upon the advance costs, exchange rates, Binance Support charges or whatever different costs that are constrained by a particular country. Likewise, by using the appropriated procedure for the blockchain advancement, Binance Supports, and cross-periphery Binance Supports can be performed without any snares. More conspicuous induction to the credits: The Internet and the serious data move are the media that ease advanced cash exchanges. Thusly, these organizations are open to people with data on the cryptographic cash masterminds, a helpful data affiliation and snappy action to the relevant passages and locales. The advanced Binance Support organic framework is prepared for making Binance Support taking care of and asset move open to all the wiling people after the fundamental establishment is accessible set up. Strong security: After favoring the computerized Binance Support move, this can't be exchanged like the "charge-back" Binance Supports of different Visa associations. This can be a help against the deception that necessities to choose explicit understandings among vendors and buyers about limits of the appearance technique or a blunder in the Binance Support. Adaptability: There are around 1200 sorts of altcoins or cryptographic types of cash present in the current world. A bit of these are a bit of transient, anyway an adequate degree is used for express cases, which depict the versatility of this marvel. Blockchains, sidechains, mining - wordings in the incognito universe of cryptographic cash continue aggregating by minutes. Notwithstanding the way that it sounds ludicrous to introduce new fiscal terms in a successfully astounding universe of store, advanced types of cash offer a really vital response for most likely the best burden in the current Binance Support market - security of Binance Support in an automated world. Advanced cash is a describing and irksome improvement in the snappy moving universe of parity tech, a proper response to the necessity for a protected vehicle of exchange the hours of virtual Binance Support. In when game plans are simply digits and numbers, cryptographic cash proposes to do unequivocally that! In the most basic kind of the term, advanced cash is a proof-of-thought for elective virtual money that ensures ensured about, obscure Binance Supports through shared online work sorting out. The misnomer is considerably more a property rather than veritable money. Rather than standard money, cryptographic cash models work without a central influence, as a decentralized progressed instrument. In a scattered advanced Binance Support instrument, the money is given, directed and grasped by the total system peer compose - the tireless activity of which is known as mining on a buddy's machine. Successful diggers get coins too in vitality about their time and resources utilized. At the point when used, the Binance Support information is conveyed to a blockchain in the framework under an open key, shielding each coin from being spent twice from a comparable customer. The blockchain can be thought of as the agent's register. Coins are ensured about behind a mystery word made sure about cutting edge wallet addressing the customer. Effortlessly of coins in the serious money world is pre-picked, freed from control, by any individual, affiliations, government components and cash related foundations. The cryptographic cash structure is known for its speed, as Binance Support practices over the modernized wallets can rise resources immediately, diverged from the customary budgetary system. It is moreover by and large irreversible by arrangement, further strengthening the chance of mystery and shedding any further chances of following the money back to its special owner. Tragically, the eminent features - speed, security, and anonymity - have moreover made crypto-coins the strategy for Binance Support for different unlawful Binance Supports. Much equivalent to the Binance Support market in actuality, money rates shift in the serious coin condition. Inferable from the restricted proportion of coins, as enthusiasm for money grows, coins swell in regard. Bitcoin is the greatest and best advanced cash as of recently, with a market head of $15.3 Billion, getting 37.6% of the market and at present assessed at $8,997.31. Bitcoin hit the currency market in December, 2017 by being Binance Supportd at $19,783.21 per coin, before standing up to the startling make a plunge 2018. The fall is generally a result of rising of alternative electronic coins, for instance, Ethereum, NPCcoin, Ripple, EOS, Litecoin and MintChip. On account of hard-coded limits on their deftly, computerized types of cash are considered to keep comparative principles of money related issues as gold - cost is constrained by the confined effortlessly and the progressions of premium. With the steady instabilities in the exchange rates, their reasonability regardless of everything isn't yet clear. Consequently, the enthusiasm for virtual financial structures is more speculation right now than a standard Binance Support market. In the wake of present day change, this electronic money is a key bit of imaginative aggravation. From the reason for a nice onlooker, this climb may look empowering, subverting and perplexing simultaneously. While some monetary expert remain far fetched, others believe it to be a lightning change of financial industry. Moderately, the serious coins will oust for the most part quarter of open financial principles in the made countries by 2030. This has recently made another favorable position class near to the customary overall economy and another game plan of theory vehicle will start from cryptofinance in the next years. Starting late, Bitcoin may have ventured out to offer spotlight to various cryptographic types of cash. Nevertheless, this doesn't signal any crash of the cryptographic cash itself. While some cash related advisors highlight over governments' activity in separating the secret world to coordinate the central organization part, others request continuing with the current free-stream. The more standard cryptographic types of cash are, the more examination and rule they attract - an ordinary problem that bewilders the serious note and deteriorates the basic objective of its world. Regardless, the nonattendance of go-betweens and oversight is making it incredibly engaging the examiners and making each day business change . To be sure, even the International Monetary Fund (IMF) fears that cryptographic types of cash will remove public banks and overall banking soon. After 2030, common business will be controlled by crypto nimbly chain.
submitted by johnathanmar12 to u/johnathanmar12 [link] [comments]


Roger Ver, is one of the five founders of the bitcoin foundation. You could say he was ahead of his time, buying $25,000 worth of bitcoin when they were merely $1 each. He was the first major investor to invest millions in, Ripple, Kraken, and Bitpay among others. Now he wants Bitcoin Cash, a fork of the legacy chain, to be used as a global P2P currency, and says it can scale just like Satoshi first laid out in the original Bitcoin whitepaper. -------------------------------------------------------------- Rank: #5 Current Price: $257.65 Market Cap : $4,741,042,759 24 hour trading volume : 1.741 Billion USD -------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Roger, first and foremost, I wanted to thank you for taking the time to do this. You are truly a pioneer in the Bitcoin space, and all of us owe you a debt of gratitude. On behalf of all of us, I wanted to say thank you for advancing the space.
1. First, I want you to take a moment and appreciate how far bitcoin and cryptocurrency has come this past decade. Did you ever believe you would see such growth, interest, and adoption in such a short period of time or has it completely surprised you?
We always over estimate the amount of progress that will be made in the short term, but underestimate the amount of progress that will be made in the long term.
Crypto currency is another example of that.
2. At what point did it hit you that bitcoin was history in the making?
From the very first day I knew it was one of the most important inventions in the history of humankind.
The book Digital Gold goes over how I literally had to go to the emergency room because of the excitement I had for Bitcoin.
3. How did you first get into bitcoin, pre Bitinstant?
I first heard about it on the radio show.
A full history of the early years is covered well by Digital Gold.
4 .What economists and philosophers do you align with?
I think Murray Rothbard fits into both categories and his thinking influenced mine more than any other single author.
Others who have influenced me would include:
Adam Smith
Ludwig von Mises
Milton Friedman
David Friedman
John Locke
Henry Hazlitt
Frederick Bastiat
Larked Rose
Ray Kurzweil
6. What has been your favorite moment in crypto history thus far?
My favorite moments were reading the underlying philosophy behind the Silk Road.
The government has done an amazing job distorting and smearing the underlying message behind the site.
My eyes started to tear up when I read this post on the front page of the Silk Road for the fist time:
I never bought or sold a single thing there, but I spent countless enjoyable hours reading their forums and exploring the site.
7. What are your future plans for Bitcoin Cash?
It isn’t just a hobby, it’s a global revolt. We will become money for the world.
8. Branding is so important. Bitcoin currently has greater brand recognition a la Coca-Cola, and is regarded by many as the “real” Bitcoin, even though this is widely disputed, especially by crypto-fundamentalists. Do you envision a Coca-Cola vs. Pepsi type scenario? Do you envision parity price-wise between the two on a long enough timeline?
Bitcoin Cash has more utility than BTC, so in the long run it will have a larger market cap. Currently we are in the era when Myspace was bigger than Facebook, but Myspace’s servers were being over loaded and causing a bad user experience.
Eventually people migrated to Facebook and eventually people will migrate away from BTC.
8. a) Have you ever thought of re-branding Bitcoin Cash?
No one is in control to do such a thing by themselves. The community can’t even agree on orange vs green for the colors.
9. Bitcoin Cash has the potential to truly be used as a global form of payment rather than merely a store of value, what else excites you the most about the potential of Bitcoin Cash?
  1. Fast
  2. Cheap
  3. Reliable
  4. Private
Payments for the world. That’s all we need.
10. I asked Adam Back the same question: If you could remove yourself from the equation, and remove bias, how would you objectively evaluate the pros and cons of Bitcoin Cash versus The Lightning Network?
Anyone can permissionlessly start using BCH to start sending or receiving payments world wide in about 30 seconds. (The time it takes to download an app)
It is accepted by more than 100,000 websites around the world, and has millions of users.
Lightning Network would take about a full day to setup and get working permissionlessly, and would take several hundred dollars of additional computer hardware.
Once it is setup, you can spend it at about 300 websites world wide, and it has maybe a few tens of thousands of users.
11. When you’re not working, what do you like to do for fun? Favorite hobbies?
I enjoy reading, and Brazilian Jujitsu. I’m especially interested in doing more competitions before I get too old.
12. What are a few of your favorite books? What are some that have made a long lasting impact on you? (Can be fiction or nonfiction)
I loved the Age of Spiritual Machines. It painted a picture of how exciting the world is going to be thanks to More’s Law.
I also loved The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. I see crypto currency being a world life parallel.
13. What are you most excited about for the future of blockchain technology and where do you see the space in 5 years?
I’m excited to see wide spread wallets with strong privacy, and more agorism starting to take place around the world.
14. What are your personal theories of who Satoshi was / were, what was their motivation, and do you think something like bitcoin would have inevitably been created eventually, had Satoshi never existed?
I don’t know who Satoshi is or was, but it was clear they were trying to build a peer to peer electronic cash system, not what BTC has become today.
It was an inevitability that someone would create something like Bitcoin eventually. People like David Friedman and others had been writing about it for decades in advance.
15. What advice would you give our viewers regarding blockchain, business, motivation, or life in general?
Read more books. Reading a book like having a one on one tutoring session from the author. It’s the best way to learn directly from the greatest minds the human race has ever produced.
If you were a director and could make only one film out of all the wild stories regarding crypto, what subject matter would you choose and why?
The Silk Road because it embodied the spirit of peer to peer cash and voluntaryism.
submitted by blindedzeppelin to mainstreetcrypto [link] [comments]

Long-run favors BTC over BCH, here's why...

There are many reasons why BTC will remain the gold standard and not BCH.
BTC Advantages over BCH:
BCH has:
I have been watching Bitcoin for a long time, and the main thing I've learned is don't overreact to flashes in the pan, weak hands, and anytime a "panic" is happening. What really pays in the long-run is sticking with things that have a proven track record, a high quality set of software engineers and computer scientists, and a critical mass of ecosystem. Nothing compares to Bitcoin in these regards!!
Bitcoin has a very bright future ahead!
submitted by fortunative to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

US Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses – by Michael Hudson • 23 July 2019 • 5,400 Words •
Today’s world is at war on many fronts. The rules of international law and order put in place toward the end of World War II are being broken by U.S. foreign policy escalating its confrontation with countries that refrain from giving its companies control of their economic surpluses. Countries that do not give the United States control of their oil and financial sectors or privatize their key sectors are being isolated by the United States imposing trade sanctions and unilateral tariffs giving special advantages to U.S. producers in violation of free trade agreements with European, Asian and other countries.
This global fracture has an increasingly military cast. U.S. officials justify tariffs and import quotas illegal under WTO rules on “national security” grounds, claiming that the United States can do whatever it wants as the world’s “exceptional” nation. U.S. officials explain that this means that their nation is not obliged to adhere to international agreements or even to its own treaties and promises. This allegedly sovereign right to ignore on its international agreements was made explicit after Bill Clinton and his Secretary of State Madeline Albright broke the promise by President George Bush and Secretary of State James Baker that NATO would not expand eastward after 1991. (“You didn’t get it in writing,” was the U.S. response to the verbal agreements that were made.)
Likewise, the Trump administration repudiated the multilateral Iranian nuclear agreement signed by the Obama administration, and is escalating warfare with its proxy armies in the Near East. U.S. politicians are waging a New Cold War against Russia, China, Iran, and oil-exporting countries that the United States is seeking to isolate if cannot control their governments, central bank and foreign diplomacy.
The international framework that originally seemed equitable was pro-U.S. from the outset. In 1945 this was seen as a natural result of the fact that the U.S. economy was the least war-damaged and held by far most of the world’s monetary gold. Still, the postwar trade and financial framework was ostensibly set up on fair and equitable international principles. Other countries were expected to recover and grow, creating diplomatic, financial and trade parity with each other.
But the past decade has seen U.S. diplomacy become one-sided in turning the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, SWIFT bank-clearing system and world trade into an asymmetrically exploitative system. This unilateral U.S.-centered array of institutions is coming to be widely seen not only as unfair, but as blocking the progress of other countries whose growth and prosperity is seen by U.S. foreign policy as a threat to unilateral U.S. hegemony. What began as an ostensibly international order to promote peaceful prosperity has turned increasingly into an extension of U.S. nationalism, predatory rent-extraction and a more dangerous military confrontation.
Deterioration of international diplomacy into a more nakedly explicit pro-U.S. financial, trade and military aggression was implicit in the way in which economic diplomacy was shaped when the United Nations, IMF and World Bank were shaped mainly by U.S. economic strategists. Their economic belligerence is driving countries to withdraw from the global financial and trade order that has been turned into a New Cold War vehicle to impose unilateral U.S. hegemony. Nationalistic reactions are consolidating into new economic and political alliances from Europe to Asia.
We are still mired in the Oil War that escalated in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq, which quickly spread to Libya and Syria. American foreign policy has long been based largely on control of oil. This has led the United States to oppose the Paris accords to stem global warming. Its aim is to give U.S. officials the power to impose energy sanctions forcing other countries to “freeze in the dark” if they do not follow U.S. leadership.
To expand its oil monopoly, America is pressuring Europe to oppose the Nordstream II gas pipeline from Russia, claiming that this would make Germany and other countries dependent on Russia instead of on U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG). Likewise, American oil diplomacy has imposed unilateral sanctions against Iranian oil exports, until such time as a regime change opens up that country’s oil reserves to U.S., French, British and other allied oil majors.
U.S. control of dollarized money and credit is critical to this hegemony. As Congressman Brad Sherman of Los Angeles told a House Financial Services Committee hearing on May 9, 2019: “An awful lot of our international power comes from the fact that the U.S. dollar is the standard unit of international finance and transactions. Clearing through the New York Fed is critical for major oil and other transactions. It is the announced purpose of the supporters of cryptocurrency to take that power away from us, to put us in a position where the most significant sanctions we have against Iran, for example, would become irrelevant.”[1]
The U.S. aim is to keep the dollar as the transactions currency for world trade, savings, central bank reserves and international lending. This monopoly status enables the U.S. Treasury and State Department to disrupt the financial payments system and trade for countries with which the United States is at economic or outright military war.
Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly responded by describing how “the degeneration of the universalist globalization model [is] turning into a parody, a caricature of itself, where common international rules are replaced with the laws… of one country.”[2] That is the trajectory on which this deterioration of formerly open international trade and finance is now moving. It has been building up for a decade. On June 5, 2009, then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev cited this same disruptive U.S. dynamic at work in the wake of the U.S. junk mortgage and bank fraud crisis.
Those whose job it was to forecast events … were not ready for the depth of the crisis and turned out to be too rigid, unwieldy and slow in their response. The international financial organisations – and I think we need to state this up front and not try to hide it – were not up to their responsibilities, as has been said quite unambiguously at a number of major international events such as the two recent G20 summits of the world’s largest economies.
Furthermore, we have had confirmation that our pre-crisis analysis of global economic trends and the global economic system were correct. The artificially maintained uni-polar system and preservation of monopolies in key global economic sectors are root causes of the crisis. One big centre of consumption, financed by a growing deficit, and thus growing debts, one formerly strong reserve currency, and one dominant system of assessing assets and risks – these are all factors that led to an overall drop in the quality of regulation and the economic justification of assessments made, including assessments of macroeconomic policy. As a result, there was no avoiding a global crisis.[3]
That crisis is what is now causing today’s break in global trade and payments.
Warfare on many fronts, with Dollarization being the main arena
Dissolution of the Soviet Union 1991 did not bring the disarmament that was widely expected. U.S. leadership celebrated the Soviet demise as signaling the end of foreign opposition to U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism and even as the End of History. NATO expanded to encircle Russia and sponsored “color revolutions” from Georgia to Ukraine, while carving up former Yugoslavia into small statelets. American diplomacy created a foreign legion of Wahabi fundamentalists from Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, Syria and Libya in support of Saudi Arabian extremism and Israeli expansionism.
The United States is waging war for control of oil against Venezuela, where a military coup failed a few years ago, as did the 2018-19 stunt to recognize an unelected pro-American puppet regime. The Honduran coup under President Obama was more successful in overthrowing an elected president advocating land reform, continuing the tradition dating back to 1954 when the CIA overthrew Guatemala’s Arbenz regime.
U.S. officials bear a special hatred for countries that they have injured, ranging from Guatemala in 1954 to Iran, whose regime it overthrew to install the Shah as military dictator. Claiming to promote “democracy,” U.S. diplomacy has redefined the word to mean pro-American, and opposing land reform, national ownership of raw materials and public subsidy of foreign agriculture or industry as an “undemocratic” attack on “free markets,” meaning markets controlled by U.S. financial interests and absentee owners of land, natural resources and banks.
A major byproduct of warfare has always been refugees, and today’s wave fleeing ISIS, Al Qaeda and other U.S.-backed Near Eastern proxies is flooding Europe. A similar wave is fleeing the dictatorial regimes backed by the United States from Honduras, Ecuador, Colombia and neighboring countries. The refugee crisis has become a major factor leading to the resurgence of nationalist parties throughout Europe and for the white nationalism of Donald Trump in the United States.
Dollarization as the vehicle for U.S. nationalism
The Dollar Standard – U.S. Treasury debt to foreigners held by the world’s central banks – has replaced the gold-exchange standard for the world’s central bank reserves to settle payments imbalances among themselves. This has enabled the United States to uniquely run balance-of-payments deficits for nearly seventy years, despite the fact that these Treasury IOUs have little visible likelihood of being repaid except under arrangements where U.S. rent-seeking and outright financial tribute from other enables it to liquidate its official foreign debt.
The United States is the only nation that can run sustained balance-of-payments deficits without having to sell off its assets or raise interest rates to borrow foreign money. No other national economy in the world can could afford foreign military expenditures on any major scale without losing its exchange value. Without the Treasury-bill standard, the United States would be in this same position along with other nations. That is why Russia, China and other powers that U.S. strategists deem to be strategic rivals and enemies are looking to restore gold’s role as the preferred asset to settle payments imbalances.
The U.S. response is to impose regime change on countries that prefer gold or other foreign currencies to dollars for their exchange reserves. A case in point is the overthrow of Libya’s Omar Kaddafi after he sought to base his nation’s international reserves on gold. His liquidation stands as a military warning to other countries.
Thanks to the fact that payments-surplus economies invest their dollar inflows in U.S. Treasury bonds, the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit finances its domestic budget deficit. This foreign central-bank recycling of U.S. overseas military spending into purchases of U.S. Treasury securities gives the United States a free ride, financing its budget – also mainly military in character – so that it can taxing its own citizens.
Trump is forcing other countries to create an alternative to the Dollar Standard
The fact that Donald Trump’s economic policies are proving ineffective in restoring American manufacturing is creating rising nationalist pressure to exploit foreigners by arbitrary tariffs without regard for international law, and to impose trade sanctions and diplomatic meddling to disrupt regimes that pursue policies that U.S. diplomats do not like.
There is a parallel here with Rome in the late 1st century BC. It stripped its provinces to pay for its military deficit, the grain dole and land redistribution at the expense of Italian cities and Asia Minor. This created foreign opposition to drive Rome out. The U.S. economy is similar to Rome’s: extractive rather than productive, based mainly on land rents and money-interest. As the domestic market is impoverished, U.S. politicians are seeking to take from abroad what no longer is being produced at home.
What is so ironic – and so self-defeating of America’s free global ride – is that Trump’s simplistic aim of lowering the dollar’s exchange rate to make U.S. exports more price-competitive. He imagines commodity trade to be the entire balance of payments, as if there were no military spending, not to mention lending and investment. To lower the dollar’s exchange rate, he is demanding that China’s central bank and those of other countries stop supporting the dollar by recycling the dollars they receive for their exports into holdings of U.S. Treasury securities.
This tunnel vision leaves out of account the fact that the trade balance is not simply a matter of comparative international price levels. The United States has dissipated its supply of spare manufacturing capacity and local suppliers of parts and materials, while much of its industrial engineering and skilled manufacturing labor has retired. An immense shortfall must be filled by new capital investment, education and public infrastructure, whose charges are far above those of other economics.
Trump’s infrastructure ideology is a Public-Private Partnership characterized by high-cost financialization demanding high monopoly rents to cover its interest charges, stock dividends and management fees. This neoliberal policy raises the cost of living for the U.S. labor force, making it uncompetitive. The United States is unable to produce more at any price right now, because its has spent the past half-century dismantling its infrastructure, closing down its part suppliers and outsourcing its industrial technology.
The United States has privatized and financialized infrastructure and basic needs such as public health and medical care, education and transportation that other countries have kept in their public domain to make their economies more cost-efficient by providing essential services at subsidized prices or freely. The United States also has led the practice of debt pyramiding, from housing to corporate finance. This financial engineering and wealth creation by inflating debt-financed real estate and stock market bubbles has made the United States a high-cost economy that cannot compete successfully with well-managed mixed economies.
Unable to recover dominance in manufacturing, the United States is concentrating on rent-extracting sectors that it hopes monopolize, headed by information technology and military production. On the industrial front, it threatens to disrupt China and other mixed economies by imposing trade and financial sanctions.
The great gamble is whether these other countries will defend themselves by joining in alliances enabling them to bypass the U.S. economy. American strategists imagine their country to be the world’s essential economy, without whose market other countries must suffer depression. The Trump Administration thinks that There Is No Alternative (TINA) for other countries except for their own financial systems to rely on U.S. dollar credit.
To protect themselves from U.S. sanctions, countries would have to avoid using the dollar, and hence U.S. banks. This would require creation of a non-dollarized financial system for use among themselves, including their own alternative to the SWIFT bank clearing system. Table 1 lists some possible related defenses against U.S. nationalistic diplomacy.
As noted above, what also is ironic in President Trump’s accusation of China and other countries of artificially manipulating their exchange rate against the dollar (by recycling their trade and payments surpluses into Treasury securities to hold down their currency’s dollar valuation) involves dismantling the Treasury-bill standard. The main way that foreign economies have stabilized their exchange rate since 1971 has indeed been to recycle their dollar inflows into U.S. Treasury securities. Letting their currency’s value rise would threaten their export competitiveness against their rivals, although not necessarily benefit the United States.
Ending this practice leaves countries with the main way to protect their currencies from rising against the dollar is to reduce dollar inflows by blocking U.S. lending to domestic borrowers. They may levy floating tariffs proportioned to the dollar’s declining value. The U.S. has a long history since the 1920s of raising its tariffs against currencies that are depreciating: the American Selling Price (ASP) system. Other countries can impose their own floating tariffs against U.S. goods.
Trade dependency as an aim of the World Bank, IMF and US AID
The world today faces a problem much like what it faced on the eve of World War II. Like Germany then, the United States now poses the main threat of war, and equally destructive neoliberal economic regimes imposing austerity, economic shrinkage and depopulation. U.S. diplomats are threatening to destroy regimes and entire economies that seek to remain independent of this system, by trade and financial sanctions backed by direct military force.
Dedollarization will require creation of multilateral alternatives to U.S. “front” institutions such as the World Bank, IMF and other agencies in which the United States holds veto power to block any alternative policies deemed not to let it “win.” U.S. trade policy through the World Bank and U.S. foreign aid agencies aims at promoting dependency on U.S. food exports and other key commodities, while hiring U.S. engineering firms to build up export infrastructure to subsidize U.S. and other natural-resource investors.[4] The financing is mainly in dollars, providing risk-free bonds to U.S. and other financial institutions. The resulting commercial and financial “interdependency” has led to a situation in which a sudden interruption of supply would disrupt foreign economies by causing a breakdown in their chain of payments and production. The effect is to lock client countries into dependency on the U.S. economy and its diplomacy, euphemized as “promoting growth and development.”
U.S. neoliberal policy via the IMF imposes austerity and opposes debt writedowns. Its economic model pretends that debtor countries can pay any volume of dollar debt simply by reducing wages to squeeze more income out of the labor force to pay foreign creditors. This ignores the fact that solving the domestic “budget problem” by taxing local revenue still faces the “transfer problem” of converting it into dollars or other hard currencies in which most international debt is denominated. The result is that the IMF’s “stabilization” programs actually destabilize and impoverish countries forced into following its advice.
IMF loans support pro-U.S. regimes such as Ukraine, and subsidize capital flight by supporting local currencies long enough to enable U.S. client oligarchies to flee their currencies at a pre-devaluation exchange rate for the dollar. When the local currency finally is allowed to collapse, debtor countries are advised to impose anti-labor austerity. This globalizes the class war of capital against labor while keeping debtor countries on a short U.S. financial leash.
U.S. diplomacy is capped by trade sanctions to disrupt economies that break away from U.S. aims. Sanctions are a form of economic sabotage, as lethal as outright military warfare in establishing U.S. control over foreign economies. The threat is to impoverish civilian populations, in the belief that this will lead them to replace their governments with pro-American regimes promising to restore prosperity by selling off their domestic infrastructure to U.S. and other multinational investors.
chart hudson
There are alternatives, on many fronts
Militarily, today’s leading alternative to NATO expansionism is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), along with Europe following France’s example under Charles de Gaulle and withdrawing. After all, there is no real threat of military invasion today in Europe. No nation can occupy another without an enormous military draft and such heavy personnel losses that domestic protests would unseat the government waging such a war. The U.S. anti-war movement in the 1960s signaled the end of the military draft, not only in the United States but in nearly all democratic countries. (Israel, Switzerland, Brazil and North Korea are exceptions.)
The enormous spending on armaments for a kind of war unlikely to be fought is not really military, but simply to provide profits to the military industrial complex. The arms are not really to be used. They are simply to be bought, and ultimately scrapped. The danger, of course, is that these not-for-use arms actually might be used, if only to create a need for new profitable production.
Likewise, foreign holdings of dollars are not really to be spent on purchases of U.S. exports or investments. They are like fine-wine collectibles, for saving rather than for drinking. The alternative to such dollarized holdings is to create a mutual use of national currencies, and a domestic bank-clearing payments system as an alternative to SWIFT. Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela already are said to be developing a crypto-currency payments to circumvent U.S. sanctions and hence financial control.
In the World Trade Organization, the United States has tried to claim that any industry receiving public infrastructure or credit subsidy deserves tariff retaliation in order to force privatization. In response to WTO rulings that U.S. tariffs are illegally imposed, the United States “has blocked all new appointments to the seven-member appellate body in protest, leaving it in danger of collapse because it may not have enough judges to allow it to hear new cases.”[5] In the U.S. view, only privatized trade financed by private rather than public banks is “fair” trade.
An alternative to the WTO (or removal of its veto privilege given to the U.S. bloc) is needed to cope with U.S. neoliberal ideology and, most recently, the U.S. travesty claiming “national security” exemption to free-trade treaties, impose tariffs on steel, aluminum, and on European countries that circumvent sanctions on Iran or threaten to buy oil from Russia via the Nordstream II pipeline instead of high-cost liquified “freedom gas” from the United States.
In the realm of development lending, China’s bank along with its Belt and Road initiative is an incipient alternative to the World Bank, whose main role has been to promote foreign dependency on U.S. suppliers. The IMF for its part now functions as an extension of the U.S. Department of Defense to subsidize client regimes such as Ukraine while financially isolating countries not subservient to U.S. diplomacy.
To save debt-strapped economies suffering Greek-style austerity, the world needs to replace neoliberal economic theory with an analytic logic for debt writedowns based on the ability to pay. The guiding principle of the needed development-oriented logic of international law should be that no nation should be obliged to pay foreign creditors by having to sell of the public domain and rent-extraction rights to foreign creditors. The defining character of nationhood should be the fiscal right to tax natural resource rents and financial returns, and to create its own monetary system.
The United States refuses to join the International Criminal Court. To be effective, it needs enforcement power for its judgments and penalties, capped by the ability to bring charges of war crimes in the tradition of the Nuremberg tribunal. U.S. to such a court, combined with its military buildup now threatening World War III, suggests a new alignment of countries akin to the Non-Aligned Nations movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Non-aligned in this case means freedom from U.S. diplomatic control or threats.
Such institutions require a more realistic economic theory and philosophy of operations to replace the neoliberal logic for anti-government privatization, anti-labor austerity, and opposition to domestic budget deficits and debt writedowns. Today’s neoliberal doctrine counts financial late fees and rising housing prices as adding to “real output” (GDP), but deems public investment as deadweight spending, not a contribution to output. The aim of such logic is to convince governments to pay their foreign creditors by selling off their public infrastructure and other assets in the public domain.
Just as the “capacity to pay” principle was the foundation stone of the Bank for International Settlements in 1931, a similar basis is needed to measure today’s ability to pay debts and hence to write down bad loans that have been made without a corresponding ability of debtors to pay. Without such an institution and body of analysis, the IMF’s neoliberal principle of imposing economic depression and falling living standards to pay U.S. and other foreign creditors will impose global poverty.
The above proposals provide an alternative to the U.S. “exceptionalist” refusal to join any international organization that has a say over its affairs. Other countries must be willing to turn the tables and isolate U.S. banks, U.S. exporters, and to avoid using U.S. dollars and routing payments via U.S. banks. To protect their ability to create a countervailing power requires an international court and its sponsoring organization.
The first existential objective is to avoid the current threat of war by winding down U.S. military interference in foreign countries and removing U.S. military bases as relics of neocolonialism. Their danger to world peace and prosperity threatens a reversion to the pre-World War II colonialism, ruling by client elites along lines similar to the 2014 Ukrainian coup by neo-Nazi groups sponsored by the U.S. State Department and National Endowment for Democracy. Such control recalls the dictators that U.S. diplomacy established throughout Latin America in the 1950s. Today’s ethnic terrorism by U.S.-sponsored Wahabi-Saudi Islam recalls the behavior of Nazi Germany in the 1940s.
Global warming is the second major existentialist threat. Blocking attempts to reverse it is a bedrock of American foreign policy, because it is based on control of oil. So the military, refugee and global warming threats are interconnected.
The U.S. military poses the greatest immediate danger. Today’s warfare is fundamentally changed from what it used to be. Prior to the 1970s, nations conquering others had to invade and occupy them with armies recruited by a military draft. But no democracy in today’s world can revive such a draft without triggering widespread refusal to fight, voting the government out of power. The only way the United States – or other countries – can fight other nations is to bomb them. And as noted above, economic sanctions have as destructive an effect on civilian populations in countries deemed to be U.S. adversaries as overt warfare. The United States can sponsor political coups (as in Honduras and Pinochet’s Chile), but cannot occupy. It is unwilling to rebuild, to say nothing of taking responsibility for the waves of refugees that our bombing and sanctions are causing from Latin America to the Near East.
U.S. ideologues view their nation’s coercive military expansion and political subversion and neoliberal economic policy of privatization and financialization as an irreversible victory signaling the End of History. To the rest of the world it is a threat to human survival.
The American promise is that the victory of neoliberalism is the End of History, offering prosperity to the entire world. But beneath the rhetoric of free choice and free markets is the reality of corruption, subversion, coercion, debt peonage and neofeudalism. The reality is the creation and subsidy of polarized economies bifurcated between a privileged rentier class and its clients, their debtors and renters. America is to be permitted to monopolize trade in oil and food grains, and high-technology rent-yielding monopolies, living off its dependent customers. Unlike medieval serfdom, people subject to this End of History scenario can choose to live wherever they want. But wherever they live, they must take on a lifetime of debt to obtain access to a home of their own, and rely on U.S.-sponsored control of their basic needs, money and credit by adhering to U.S. financial planning of their economies. This dystopian scenario confirms Rosa Luxemburg’s recognition that the ultimate choice facing nations in today’s world is between socialism and barbarism.
Keynote Paper delivered at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy, July 21, 2019.
[1] Billy Bambrough, “Bitcoin Threatens To ‘Take Power’ From The U.S. Federal Reserve,” Forbes, May 15, 2019.
[2] Vladimir Putin, keynote address to the Economic Forum, June 5-6 2019. Putin went on to warn of “a policy of completely unlimited economic egoism and a forced breakdown.” This fragmenting of the global economic space “is the road to endless conflict, trade wars and maybe not just trade wars. Figuratively, this is the road to the ultimate fight of all against all.”
[3] Address to St Petersburg International Economic Forum’s Plenary Session, St Petersburg,, June 5, 2009, from Johnson’s Russia List, June 8, 2009, #8,
[4] . Already in the late 1950s the Forgash Plan proposed a World Bank for Economic Acceleration. Designed by Terence McCarthy and sponsored by Florida Senator Morris Forgash, the bank would have been a more truly development-oriented institution to guide foreign development to create balanced economies self-sufficient in food and other essentials. The proposal was opposed by U.S. interests on the ground that countries pursuing land reform tended to be anti-American. More to the point, they would have avoided trade and financial dependency on U.S. suppliers and banks, and hence on U.S. trade and financial sanctions to prevent them from following policies at odds with U.S. diplomatic demands.
[5] Don Weinland, “WTO rules against US in tariff dispute with China,” Financial Times, July 17, 2019.
submitted by finnagains to conspiracy [link] [comments]

A Crypto Fix for a Broken International Monetary System

The international monetary system is broken. Helping to fix it poses a huge opportunity for the cryptographers behind cryptocurrency and blockchain technology.
Now they have one of the stewards of that system in their corner: Mark Carney, the outgoing Bank of England Governor.
A week ago in Jackson Hole, Mont., Carney told the Federal Reserve’s annual gabfest that central bankers could develop a network of national digital currencies to create a new, basket-managed “synthetic hegemonic currency.”
Carney’s proposal was mostly a thought exercise to inspire conversation around solutions to the dangerous imbalances fostered by the current system’s dependence on the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. The specifics were necessarily thin – any solution will be both technically and politically complicated, and even though he’ll depart the BOE in January, Carney’s status as a public official demands caution.
But I don’t share those constraints. So, let me lay out my own modest proposal for a cryptocurrency-based fix to a broken global financial system. Hint: it is not “buy bitcoin.”
I’m neither a trained economist nor a cryptographer, so I know this act of hubris will attract naysayers. I welcome criticisms and suggestions. I’m also quite certain I’m not the first to think of this, so I’m eager to hear of others working on similar projects.
The thing is I’ve been obsessed with both the structural failings of the global financial system and cryptocurrency for many years now. Three of my five books have covered those topics. It’s hard to bite my tongue.

Fixing the global currency system

I think that instead of creating a whole new global currency, central bankers should work to develop digital currency interoperability. We need a system of decentralized exchange through which businesses in different countries can use smart contracts to create automated escrow agreements and protect themselves against exchange rate volatility. With algorithms that achieve atomic swaps now available and with other advances in cross-chain interoperability, I believe we’ll soon have the technology to remove foreign exchange risk from international trade without relying on an intermediating currency such as the dollar.
Here’s how it might work: A hypothetical importer in Russia could strike a deal with an exporter from China and agree to a future payment, denominated in Chinese renminbi, based on the latter’s prevailing exchange rate with the Russian ruble. Relying on an interoperability protocol that’s commonly integrated into each party’s preferred digital national currency – either in privately run stablecoins or central bank-issued digital currencies – the two firms could then establish a smart contract that “trustlessly” locks up the required renminbi payment in decentralized escrow. If delivery and contract fulfillment are confirmed, the payment is released to the Chinese exporter. If not, the funds revert to the Russian importer at the same, initial conversion rate.
In this scenario, both parties are protected against adverse exchange rate movements. Yet, despite the trust gap between them, there is no need to intermediate the payment through dollars, and no need for either party to take out a forward contract, FX option or some other expensive exchange rate hedge.
Of course, the importer would suffer the opportunity cost of locking up otherwise valuable working capital for a few months. But private banks could mitigate that with collateralized short-term loans on terms that would be a lot cheaper than the current cost of currency hedging. Alternatively, if the smart contract is executed on a proof-of-stake blockchain, the locked-up funds could be employed to earn cryptocurrency staking rewards.
What would central banks’ roles be?
Well, for one, they could backstop the entire credit and/or staking model. Providing liquidity or guarantees to banks’ trade finance businesses would be a more constructive use of domestic money supply than applying it to rainy-day funds of U.S. Treasuries and other dollar assets.
Secondly, they’d be charged with assuring the trustworthiness of the interoperability protocol. Whether central banks would endorse and regulate privately developed protocols such as Tendermint’s Cosmos, Parity Technologies’ Polkadot or Ripple’s Interledger, or whether they would commission a multilateral body to build and manage a single official system, there’s no getting around an oversight role for public sector policymakers.
(Don’t worry, crypto libertarians, no one’s taking away your bitcoin in this scenario. In fact, since central bankers will retain their own monetary sovereignty, with exchange rates continuing to fluctuate, bitcoin’s appeal as a “digital gold” alternative to domestic currencies could well be enhanced.)

A broken system

Let’s be clear: if foreign trade no longer requires dollar intermediation, the U.S.-centric global economy will suffer a massive impact, perhaps bigger even than the 1971 “Nixon Shock,” when the dollar was unpegged from gold.
The entire reserve currency system, in which foreign central banks own U.S. government bonds as a backstop and multinational companies hold large parts of their balance sheets in dollars, is based on the need to protect against exchange rate losses. If that risk is removed, the edifice would, in theory, come down.
Yet, as Carney rightly points out, continuing with dollar hegemony is not tenable, either. The system is broken. Whenever global investors get the jitters they rushen masse into “safe haven” dollar assets – even when, as with President Trump’s trade war with China, U.S. policy is the cause of their malaise.
This process, which has become progressively more acute with each financial crisis, causes huge distortions, economic dysfunction and political turmoil. And with economies slowing and the worldwide value of bonds carrying negative yields now at $17 trillion, we now face worrying signs of another crisis. This time, traditional central bank policy could be powerless.
When another crisis comes, the dollar-based system will generate a predictable vicious cycle. The dollar will rapidly rise. This will hurt U.S. exporters, which further stir the mercantile instincts of anti-free traders such as Trump and fuel risks of a destructive tit-for-tat currency war.
Meanwhile, emerging markets will suffer capital flight as a rising dollar raises the risk of debt defaults in those countries. Their central banks will respond by jacking up interest rates to prop up their domestic currencies, but this will choke their economies at a time when they require easier, not tighter, monetary policy. Unemployment will surge and governments will topple.
The current system breeds what former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke dubbed the “global savings glut” as developing countries squirrel money into dollar reserves that could otherwise be used for domestic development.
In the U.S., it creates the countervailing effect of massive deficits – in other words, sky-high debt. Far from being the “exorbitant privilege” once described by French Finance Minister Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, the dollar’s reserve status is an American curse. It creates artificially low U.S. interest rates, which misprices credit risks and fuels bubbles – see: the 2008 housing crisis.
Worst of all, the dollar system undermines democracy and diminishes economic sovereignty. The performance of every economy hinges on U.S. Federal Reserve policies. Yet the Fed’s low inflation/maximum employment mandate is defined only by the U.S. economic outlook. This policy mismatch makes it much harder for governments to pursue effective measures to create opportunities for all.
When things really go sour, the Fed belatedly and reluctantly becomes the world’s lender of last resort, pumping dollars into the world’s banks via their New York subsidiaries. That’s how we ended up with the “quantitative easing” surfeit after the last crisis, money that went into financial assets, London real estate and fine art, but did little to boost the earning power of the middle class.
These policy failures have bred a populist backlash against globalization, manifest in the U.K.’s Brexit crisis and President Trump’s adversarial trade policies. Yet the reality is that capital flows are more globalized than ever and increasingly beating to the drum of the U.S. dollar.
So, yes, we need change. The question is how and in what time frame?

Violent or managed change?

The solution I described could be adopted abruptly and disruptively or it could be cooperatively managed for a smoother transition.
Under the first scenario, let’s consider Russia and China, the two countries I deliberately chose for my explanatory example, since they are believed to be further ahead than most in developing fiat digital currencies. Both would love to do away with dollar dependence. Could they go it alone and jointly devise a bilateral, cross-chain smart contract between a digital renminbi and a digital ruble? Sure. Would other countries follow suit? Maybe. Such an uncontrolled retreat from dollars could do huge harm to the U.S. and the overall global economy.
That’s why I think central banks should heed Carney’s call and work together on a solution. They could coordinate the gradual introduction of digital currencies, selectively managing access and applying differential interest rates to discourage an exodus from shaky banks. They could also charge the IMF with seeking a global standard for cross-chain interoperability.
Regardless, the disruptive technologies behind digital currencies, stablecoins and decentralized exchanges will advance. It’s a ticking time bomb.
Some central bankers, led by Carney – and now, Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker, who said in a Wharton Business School podcast that stablecoins are “inevitable” – get it. Others need to learn fast.
Mark Carney image via Twocoms /
submitted by lordofhippos to CryptoCurrencyLive [link] [comments]

Why Stellar is the most competitive digital currency

I invested a lot of time last week in writing a technical paper on the economic implications of stellar and why it is the best investment in crypto. I initially bought in at .4 cents so I've been since the subreddit had 7000 redditors. That was only 2 months ago but still pretty cool. Anyway I wanted to post key giveaways to that paper since it didn't receive much attention at all. First let me define terminology to help the layman.
Essentially countries all have national accounts that tell us their transactions like imports and exports, and this allows us to gauge the financial health in a country. The reason is because a country that has too much debt will be riddled with higher unemployment rates and lower ouput levels (think Greece). So essentially everywhere in the world you will always have debtor and surplus countries because someone needs to do the importing for all the exporting going on. It's the same principle as crypto when day trading. I don't want to give the impression that trade is zero-sum, however crypto day trading is zero sum.
Anyway, many people compare crypto to gold as a stable and scarce source of value. People are attracted to bitcoin because it steers away from fiat currency however people don't realize that fiat is incredibly new and is actually more innovative than the old commodity currency method. This old method was directed under the Bretton Woods system and the Gold Standard before it, where Gold ruled all. However, this stability made it very risky to keep exchange rates at parity. Let's look at a theory called the impossible trinity where you can't have all three aspects in a currency: sovereign monetary policy, free capital flow, and fixed-exchange rates. The UK tried this in the early 1990s by keeping the pound in the European exchange rate mechanism (fixed exchange rate). However, the government also allowed for free capital flow (meaning people could take pounds out of the country), and sovereign monetary policy (the Bank of England could set interest rates). The results was a disaster that sent the pound spiraling downward because it violated the impossible trinity (Black Wednesday- It could only maintain any 2 of those 3 aspects in its currency but couldn't maintain all three. Italy also attempted to use this strategy in the 1990's to organically devalue the lira. Unemployment in Italy was rampant and they wanted to devalue the lira to make exports more competitive since Italian goods could be cheaper on international markets (since the lira was depreciating vs other currencies). Italy was also in the exchange rate mechanism (fixed exchange rate), allowed free capital flows, and was still in charge of its interest rates (no Euro at this time). As a result, the lira finally devalued as seen in the below chart.
Now the whole point of this is to show how important monetary policy of any kind is to the stability of a country. Even in a system that promised price stability like Bretton woods, we got even worse price corrections because speculation wasn't priced in adequately. A free floating system has proven more resilient to market shock. Honestly, when is the last time you saw the dollar drop 20% overnight? Need I remind you when Switzerland unpegged the Franc in 2015 and appreciated by 30% in a few days? Now, given that exchange rates still shift even under fixed exchange systems (this is what crypto strives to be), there is still some systemic risk in speculation and currency volatility. This volatility is unwarranted since we are essentially maintaining the same risk as fiat without the monetary tools of sovereign monetary policy (setting interest rates).
This is the reason why so many governments are concerned with crypto. It removes a tool but maintains the same preceding risk. Governments need interest rates in order to adjust national account balances and control national savings. If we get a laissez faire situation where a government starts exporting more than everyone else, then crypto doesn't allow us the tools to devalue and remain competitive viable sovereign nations. Of course you may think that this does not matter if every country has bitcoin since they should have the same cost of production in international markets, however let me give you one example: GREECE!
Greece and Germany have the same exact currency and should theoretically enjoy the same competitiveness in cost of production but they don't at all. The cost of living and import/export competitiveness diverges dramatically creating a cost of adjustment where Germany essentially takes employment and output levels from other Euro countries because it has more savings and enjoys a surplus relationship with other countries.
Now unlike Ripple stellar is totally inflationary. Transaction fees in stellar are distributed to an inflation pool, whereas with Ripple transaction fees literally obliterate ripple. Inflation is an incredibly important tool not only to encourage spending, but to at least align Stellars monetary growth with the rest of the world (Fiat). Inflation allows for loan and debt instrument creation that spurs economic growth. It is incredibly important which is why sovereign nations have it as a monetary tool. What I am trying to say is that stellar seems to have the only true vision of integrating their platform into the existing fiat system rather than trying to fight a losing battle, in order to prove an idealistic libertarian viewpoint. This, apart from the low transaction costs, high transaction speed, and convertibility with fiat is what really makes Stellar competitive. The decentralized nature is also an added bonus along with necessary inflation. Stellar isn't meant to be a national bank that enacts sovereign monetary policy but the inflation rate is near perfect for a viable currency (there is a reason the Fed always strives for 2% inflation).
I know most of this paper focused on political economy and fiat but it attempted to explain why the idealistic vision of most crypto currencies is just not feasible. This allows us to gauge for cryptos that do align with the real world which are stellar and ripple. In the last paragraph I at least explained the positives stellar has over ripply and that was only a few.
My full paper is in this link:
I hope you enjoy!
submitted by Austerlitzer to Stellar [link] [comments]

Behavioral Economics: Bitcoin's Moat Has Created Fundamental Market Beliefs That Will Prove Difficult To Eradicate For A Currency Called Ether

In the following text I try to look at why ETH will have a difficult time overcoming Bitcoin.
Moats! Does Bitcoin have a trust moat? (Moats more important for LONGTERM price than innovation?)
I recently argued that I liked Musks idea that innovation is more important than moats. I may have to backpaddle on that. Maybe in the short-term innovation is more important to keep your momentum going but what about the long-term? What about stable value? If you keep innovating, you keep spending: Energy, money, time. A perfect / ideal moat just exists, it doesn't cost you anything. Maybe innovation is more important to keep your company share price at unrealistic levels:
Buffett has been successful thanks to his purchases of undervalued companies; Musk has become successful by marketing an overpriced company so that it becomes even more overpriced
Musk represents the promises of disruption, potential for very fast expansion in coming years, and indeed, bubbles and manias where this obsession often leads because it's much easier to pronounce big words and get enthusiastic than to provably produce billions by hard work.
My argument is that disruption always relies on emotion, manias and grandeur. Moats don't require such things. You don't disrupt anyone without attempting the crazy thing, the bold thing and taking crazy risks in the process. It is part of the entrepreneurial game. Innovation comes at a cost - it is a rollercoaster. Case in point: EOS
Largest consumer base and trust as a moat?
What is the fundamental value of Bitcoin? Why is there not a single currency that comes close to Bitcoin? Because you don't just build network effects and mindshare over night. It just doesn't happen. In that regard, Bitcoin has a 9 year advantage. Trust as a moat. Who needs innovation when you have trust?
Other currencies such as Ether still suffer from hacks like DAO, Parity and so on. Bitcoin has had no such hacks. Yes, "bitcoin" had exchange hacks but that wasnt Bitcoin and only the public would label that as a Bitcoin hack and trust loss.
Ether not a store of value, branding issues, trust perception in crypto circles, reliance on utility for brand perception a red flag
A coin called Ether will have to overcome serious trust issues and will in my opinion never be accepted as a store of value (that doesnt mean the price cant go up due to an increase in userbase). The EF has made serious branding mistakes and the hacks have destroyed trust within crypto circles moreso than in Bitcoin. This is a fundamental market perception that will not just disappear regardless of utility.
Actual consumers ready to switch, no love for Bitcoin The downside is that actual consumers may have no love for Bitcoin as they experienced slow transactions and high fees. They may switch once aware of alternatives running atop of ETH. That in turn can considerably push the price up in the short-term as demand for ETH goes up and demand for the more boring coin (digital gold) goes down.
Anecdotal: Personally I always use BTC to pay because of 0 confirmations and a more widespread acceptance compared to ETH. So far I have never used ETH but this is just anecdotal and we have many here who have used it before.
It is in my opinion foolish to belief that an ETH scaling solution will arrive before Lightning finds adoption looking at current adoption numbers (massive growth in the hundreds of percents YoY). That is real data Ethereum supporters cant just talk away.
Assumption: A store of value needs to be a great medium of exchange (WRONG!!!)
I recently listened to a talk about Bitcoin. The speaker claimed that a store of value needs to be a medium of exchange. His conclusion, if Bitcoin wants to be a store of value it should be a medium of exchange.
I disagree.
===> Real estate, art are excellent store of values and not good mediums of exchange.
I believe Bitcoin will act as a fundamental economic stabilizer in the future. I see decentralized currencies as an economic breakthrough that will go down in history. You don't just launch a decentralized currency. It took Bitcoin 9 years to build its network effects and I dont think Ether will ever be considered such a thing regardless of what the techies claim (more useful, maybe better medium of exchange and thus a better store of value) and not just because of branding issues but also political issues where Ether is unlikely to achieve legal tender status and its focus on being a smart contract platform, not a currency.
Considering that BTC will likely achieve legal tender status it is also likely to become part of portfolio mix of institutional investors whereas Ethereum will be considered an equity / speculative digital asset.
The idea that a network grows in value as the userbase grows also in my opinion has fixed ceilings. Metcalfs law is often touted but applied in a strange way to crypto price theory.
Once you have non-speculative use cases running on ETH I would personally add a huge discount to ETH due to increased utility and turnover. Personally I am currently pricing this in already which is why I am more interested in competing smart contract platforms that still have to undergo a speculative price finding phase that ETH has already completed (ETH = closer to dapp launch and realistic pricing) but that is just me and I am not Mr market!!!
Wait, wut? More utility = lower price? Sounds paradox but I think that is exactly what will happen. It is more important that users keep believing that your coin is a store of value because that collective assumption will lead to a self-fullfilling prophecy.
Behavioral Economics Lessons: Beliefs About A Market Create Fundamental Realities
Further, reflexive market theory teaches us that you should keep in mind: Rising prices attract more buyers until this process exhausts itself but more importantly it teaches us also that beliefs about a market have real consequences. If the market believes your coin is a store of value this will create a fundamental reality until perception changes. I therefore have to assume based on behavioral economics and related price theories that Bitcoin will continue it's positive feedback loop until the perception of it being a store of value is broken (for whatever reason).
Further it is my opinion that this belief cannot be broken by proving that it is a bad medium of exchange, else Ether should have replaced it in during the 2017 runup or thereafter. It failed to do so, that teaches me one thing very clearly: That the market has established a very fixed belief in Bitcoin as a store of value.
Within economics, reflexivity refers to the self-reinforcing effect of market sentiment, whereby rising prices attract buyers whose actions drive prices higher still until the process becomes unsustainable. This is an instance of a positive feedback loop. The same process can operate in reverse leading to a catastrophic collapse in prices.
Further Sources:
Thiel contradicts himself on Bitcoin value
Though Thiel has long been an enthusiastic supporter of bitcoin, he nonetheless believes that it's likely other digital currencies like ethereum will surpass bitcoin in value. If that does take place, Thiel believes that bitcoin could become a long-term store of value rather than a go-to asset for daily transactions. In this way, the billionaire sees bitcoin a bit like an online version of gold or another precious metal.
A digital store of value in short-term may be less valuable than a network with high utility. But in the long-term will be considerably more expensive unless you assume that economic market cycles do not exist. A store of value should perform well or better in an economic depression. A utility network or company price should perform worse in an economic depression due to less demand and transactional values.
Overall, a store of value should at a 10% portfolio rate be CONSIDERABLY more expensive (in the trillions of dollars) than almost any other blockchain (unless market penetration reaches 100% for that platform, ETH monopoly by 2025 anyone?)
Edit: Corrections
submitted by etheraddict77 to ETHInsider [link] [comments]

MasterNode Boot Camp, education resources to take the community to the next level.

One of the criticisms leveled at Dash is that the MasterNode community is in charge of spending the (freakishly large) Treasury budget in ways that promote the Dash ecosystem. But the Masternode community may not know everything about everything, and may not make the best and most optimized decisions on proposals.
Just to get this out of the way, the people offering those criticisms (both internally and externally) are not wrong. On the other hand, this is utterly new territory. Nobody knows it all, they can't. And I don't know if you have checked the price and market cap of Dash lately, but apparently, we haven't done a terrible job of it.
On the third hand, it would be nice if we had some resources that made it easy for the MasterNode community, and the larger Dash community to learn and develop and improve. So, me and some of my Discord friends have been working on a resource list. It's a work in progress. It's not exhaustive. I expect to use the best crypto community on the planet to improve this resource over time, so feel free to chip in, both on topics not mentioned, and for resources (small, medium and large) to flesh out the topics we have currently.
The general idea is that there are x number of topics that add something to our combined decision making skills. Each topic will have several resources, the two minute overview, the 15 or 20 minute resource that goes into enough detail to allow us to make meaningful and sophisticated judgements, and the masters/PhD level resource for those who want it all to the nth degree.
The list may look a bit intimidating. It's not. Geez, it would take months if not years to read all that stuff. Not to worry, we have a secret weapon. Nobody has to know it all, or learn it all. Everybody will have their own particular interests. Some people will pick up a lot in a broad overview. Some will explore one area until they are legitimate experts in that area. Some will pick up a smattering.
The MasterNodes constitute a super organism. Individually, we each contribute something. But as a group, we have few peers. We sure as hell know more about crypto in general, and Dash in particular than the legacy banking industry. Ditto for the nice government people. And ditto x 10 for the mainstream media. As a group, we already qualify as the experts regarding crypto.
And as we gain experience and knowledge, and more and better consultants, our governance system will also improve. Between our Dev Team, our community, our Treasury and the MasterNodes, we are unstoppable.
Micro Economics 101 Human action, Ludwig von Mises. Available online for free in the Mises Institute website:
Lessons in economics by Jesús Huerta de Soto (videos of lectures): Spanish (original) English
Economics in one lesson, Henry Hazlitt. Available online for free in the Mises Institute website:
Concepts: Homo ecomomicus
Time value of money
Opportunity cost
Marginal utility
Risk assessment
Risk premium
Risk aversion
Law of one price
Macro Economics 101
Money, bank credit and economic cycles, Jesús Huerta de Soto. Available online for free in his website:
Prices and production, Friederich.A. Hayek. Available online for free in the Mises Institute website:
The wealth of nations, Adam Smith. Condensed version available online for free in the Adam Smith Institute website:
The gold standard, Llewellyn H. Rockell Jr. Available online for free in the Mises Institute website:
Deflation and liberty, Jörg Guido Hülsmann. Available online for free in the Mises Institute website:
The general theory of employment, interest and money, John Maynard Keynes.
Fraud. Why the great recession (documentary).
Concepts: Quantity Theory of Money
compare/contrast Austrian econ. and Keynesian econ. Many comparisons in the books. Of course, mostly from the austrian economics perspective. Nonetheless, Keynes theory lost the battle a long time ago (even though it still is the perfect political excuse for the State expending nowadays).
Finance and investment: CFA Curriculum Level 1. In theory it cannot be downloaded for free, but for me is one of the best sources to learn about all this topics in one go. Financial calculus. An introduction to derivative pricing, Martin Baxter and andrew Rennie. The intelligent investor, Benjamin Graham. By far the best easy going book ever written for investors. Irrational Exuberance, Robert J. Shiller. Financial Statements: A Step-by-Step Guide to Understanding and Creating Financial Reports, Thomas Ittelson. Financial Statement Analysis: A Practitioner’s Guide, Martin Fridson, Fernando Álvarez Security Analysis, Benjamin Graham and David L. Dodd. Concepts: Cost of capital Rate of return Internal Rate of Return Fundamental analysis Price-to-earnings ratio Cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio Discounted cash flows Modern Portfolio Theory Post-modern portfolio theory Asset pricing: Valuation Intrinsic value Capital Asset Pricing Model Arbitrage Pricing Theory Rational Pricing Cryptocurrencies - What is the fair value of a currency? Purchasing Power Parity Efficient-market hypothesis
Trading: Technical Analysis of the Financial Markets, John J. Murphy. A classic.
Statistics Short: Medium: breezy, funny, accessible and effective, everything you never thought you would hear about a stats textbook: in depth: Statistics of financial markets. It can bought here:
Game theory short: medium: Their whole series is good. in depth: Theory of games and economic behavior, John von. Newman. Available for free in
Valuation, eg buying a business or calculating a Return on Investment (ROI)
Econ and business terminology
Term of the day:
Dictionary/reference for financial terms:
Investment based on analysis of fundamentals, this tells you something, but not everything.
Technical chart analysis, this tells you a different something, but not everything
How does blockchain tech actually work anyway?
Short: Basic but excellent, Amanda B. Johnson’s Dash School
In depth:
Contract law
in depth:
What gives money value?
Cryptocurrencies - What is the fair value of a currency? (By our own PabloMP)
Quantity Theory of Money
Purchasing Power Parity
in depth:
How the fractional reserve banking system works
in depth:
Who is in charge of the money supply in the U.S.
in depth:
submitted by solarguy2003 to dashpay [link] [comments]

BTC market cap 6.2 billion USD compared to almost 14 billion USD in November 2013

--Lets discuss about market capitalization of Bitcoin, altcoins and why this is important for the crypto market.
Current BTC market cap is 6.2 billion dollars compared to almost 14 billion dollars in November 2013
The following data was pulled from in case you want to double check it (All based on the 180 day historic):
And that is pretty much the relevant list for me, since the rest of the altcoins that I didnt include, IN MY opinion are not even worth mentioning.
So what do we take from this? We have seen some new regulations, bans, restrictions, scams, exchanges going bankrupt and scamming and overall bad news for cryptos in the last few months. On the other hand there are a ton of new startups bitcoin and crypto related to be launched this year; but will that matter? I mean, sure there is a ton of infrastructure being built around bitcoin which will make it easier to purchase and use bitcoin, this is actually good news (couldnt resist sry) but meanwhile the trust in cryptos is on the floor by the general public/media.
They can put a million bitcoin atms in every country, but who will be buying if the only thing you see are more and more shady exchanges going bankrupt and people losing their money? The market caps I put above reflect the current distrust in this system , at least as a store of value by the general public and THE BIG money. Those market caps dont even compare to even small companies and their stocks , nowhere near gold or silver just to give a few example. That means that cryptos are EASILY manipulable, we had clear examples of that happening during the mtgox fall. Some of those coins are being pumped and dumped by whales so much that is not even funny anymore. So this is a double edge problem you see? Whales will continue to manipulate the market as long as they can and the only way to stop it is by having a bigger market cap, which will only happen with bigger adoption or* bigger individual trust and direct demand. Bigger adoption wont happen in a non-trustable market and manipulation and shady stuff wont stop happening without bigger adoption/market cap. That is a round problem..
Some final thoughts, I really want to hear opinions, cricism, bashing, theories, crazy stuff, decent analysis and pretty much everything that come to your mind please. I post this often but if the idea of bitcoin was to have a p2p currency with low fees and etc advantages over traditional currencies, it really doesnt have to be worth $500 , $1000 or $20 for that to work, you just need quick converstion to fiat and a ton of exchanges, bitcoin can be worth what dogecoin is worth and still work as intended, the currency of the internet.
I have enjoyed the crypto-ride a lot but at this point I have taken enough profit to retire and I dont think I will just keep my "hodl stash" for much longer. I often hear a lot here that in the long term it will be xmoon value, but honestly? With the amount of altcoins and the amount of attacks to bitcoin, any altcoin could replace bitcoin anytime soon. All of this is pure speculation , I am a trader so I like to speculate. I am starting to think that in the longterm other cryptos will easily take over thanks to what bitcoin is building for them around the world. We could even see government-issued cryptos with parity in the long term as well, anything is possible and with that in mind , bitcoin doesnt seem that strong as it did initially.
Your thoughts? Discuss pls.
submitted by Displayer_ to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

So... We have been experiencing extremely consistent linear growth since Dec. 20th

I first noticed this trend on the few days before new years and the mini-bubble we had between the 25th and the 28th of December. When the markets fell down to that linear growth line I was surprised that it held true to that sentiment. When our most recent fairly major bubble ended yesterday, and the market stabilized almost ontop of this linear trendline, I was shocked.
I have a feeling it's related to the bot that has been buying BTC like crazy on Mtgox. 10-20BTC (when it's turned on) every ~10 minutes and it's been going on for weeks. I mentioned it in the Daily Discussion thread today and alot of people seemed to like the idea, so perhaps it could explain the linear growth that we've been seeing? The top theory is:
Another theory: a big company is stealthily investing millions before announcing that they will start to accept Bitcoin and sending the price into orbit.
The extremely hyper-relevant multi-million dollar picture showcasing the aforementioned linear growth trendline:
Does anyone have any input to this? If this trend holds true, and we don't get another major spout of news that drives the price in either direction, the trend should cross the all-time high in between 14-16 days. However, there is a chance we might get another bubble during that time which would shift the time of the ATH breach forward or backward by a significant amount, especially considering the ATH is still around gold-parity level ($1225) which will provide significant resistance (as it did last time).
submitted by lowstrife to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Doug Kass' 15 Surprises For 2019

Authored by Dog Kass via,
White House Politics:
(When asked what he wanted to give thanks for during a press gaggle Thanksgiving Thursday, Trump responded), “_for having a great family and for having made a tremendous difference in this country. I’ve made a tremendous difference in the country. This country is so much stronger now than it was when I took office that you wouldn’t believe it… And I mean, you see, but so much stronger people can’t even believe it. When I see foreign leaders they say we cannot believe the difference in strength between the United States now and the United States two years ago.” _– President Trump (Comments on Thanksgiving)
_“You only think I guessed wrong! … You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders – the most famous of which is “never get involved in a land war in Asia” – but only slightly less well-known is this: Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!” _– Vizzini,The Princess Bride
The Economy:
“The missing step in the standard Keynesian theory (is) the explicit consideration of capitalist finance within a cyclical and speculative context… finance sets the pace for the economy. As recovery approaches full employment… soothsayers will proclaim that the business cycle has been banished (and) debts can be taken on. But in truth neither the boom nor the debt deflation… and certainly not a recovery can go on forever. Each state nurtures forces that lead to its own destruction.” _–_ Hyman Minsky
The Markets:
“Every new beginning comes from some other beginning’s end.” __Seneca the Elder
Contrary to the expectations of many (including myself), the uncertainties following the surprising Trump presidential election victory, which produced a number of possible outcomes (some of them adverse), was enthusiastically embraced by investors in 2017 and in the first month of this year. A market on steroids was not a conclusion or forecast by any mainstream Wall Street forecaster that year. There was no sell side strategist who expected equities would rise anywhere near the 20%+ gains in the major indices recorded in 2017, nor do I know any who predicted that the S&P Index would make more than 70 individual highs a year ago.
As I expected, that enthusiasm continued in and through most of the month of January, 2018. But, after a year of historically low volatility and ever-rising stock prices, the bullish consensus became troubled as the complexion of the market changed throughout most of 2018 .
As I noted in last year’s commentary, I thought that the biggest surprise in 2018 would be that extrapolation of the market uptrend didn’t work after many years of working, and that we will witness the emergence of multiple non-consensus developments, including:
Warren Buffett once observed that a bull market_ “is like sex. It feels best just before it ends.'” _While some of us in the ursine crowd debate whether the investment orgasm has already passed, in the extreme it finally may be Minsky’s Moment and year after nine years of recovery and prosperity following _The Great Recession._This year I have decided to publish my _“Surprise List”_ a bit earlier than usual.
As you all know, my Surprises are what I term to be _Probable Improbables_ – events that have a greater possibility of occurring than are seen by the consensus. I try to make you think apart from that diabolically dangerous_ “Group Stink”_ and, particularly as it relates to politics (but with other subjects as well), I feel that I should offend you at least once, or I am not doing my job. But, any offense is meant in the spirit of the great Romantic poet William Blake who taught us that “_Opposition is true friendship._”
My Surprises are shorter in length than in previous years. _(I want to quickly get to the important points of the Surprise List – available on one or two pages – rather than deliver a more flowery prose and bunch of stories that I have commonly done in the past)._We will start the new investment year about one month from now with a completely different _“feeling”_ of previous years – as I mentioned previously, the complexion of Mr. Market seems to have changed:
The core themes and roadmap for 2019 is that a standard run-of-the-mill Bear Market may run into something bigger in a year enveloped in unprecedented political turmoil (and electorate disgust and anger), an escalating trade (and cold) war with China and continuing global economic disappointments — dragging down a mature, an extended and fully exploited economic growth and market cycle.
Not surprisingly, my Surprise is that a slightly down year of performance for the S&P Index in 2018 may turn out to be something worse in 2019.
But the biggest and most provocative surprise is the decline and fall of President Trump in 2019 – in which an anti-imperial rebalancing is successfully mounted by a more assertive Congress, bringing the country back into constitutional equilibrium.
Without further fuss, here are my outside of consensus 15 Surprises for 2019:
1) A U.S. Recession in 2019 Followed by Stagflation:
We learn, in 2019, the extent to which economic activity was pulled forward by the protracted period of historically low interest rates – as capital spending, retail sales, housing and autos founder further.
With U.S. Real GDP growth dropping to +1% to +2% in the first half of 2019, inflation remaining stubbornly high (especially of a wage-kind as the labor market remains tight) and with cost pressures unable to be passed on, the threat of recession intensifies.
By the third quarter of 2019 U.S. Real GDP turns negative. Tax collections collapse as government spending continues to rise. The budget deficit forecasts are lifted to over $2 trillion.
The U.S. falls into a recession in the last half of 2019 – followed by a lengthy period of stagnating economic growth and higher inflation (stagflation).
A dysfunctional, non-unified and discombobulated Europe also falls into a recession in 2019 – with significant ramifications for U.S. multinationals that populate the S&P Index.
U.S./Chinese trade tensions push the global economy down the hill as the year progresses and GDP growth in China comes in below +5.0%. The IMF reduces it’s global economic growth forecast three times next year.
S&P per share earnings fall by over -10% in 2019.
2) The Federal Reserve Pauses and Then Cuts as Currencies and Interest Rates Swing Wildly:
It’s a wild year for fixed income and currency volatility.
The Fed cuts rates in 3Q2019 and by year-end announces that QE4 will commence in January, 2020.
The 2018 tantrum in Italian bonds is just a precursor for hissy fits throughout the European bond market as the ECB is no longer expanding its balance sheet and tries to get out of NIRP.
The BoJ throws in the towel on their drive for higher inflation. The Japanese bond market sees sharp selloff.
During 2019 the yield on the ten year U.S. note falls to 2.25% before ending the year at over 3.50% as the selloff in European and Japanese bonds and the announcement of QE4 drive our yields higher. Gold falls to $1050 before ending the year at over $1700.
3) Stocks Sink:
Though the third year of a Presidential cycle is usually bullish – _it’s different this time._Trump confusing _brains with a bull market_ can’t fathom the emerging Bear Market. At first he blames it on Steve Mnuchin, his Secretary of Treasury (who leaves the Administration in the middle of the year). Then he blames a lower stock market on the mid-term election which turned the House. Then he blames the market correction on the Chinese.
The S&P Index hits a yearly low of 2200 in the first half of the year as the market worries about slowing economic and profit growth and a burgeoning deficit/monetization. The announcement of QE4 results in a year end rally in December, 2019. In a continued regime of volatility (and in a market dominated by ETFs and machines/algos), daily swings of 1%-3% become more commonplace. Investor sentiment slumps as redemptions from exchange traded funds grow to record levels. The absence of correlation between ETFs and the underlying component investments causes regulatory concerns throughout the year.
Congress holds hearings on the changing market structure and the weak foundation those changes delivered during the year.
Short sellers provide the best returns in the hedge fund space as the S&P Index records a second consecutive yearly loss (which is much deeper than in 2018).
As the Fed cuts interest rates the US dollar falls and emerging markets outperform the US in 2019.
I, like many, are concerned about corporate credit (See Surprise #8) and though credit is not unscathed, it is equities that bear the brunt of the Bear since they are below credit in the company capitalization structure.
Bottom line, after a steep drop in the first six months of the year, the markets rise off of the lows late in the year in response to this shifting political scene (the decline of Trump) and a reversal to a more expansive Fed policy – ending the year with a -10% loss.
4) Despite the Appearance of the Bear, FANG Stocks Surprisingly Prosper (Both Absolutely and Relatively) as Investors Seek Growth (at any cost) In a Slowing Economy – Facebook’s Shares Rebound Dramatically:
While there is a growing consensus that FANG will lead a Bear Market lower – that is not the case as growth, in a general sense, is dear and cherished by market participants next year. Among FANG, Facebook‘s shares have a reversal of fortune (and is the best performing FANG stock) as the company announces aggressive management changes and moves to remedy the misinformation trap.
As more previously unrevealed information reduces her valuation, Sheryl Sandburg’s special status as a female leader (in a seascape of men at Facebook and in industry) is questioned. In the first half of 2019, Sandberg becomes a sacrificial lamb and is sacked – and is forced to lean out after leaning in.
At the suggestion of Warren Buffett (who has accumulated a sizable stake in the company), former Board Member Donald Graham is named as the new, independent and Non-Executive Board Chairman of Facebook.
This unexpected move encourages FB investors to believe that the company is quickly moving to fix its multiple data and privacy issues.
Fewer (than feared) Facebook members opt out and growth in usage resumes in the back half of 2019.
FB’s stock popularity (and market capitalization) increases as it becomes a more dominant holding in “value investors” portfolios – the shares trade above $200/share late in the year.
5) “Peak Trump” – the President Bows Out in His Pursuit of a Second Term:
The President’s dismissal of the murder of Washington Post reporter Jamal Khashoggi is seen as delivering tacit support to Saudi Arabia’s MBS – it is a pivotal turning point in Trump’s popularity and ultimate reputational decline in 2019. _“Pay enough and you can get away with murder”_ becomes the mantra of the Progressive Left. Trump acceptance by his Republican party peers quickly diminishes as they are further worried about his motivation to side against the findings of his own intelligence department. After Trump’s personal dealings with authoritarian and autocratic countries are revealed in the Mueller probe (along with possible emoluments violations), Trump’s popularity fades further as Lindsay Graham and other prominent Republicans repeal their support and denounce the President.
An anti-imperial rebalancing is mounted, in which a more assertive Congress brings the country back into constitutional equilibrium.
Though the public and political leaders (even on the right)_ increasingly reject the President, there are no impeachment efforts by the Democrats. Instead (and surprisingly), House Speaker Pelosi (recognizing that constructive steps are the recipe for a Democratic 2020 Presidential win) exacts discretion and stops the Democrats from moving on an impeachment in the House. Democratic leadership turns to reforms and a torrent of new legislation in the areas of improving the environment and climate control (and the halt of growth in fossil fuel by the development of alternative energy programs), the opioid crisis, education, crime, voting rights, healthcare and prescription drug prices, immigration, etc.- showing the electorate that their Party can demonstrate the framework for a positive agenda, a vision and a social contract (and can rule instead of obstruct).But, most importantly… With real GDP turning negative in 2019’s second half, Democrats attempt to replace Republicans’ supply-side economics with a smarter theory of growth. Recognizing just as inflation and other ills opened the door for criticism of Keynesian economics in the 1970s, so have inequality and disinvestment done the same for critiques of supply side today. In 2019, the Democrats turn the table on the supply-siders and give a voice through thoughtful proposed legislation (making the affirmative case for the Democratic theory of growth geared to raising wages and putting more money in the hands in working- and middle-class people’s pocket and investing in their needs). Americans enthusiastically embrace this alternative (of how the economy works and grows and spreads prosperity) and reject and defeat the long standing Republican economic narrative – seeing it as a better way to spur on the economy_ (than giving rich people more tax cuts)._ Asking the question _“has it worked for you?_” and given the fairy tale of added revenue from growth (and the widening hole in the deficit),_ rampant inequality, the fear of being bankrupted by medical catastrophe and massive student debt obligations Democrats provide a practical alternative to cutting taxes for the rich and decreasing regulation which has failed to unleash as much innovation and economic activity that was promised by the Administration. The legislation, which puts more money in middle class pockets, defends and supports the notion that the public sector can make better decisions than the private sector. Referred to as the _“middle – in economic bill,”_ is cosponsored by a leading, conservative and respected Republican member of Congress and begins to gain bipartisan support in Congress, driving a stake through the supply-side’s heart.
Despite his loss of popularity (which plummets to 25%)_ and the push back from the Republican establishment, Trump declares he is still planning to run for President. Nevertheless, a challenge from Senator Mitt Romney (who’s motto is “Make Republicans Great Again”_) gains steam as McConnell, Graham, Kennedy Et al. throw their support for the Senator.
As Trump’s problems multiply, Romney becomes the heavy favorite to defeat Trump in the Republican primary.
Recognizing a sure election defeat, by year-end the President announces that his medical team has disclosed a health issue and he is advised not to run for office. _Reluctantly, _Trump agrees and bows out of the 2020 Presidential race late in the year.
The Trump mantra of “Make America Great Again” i_s replaced by _“Make Economic Uncertainty and Market Volatility Great Again.”#MAGA/#MUVGA
6) The Year of the Woman:
With a Trump withdrawal from 2020 the election is wide open.
The arc of history influences the Democratic Presidential nomination march and the leading candidates that emerge for 2020 are mostly women. The potential contenders include progressive firebrands like Elizabeth Warren, Stacey Abrams, Kristen Gillibrand and Kamala Harris, and moderates like Senator Amy Klobuchar and Rhode Island Governor Gina Raimondo.
Michael Bloomberg, Howard Schultz and Joe Biden bowout from the race by year end 2019 By year-end, Klobucher, Harris and Warren surface as the three leading Democratic Presidential candidates.
It appears that an all women Democratic ticket (President/Vice President) is increasingly likely.
Nationally, several high profile sexual harassment suits are disclosed. Allegations against a number of well known television, other entertainment and political icons/leaders serve to reinforce the candidacy of the above women who aspire to gain the Democratic Presidential nomination. After Congressional hearings, non partisan and strict harassment legislation are introduced forcing several well known male politicians to resign from office.
7) A New (But Old) Shiny Object Appears As A Stock Market Winner in 2019:
Bitcoin trades close to $3,000 in December, 2018 and spends most of 2019 under $5,000 (as numerous trading irregularities, thefts and more frauds are exposed).
England’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) takes the lead, in instituting a comprehensive regulatory response to regulating the crypto currency markets. The U.S. follows by imposing broad-based crypto currency regulation in 2019.
A leading business network (who’s bitcoin “bug” has become the new cover of magazine contrary indicator!) faces a class action suit for their seeming encouragement in buying into the asset class in their too frequent broadcasts during 2018. Several crypto currency guests who were prominent on the network’s coverage are indicted for fraud. In an agreement with regulatory authorities, the biz network’s programming is reconstituted.
Marijuana stocks, after a weak final few months in 2018 (are down by over 50% from their highs), explode back to the upside reflecting a quickened pace of alternative health applications. (MJ) is the single best performing exchange traded fund and (TLRY) makes another move to $300/share.
8) Private Equity, High Yield Debt and Leveraged Loan Problems (Which Have Doubled in Size Over the Last Ten Years) Emerge as the Resurgence of Leveraged Finance Comes to An End:
Private equity, in particular, the biggest winner in the decade long cycle since _The Great Decession of 2007-09,_ suffers – and so do the endowments at several prestigious universities. Covenant- lite financings in junk and leveraged loans – often in opaque and complex structures – topple under the weight of loan defaults. (HYG) (last sale: $83.17) trades $75-$80 as redemptions spike.
Publicly-held private equity shops (KKR) and Blackstone (BX) are among the largest percentages losers in 2019, High yield bonds fulfill their characterization as “junk,” and are among the worst performing asset classes. The spread between junk bonds and Treasuries more than doubles – widening dramatically during the summer months.
9) The China/U.S.Rift Intensifies as Trump’s Anger Shifts Towards That Region:
The trade war with China goes into full effect with 25% tariffs. Walmart (WMT) is adversely impacted and its shares fall by -20% from the recent highs. The Chinese retaliate against major American brands like Apple (AAPL) . _(“Peak Apple” actually happens and its shares fall below $125/share)._Peter Navarro resigns.
A major cyber-attack against the U.S. financial system, who’s source is initially not diagnosed, is ultimately reportedly to have been delivered by China. The U.S. enters a cold war with China that resembles the emergence of the cold war with Russia in 1948 – it becomes clear it will be lengthy, nasty and unfriendly to the trajectory of worldwide economic growth.
10) Bank Stocks Are Surprising Winners in 2019:
Despite some pressure in net interest margins (and income), sluggish loan demand and a pickup in loan losses – bank stocks (and EPS) are surprisingly resilient and manage to have a positive return next year as better relative EPS growth is supported by aggressive buybacks and (starting) low valuations. Investors look forward to a recovery in economic growth in 2020-21 and bank stocks (flat for most of the year) have a vigorous move in the last few months of the year and are one of the few sectors to advance in 2019.
Oil stocks, depressed from the late 2018 crude oil price fall also recovery mightily in the later months of 2019 as the price of oil advances coincident with dovish turn in monetary policy.
11) Tesla’s Problems Shift From Production to Demand to Financial:
Tesla (TSLA) loses its tax subsidy in the U.S. and in the Netherlands (a large market for them).
European competition grows.
Europe doesn’t allow the Tesla Model 3 due to safety reasons. The Chinese won’t let an American company have video data over millions of miles of roads and bans Tesla. Lenders balk and access to the public debt market evaporates. The company’s financial position deteriorates and its credit default swaps widen dramatically.
An accounting “issue” surfaces – and it morphs into an accounting fraud. Elon Musk, who has leveraged his TSLA equity holdings, faces margin calls and is forced to sell Tesla shares.
After being rushed to the hospital after an overdose, Musk leaves his CEO post to enter drug rehab.
12) Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) (BRK.B) Announces the Largest Takeover in History – The Transformational Acquisition of 3M for $150 billion.
13) Amazon (AMZN) Makes a Bid for Square (SQ) but Alphabet/Google (GOOGL) Eventually Acquires Both Square SQ and Twitter (TWTR)
14) With its Share Price Consistently Trading Under Its Book Value During the First Few Months of 2019, Goldman Sachs’ (GS) Partners Take the Brokerage Private in a Leveraged Buyout at $238/share.
15) Brexit Happens: The world continues and the pound is the best global currency.

Here Are 5-“Also Eligible” Surprises:

submitted by rotoreuters to zerohedge [link] [comments]

One Million Years In The Future: Can Bitcoin Hack It?

Here is one for those who just got their shipments from Silk Road:
It is one million years in the future, and human society is intergalactic. We've reached the far stretches of the "universe" and maybe even interacted with some other civilizations. Trade is nothing what it once was, and money can't be pieces of paper.Instead, a futuristic version of Bitcoin - perhaps based on the original protocol itself - infuses intergalactic human trade and a human society that human beings of today would not recognize.
Not only are decentralized digital currencies booming with the new multi-planet society, but people store their bitcoins in their brains...
I thought that for today's blog, it would be interesting to revisit Carl Sagan's question: "What does it mean for a civilization to be a million years old? We have had radio telescopes and spaceships for a few decades; our technical civilization is a few hundred years old ... an advanced civilization millions of years old is as much beyond us as we are beyond a bushbaby or a macaque."
Today, in 2013, we have had the Internet, truly had the Internet, for a little over a decade. Since then it has become not merely a tool of mass media, but it has indeed become mass media its' very self. Not only is it still revolutionizing virtually every entertainment industry, it has also resulted in most of our economy running on software, something that baby boomers and the World War II generation could scantily imagine until the last thirty years.
Michio Kaku is a professor of theoretical physics at City University of New York and he believes that Sagan's question is no longer speculation, writing that "one day, many of us could gaze at encyclopedia that contains the coordinates of perhaps hundreds of Earth-like planets in our sector of the galaxy. Then we will ponder with wonder, as Sagan did, what an intelligent civilization a million years' ahead of ours will look like." Perhaps some of us will ask: "Do they accept Bitcoin?"
Who knows, goes the logic, perhaps humanity will soon discover Earth-sized twins of our planet orbiting nearby solar systems. As the existential shock wears off, will we look to them with wonder and wanderlust? A new understanding of ourselves in the context of the universe will reinvent the holographic sky in our minds. Is someone looking to us with similar wonder and wanderlust? Will one day we have to send money home to our families on good ole' planet Earth via Bitcoin?
The Russian astrophysicist Kardeshev defined three levels of advanced civilizations based on how they harness energy to fuel their societies. All three stages or categories of civilizations, including the most advanced Type III, would still be bound by the laws of physics which enable us to predict the behavior of the universe from the subatomic world to the large-scale structures of the universe.
Type I civilizations would have technological levels like ours today. This metric is generally arrived at by figuring total energy consumption. Carl Sagan estimated that Earth qualifies as a .07 civilization while he lived. Type II civilizations would be capable of harnessing the energy of their own sun. Type III civilizations would be able to utilize energy on the scale of their own galaxies.
If human society had harnessed all of the power of the sun and later its own galaxy, would Bitcoin still be relevant? More pressing, could amendments to the protocol itself make it relevant? Assuming the mining of all 21 million bitcoins had been completed before human society even began harnessing the energy of the sun, then what difference does human advancement make for BTC?
Kardeshev calculated that the energy consumption of these types of civilizations would be separated by a factor of about 10 billion. In 1963, he searched for trades of the more advanced type II and III civilizations' at the 920 MHZ wavelength creating an uproar of excitement thinking he had discovered signals from a Type II civilization when in fact he had not. He had found a quasar with a red shift.
Similar transpired in 1967 when regular signals were detected by radio telescopes at Cambridge, England. These turned out to be the first discovery of a neutron star.
Kaku believes, along with with Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson, that even though human civilization has only recently begun to master planetary engines - fossil fuel, passive solar, win, geothermal and nuclear fission - humanity will, within two centuries, attain Type I status.
Human society would need to grow modestly. A mere 1 percent growth, according to Kardeschev's numbers, means that it would take 3,200 years to reach Type II status, and 5,800 years to reach Type III status.
Theoretically, it would take centuries or even millennia for a Type I civilization to terraform nearby planets. Then, we would arrive at a Type II civilization, and that stage in which human trade is put under extraterrestrial scrutiny. Clearly, the Federal Reserve system would be unsustainable in this environment.
As for decentralized currencies like Bitcoin, since it is totally understandable that humanity would make it a priority to bring 4G across its galactic realm, they have more than a chance. In fact, they could be the only way to trade should humanity find itself a home away from home.
The Type III civilization is "truly immortal. It has exhausted the power of a single star, and has reached out to other star systems. No natural catastrophe known to science has the capacity to destroy a Type III civilization."
Some theoretical problems of forming a Type III civilization begin with Einstein's theory of relativity. Nothing travels faster than light. Including block chain confirmations. This speed limit holds back a civilization's capacity to expand intergalactic. There will have to be developments in human understanding of the universe in order to Bitcoin devs to figure out how to make Bitcoin faster than the speed of light.
This could delay the transition from a Type II to a Type III civilization by perhaps a million years or so, one human physicist estimates.
Granted, all of these conjectures assume human beings get more advanced in a linear fashion. It also assumes that biological creatures in the universe are similar to us and evolve similarly.
Here we today, however, with less than a century of binary artificial intelligence. Many scientists talk seriously about parity and beyond Artificial Intelligence. This "beyond" will be exponential, and many believe it will arrive this century. They say, the big philosophical question is not what human society will look like in a million years, but, rather: if "we" survive a million years, what is "we?" Do we identify with dinosaurs and fish in this society, or the AI we have become.
If Bitcoin is a part of that equation, then you can be sure "we" will be using brainwallets.
submitted by GldSlvBtc to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Digital gold: why hackers love Bitcoin

This is an automatic summary, original reduced by 89%.
Almost a decade later - an age in digital evolution - those same agencies are absorbing the impact of a rather different and wider ranging breach of cybersecurity, and the potentially vast implications for the current criminal currency of choice: bitcoin, which quietly landed online just weeks before the London conference.
IBM and the Danish shipping giant Maersk announced last month a new strategy to use blockchain, the digital database that records bitcoin transactions, to help manage and track worldwide shipping transactions.
Already, people wishing to send money abroad may use Abra, which uses bitcoin to make a traditionally expensive process faster and cheaper.
"There's a lot of work going on to build identification systems to run in parallel and when they come together with bitcoin it could make it more efficient but also more trusted and transparent than it is now," Gordon says.
"For her generation, bitcoin is something attractive." His only regret about bitcoin is that he didn't buy any in 2009.
Six hundred dollars bought even as late as 2011, when the bitcoin achieved parity with the US dollar, would today be worth a million dollars.
Summary Source | FAQ | Theory | Feedback | Top five keywords: bitcoin#1 currency#2 people#3 virtual#4 attack#5
Post found in /worldnews and /worldnewshub.
NOTICE: This thread is for discussing the submission topic. Please do not discuss the concept of the autotldr bot here.
submitted by autotldr to autotldr [link] [comments]

One Bitcoin Now Worth More Than an Ounce of Gold Ever Was

This is an automatic summary, original reduced by 67%.
In just one year, bitcoin has risen from around $200 to now trade within a touching distance of $2,000, with the currency surpassing gold parity this year and further increasing to a price higher than an ounce of gold has ever achieved.
The highest ever recorded price for an ounce of gold was on the 6th of September 2011, near the height of the banking and euro crisis, when the commodity reached an all-time high of $1920.
During the same time, bitcoin has risen from around $1 to now be worth almost $2,000, a price few thought would ever be seen, but the digital currency has some advantages over the more analogue gold.
Even with the on-going transaction backlog, it is a lot easier to move one bitcoin than to move an ounce of gold, especially across borders or long distances.
It is even more limited in supply than gold which continues to be found across the world.
On top, loosing gold is difficult at a macro scale, but loosing bitcoin can be easy.
Summary Source | FAQ | Theory | Feedback | Top five keywords: gold#1 bitcoin#2 price#3 market#4 high#5
Post found in /Bitcoin and /BitcoinAll.
NOTICE: This thread is for discussing the submission topic. Please do not discuss the concept of the autotldr bot here.
submitted by autotldr to autotldr [link] [comments]

Ethereum mentioned in front page article on The Guardian

This is an automatic summary, original reduced by 89%.
Almost a decade later - an age in digital evolution - those same agencies are absorbing the impact of a rather different and wider ranging breach of cybersecurity, and the potentially vast implications for the current criminal currency of choice: bitcoin, which quietly landed online just weeks before the London conference.
IBM and the Danish shipping giant Maersk announced last month a new strategy to use blockchain, the digital database that records bitcoin transactions, to help manage and track worldwide shipping transactions.
Already, people wishing to send money abroad may use Abra, which uses bitcoin to make a traditionally expensive process faster and cheaper.
"There's a lot of work going on to build identification systems to run in parallel and when they come together with bitcoin it could make it more efficient but also more trusted and transparent than it is now," Gordon says.
"For her generation, bitcoin is something attractive." His only regret about bitcoin is that he didn't buy any in 2009.
Six hundred dollars bought even as late as 2011, when the bitcoin achieved parity with the US dollar, would today be worth a million dollars.
Summary Source | FAQ | Theory | Feedback | Top five keywords: bitcoin#1 currency#2 people#3 virtual#4 attack#5
Post found in /ethtrader, /Bitcoin, /CryptoCurrency, /btc, /BitcoinAll, /ethernews and /GUARDIANauto.
NOTICE: This thread is for discussing the submission topic. Please do not discuss the concept of the autotldr bot here.
submitted by autotldr to autotldr [link] [comments]

[financial] [theory] Another day; another /r/buttcoin post which claims cryptocurrency cannot have any non-zero value

Post I'm referring to; worth a read in case you're unfamiliar with this basic objection to cryptocurrency
This argument is what led me to block jstolfi, as at a certain point I consider willful ignorance no longer useful to address.
But I haven't hammered the topic here yet, so I think it's worth discussing the subject briefly.
In short, if you start with the assumption that something is worthless, then it's easy to make the argument that anyone buying it is burning their money. And it's very easy to believe that cryptocurrency has no value.
But in fact, this goes against basic economics: a commodity is worth what buyers are willing to pay for it. Just because you think they are "wrong" doesn't make it worthless. Just because its value is "speculative" rather than "intrinsic" (concepts which have plenty of grey area, but which are certainly clear for cryptocurrency: there is no intrinsic value to cryptocurrency. It is purely speculative.) doesn't make the value any less real.
There is essentially no intrinsic value to USD either. And the speculative value of gold far exceeds its intrinsic value. Silver is actually much closer to an even balance between intrinsic and speculative value, but that doesn't make its total value any greater, or make it necessarily a better choice to gamble on (personally I prefer it in part for that reason, but mostly because silver seems to be at the low end of the historic range against gold and also because it's more affordable; also, shiny).
I think that it actually makes more sense for financial commodities to be speculative. I think it is a disadvantage to an economy to tie up truly critical resources for financial book-keeping. Store of value commodities should be something where hoarding them doesn't cause economic disaster from withdrawing resources. And hoarding (i.e: saving) should be something which a healthy economy supports in my opinion. When an economy is capable of producing far more than is actually needed in the moment, as the modern global economy is, I think there should be an easy, accessible way for people to choose to save for the future rather than take their rewards now, and I believe that this should be encouraged (by increasing value over time) rather than discouraged.
This is a central point in the logic of cryptocurrency.
But if we simply say "Ha, no government backs this and accepts it for taxes so it must be worthless. Look at all those idiots spending their valuable fiat for worthless crypto!", then sure, it's easy to make circular arguments "proving" that inevitably crypto is a losing bet.
The real question is whether there will continue to be interest in using crypto as a way of saving for the future. And I think there are good arguments for it. Physical commodities cannot be transmitted digitally without trusted third parties (and even then, it's really a derivative backed by that third party being traded and not truly the physical commodity; semantics, but it's a different category than truly the physical commodity itself being transmitted). Fiat currencies are designed to have price inflation and to have monetary supply growth (supply inflation to those with an "Austrian" viewpoint (aka heretics to the cult of Keynes)). If you want to actually capture the gains of a growing economy, saving in fiat is not the way to do it, and this is admitted by mainstream economists and claimed as a feature, not a bug.
For those of us who don't like the idea that being forced to spend or invest our money in order to not lose it is a good and ethical approach, I think crypto is a logical choice. It's true that it's a speculative rather than productive asset. And it's true that investment in productive assets should ultimately provide better returns.
But in a world without good options for saving as opposed to investing, I think gambling on crypto makes sense. In my new job as a cashier at a gas station, I see more money spent on scratch cards every shift than is spent on buying NYAN. Now, these are very different types of gambles: scratch cards have instant feedback, whereas NYAN is intended (at least as I see it) to be held for years or more. The concept, however, is that there is plenty of extra money looking for someplace to put it, and gambling has long served as a way of financing. I've heard arguments about this being an important feature for (physical, old-timey) mining communities: one person might have a claim, another equipment, and so on, such that the resources are there for production, but without an otherwise acceptable means of deciding how to allocate them.
In a world with hundreds of cryptocurrencies, I believe there are many possible niches available. The niche I'm interested in is one which tries to be stable and grow (link to essay addressing the harmony and conflict between those ideas). I think that's a valuable feature for a financial commodity. It absolutely has its risks, but to claim that it's ipso facto worthless because it "must" be traded back into fiat to be used is simply nonsense.
Yes, I intend to trade NYAN for BTC and USD someday. But I never have so far, because its price appreciation is more important to me and because for now I want to take as much off the market as I can. But ultimately, I absolutely expect to see products and services directly available for NYAN. And even if there weren't, so long as there continues to be demand for NYAN for speculative purposes, NYAN will continue to have value.
Someday, NYAN will almost certainly die. Just as someday USD will almost certainly die. But I expect both of them to survive this century. And I hope to see NYAN ultimately pass parity with USD sustainably. And I expect I'll keep on hearing the argument that it's intrinsically worthless over and over during that time. And it's true in one sense of that phrase: one cannot build a physical circuit with NYAN, nor make jewelry with it, and so forth. But in the more relevant sense, the claim is intrinsically false: so long as anyone is willing to pay anything for it, it is not worthless. And I, for one, intend to continue to buy as much NYAN as I can so long as it continues to be this cheap or cheaper. And if so, then it is not worthless. And given that I've already bought ~35%, I think it's reasonable to foresee that if it continues at these prices for years, then I will eventually buy up all the NYAN available to be sold at these prices, one way or another.
Of course, none of this means that anyone else will necessarily ever value NYAN for more than I do. But I expect that building a history of being willing to redeem the commodity will continue to build a value. This is the basis for all financial commodities as I see it: a long, strong history of being able to redeem it for other things of value. This is why gold is valuable. This is why USD is valuable. This is why NYAN will gain value: because right now, our history is short and weak. Over time, our history grows and I believe will retain its current strength or grow.
submitted by coinaday to nyancoins [link] [comments]

MINT PARITY THEORY Money and banking - YouTube Gold, Bitcoin, and the Death of Risk Parity in the Midst ... Bitcoin Cash Will Reach Parity with Bitcoin Bitcoin Pizzagate Gold and ISIS - Unified Conspiracy ... Winklevoss Twins make BITCOIN

Bitcoin vs Gold by Terence Zimwara. The 2019 Bitcoin price surge has reportedly seen some institutional investors joining the craze by adding this fintech to their investment portfolios. As per custom when there are concerns of a possible global recession, investors will seek cover in unconventional assets which can preserve value, things like old paintings, antiques, precious metals and now ... Gold, Bitcoin, and the Death of Risk Parity The Interview · Featuring Dan Tapiero and Raoul Pal . Published on: March 31st, 2020 • Duration: 69 minutes. If central banks continue to prop up asset markets, will they inevitably debase their currency? And if so – how can investors protect their portfolios? Dan Tapiero, founder of DTAP Capital and co-founder of Gold Bullion International ... According to the gold ratio, Bitcoin will rise to $ 14,000 2 min read. July 30, 2020 Maggie . The price of Bitcoins has broken out of its trading range and may have also broken out of the massive multi-year triangle. If the leak can sustain and confirm, the first logical target according to the gold ratio, an important factor in the bull market, would be $ 14,000. image source: Toshi. Bulls ... Comparing the Stock to Flow of Bitcoin and Gold. The S2F model may have limited usefulness as a tool to forecast future prices. But it does allow us to compare the scarcity of gold and bitcoin like for like. After the fourth halving event in May 2020, Bitcoin’s mining reward halved from 12.5 bitcoins per block to 6.25 bitcoins per block. Titan Bitcoin is going after the premium market with the priciest Titan One Gold coin priced at $2,279, but then again it contains 1 troy ounce of 24-karat gold and one bitcoin.The Titan One ...

[index] [9499] [26968] [17728] [45273] [34292] [26312] [13498] [16722] [7496] [35463]

MINT PARITY THEORY Money and banking - YouTube

The Macro Environment Driving Bitcoin, Gold & Silver With Datadash Today Nic & I discuss the macroeconomic factors driving Bitcoin's price. Negative interest rates, war on cash, bond prices ... Here is my reasoning behind why Bitcoin Cash will someday reach parity with Bitcoin Segwit (this may well take years). One clip I put on the screen that I don't talk about as much as I should have ... We review a solid-gold Denarium coin, commemorating the parity in price between 1 bitcoin and 1 ounce of gold. Every aspect of this stunning product has received enormous attention to detail, and ... Hi everyone! Hope you enjoy this episode. We've been super curious about the power of cryptocurrencies so Matt and Thomas decided to test its capacities... B... If central banks continue to prop up asset markets, will they inevitably debase their currency? And if so – how can investors protect their portfolios? Dan T...