Dakardii's topic

[Cool Breeze]

You asked me, so I will respond to several or your baseless accusations and assertions. I label them that for reasons which I will now show to anyone paying attention. Your request was for me to respond to a "richard5za" quote, I'll repost it here:

Bitcoin is a 100% digital asset. There is no underlying asset, not derivatively, not at all. You are buying a digital expression or algorithm which is believed cannot be copied and therefore can be trusted as a store of value. (value fluctuations aside)
It is largely unregulated in so many parts of the globe that it can aid criminal and terrorist activities and is a good vehicle for tax evasion. For these reasons alone digital assets must have a good very long term future but this may or may not include Bitcoin. So there is no reason for the authorities to support Bitcoin, rather I suspect the opposite may be true.
Currently Bitcoin is trusted as a store of value but there is a very short history, with AI on the we don't know for sure that it cannot be copied and looking to the long term past for reassurance is not there.
So how do we read the signs of the times?
Firstly experts cannot be trusted as a group. There are studies showing that more than 80% of financial, political and economic experts are less accurate on a three year forecast than a dart throwing chimp! A small percentage of experts are accurate in their forecasts but who are they? Who can be trusted for an accurate reading of the signs of the times?
So, the first point in searching the signs of the times is the PE ratio of stocks against history. Its very and untenably high and history has shown that crashes happen in this situation.
So what is likely to crash with the stocks, and where will the safe havens be? I can't answer this question but if I was in charge of the economy and finances of any Western country I would want digital assets completely squashed with the stock crash. Lets get rid of this terrorist, tax and criminal evasion; it will be a long time before digital assets are rebuilt and provide us with a breathing space!
As I'm sure you can imagine, I am not seeing a happy ending for digital assets and have never owned any.

1. BTC is a digital asset, yes. But you still haven't found out why it's valued and desired - surely it must have some reason. Why is it so hard for you to either find out what this is, or is it just easier to call other people stupid and refer to BTC as "tulips" lol. It is believed that gold cannot be copied and there are reasons why gold is considered a good store of value, and it is. The problem with people who have emotional or (usually age related) other reasons to dispute BTC is that gold has all the same problems, if one is honest. Where gold might be better it gives up in spades to other things BTC (for example) is much superior and that is far more relevant due to the government oversight on it, which is portability.

2. Cash is by far and away the most associated entity related to criminal/terrorist activities, but I don't see you trying to ban that = one of the worst examples of people spewing globalist control schemes for emotional gain that is unfounded entirely.

3. The short history is actually the reason why you don't accept it, and will keep calling it a bubble ad infinitum so as to be wrong ad infinitum. Gold had its nascent stage too, every asset does - that's the point.

4. Being able to read the signs of the times is why certain people are rewarded handsomely (me here) and why others aren't (you). Of course, there is always risk involved, another universal reality for humans who attempt to gain anything in life. I don't need "experts" to make my decisions, per se, I analyze every factor I can (that includes other's behaviours, yes) to come to a conclusion precisely because that is true open mindedness and proper thinking.

5. Government regulation is of course an important consideration, but it's a consideration for every asset class. Again, the funny thing is that the naysayers are so (intentionally?) one dimensional here. BTC is outside the system. A whole new ballgame of game theory comes into play if they try to do X, Y or Z and their are consequences for that. If you own paper claims to assets (de fact "digital assets" lol, any American who doesn't own physical metals is this person) they can do anything they want to your account, they can freeze the stock market, they can bail in, etc. Not so with BTC, my friend. Oh, another winning point, fancy that.

---

I'm not worried about recent BTC events at all, why would I be? I'm in for a longer term horizon, as I've noted. Not nervous whatsoever my friend. In fact, I hope it drops to 20k so I can buy more!

Now I'll ask you the common question I pose around here to see just how honest you are: What will it take for you to admit you are incorrect about BTC? If you have no answer, basically you just have unfalsifiable beliefs that are a waste of time because that means you don't even really want to debate the issue. It's the equivalent of a child saying "No" or "because" in response to everything.

As for SMV, you have to first understand that women don't look at men like men look at women = SMV for men (from a woman's POV) is not based on physical things or age (like it is for men's view of women) solely. Women are malleable and have many more inputs for attraction, men not so much. This is obvious on several levels. That women would like a 25 year old billionaire muscle man is funny since it proves the point, their desire is the funny part, which means it simultaneously proves my point and shows that attraction is based on many things for them, but their wants are formed in accordance to their environment. Let's face it, men just want a young, fertile woman who isn't crazy and follows. Women have no idea what their biology dictates but men can analyze what it is, generally speaking - and since I am a man and know, I'm telling you because you obviously haven't seen that. If you are still lost, maybe the best example to help you would be that no matter how many billions Oprah has, I still can't get a boner around her - and I wouldn't care to anyway. The inverse of that situation has already proven me to be correct, once again, to anyone who knows reality and is honest.

[John]

** 26-Jan-2021 World View: Unfalsifiable Beliefs

To Cool Breeze:

Now I'll ask you the common question I pose around here to see just
how honest you are: What will it take for you to admit you are
incorrect about BTC? If you have no answer, basically you just have
unfalsifiable beliefs that are a waste of time.

[Cool Breeze]

Again, for all of the others that are reading them (and for whom I'm trying to do service), notice how they still haven't identified what money is. That's because if you understand what it is, you can see the value, among other things that it possesses (which is much more), that BTC has.

Also, if they actually defined what it is (either they don't know or don't want to further embarrass themselves), they'd realize just how stupid the tulip comparison is.

He who he has eyes to read and ears to ear, let him hear.

As far as what money is, I'll discuss that further with you after bitcoin collapses to zero. I know you'll be eager to have that discussion at that time.

I wish you all the luck you deserve.

Just like I thought, you won't be discussing it at all, lol.

I don't rely on luck, since it is irrelevant to my analysis.

[Cool Breeze]

** 26-Jan-2021 World View: Unfalsifiable Beliefs

To Cool Breeze:

Now I'll ask you the common question I pose around here to see just
how honest you are: What will it take for you to admit you are
incorrect about BTC? If you have no answer, basically you just have
unfalsifiable beliefs that are a waste of time.

It's a good question (and let me correct you, ONLY I ASK THAT QUESTION, not you, you hate it), since I'm honest and I brought it up here and elsewhere (not you guys), I should also answer it.

I will answer it once you first answer. If you can't be honest and orderly enough here, why should I be? Go ahead.

But you'll dodge and claim I am the coy one, even though you answered a question with a question. And I know why, it's because you can't answer the question. I can still answer it (as you should know), but let's see how genuine you guys really are, shall we?

[John]

** 26-Jan-2021 World View: Bloviation

> It's a good question (and let me correct you, ONLY I ASK THAT
> QUESTION, not you, you hate it), since I'm honest and I
> brought it up here and elsewhere (not you guys), I should also
> answer it.

> I will answer it once you first answer. If you can't be honest and
> orderly enough here, why should I be? Go ahead.

> But you'll dodge and claim I am the coy one, even though you
> answered a question with a question. And I know why, it's because
> you can't answer the question. I can still answer it (as you
> should know), but let's see how genuine you guys really are, shall
> we?

Exactly what I expected. You're just bloviating, but refusing to
answer. By your own criteria, that proves that you just have
"unfalsifiable beliefs that are a waste of time, because that means
you don't even really want to debate the issue. It's the equivalent of
a child saying "No" or "because" in response to everything."

[FullMoon]

Now it's just tit for tat. Let's drop it?
Cryptos will go to the moon with the other financials and the collapse. It's part of the game. Getting out with anything will be the priority. Especially with your life.

[Higgenbotham]

You asked me, so I will respond to several or your baseless accusations and assertions. I label them that for reasons which I will now show to anyone paying attention. Your request was for me to respond to a "richard5za" quote, I'll repost it here:

Bitcoin is a 100% digital asset. There is no underlying asset, not derivatively, not at all. You are buying a digital expression or algorithm which is believed cannot be copied and therefore can be trusted as a store of value. (value fluctuations aside)
It is largely unregulated in so many parts of the globe that it can aid criminal and terrorist activities and is a good vehicle for tax evasion. For these reasons alone digital assets must have a good very long term future but this may or may not include Bitcoin. So there is no reason for the authorities to support Bitcoin, rather I suspect the opposite may be true.
Currently Bitcoin is trusted as a store of value but there is a very short history, with AI on the we don't know for sure that it cannot be copied and looking to the long term past for reassurance is not there.
So how do we read the signs of the times?
Firstly experts cannot be trusted as a group. There are studies showing that more than 80% of financial, political and economic experts are less accurate on a three year forecast than a dart throwing chimp! A small percentage of experts are accurate in their forecasts but who are they? Who can be trusted for an accurate reading of the signs of the times?
So, the first point in searching the signs of the times is the PE ratio of stocks against history. Its very and untenably high and history has shown that crashes happen in this situation.
So what is likely to crash with the stocks, and where will the safe havens be? I can't answer this question but if I was in charge of the economy and finances of any Western country I would want digital assets completely squashed with the stock crash. Lets get rid of this terrorist, tax and criminal evasion; it will be a long time before digital assets are rebuilt and provide us with a breathing space!
As I'm sure you can imagine, I am not seeing a happy ending for digital assets and have never owned any.

1. BTC is a digital asset, yes. But you still haven't found out why it's valued and desired - surely it must have some reason. Why is it so hard for you to either find out what this is, or is it just easier to call other people stupid and refer to BTC as "tulips" lol. It is believed that gold cannot be copied and there are reasons why gold is considered a good store of value, and it is. The problem with people who have emotional or (usually age related) other reasons to dispute BTC is that gold has all the same problems, if one is honest. Where gold might be better it gives up in spades to other things BTC (for example) is much superior and that is far more relevant due to the government oversight on it, which is portability.

2. Cash is by far and away the most associated entity related to criminal/terrorist activities, but I don't see you trying to ban that = one of the worst examples of people spewing globalist control schemes for emotional gain that is unfounded entirely.

3. The short history is actually the reason why you don't accept it, and will keep calling it a bubble ad infinitum so as to be wrong ad infinitum. Gold had its nascent stage too, every asset does - that's the point.

4. Being able to read the signs of the times is why certain people are rewarded handsomely (me here) and why others aren't (you). Of course, there is always risk involved, another universal reality for humans who attempt to gain anything in life. I don't need "experts" to make my decisions, per se, I analyze every factor I can (that includes other's behaviours, yes) to come to a conclusion precisely because that is true open mindedness and proper thinking.

5. Government regulation is of course an important consideration, but it's a consideration for every asset class. Again, the funny thing is that the naysayers are so (intentionally?) one dimensional here. BTC is outside the system. A whole new ballgame of game theory comes into play if they try to do X, Y or Z and their are consequences for that. If you own paper claims to assets (de fact "digital assets" lol, any American who doesn't own physical metals is this person) they can do anything they want to your account, they can freeze the stock market, they can bail in, etc. Not so with BTC, my friend. Oh, another winning point, fancy that.

---

I'm not worried about recent BTC events at all, why would I be? I'm in for a longer term horizon, as I've noted. Not nervous whatsoever my friend. In fact, I hope it drops to 20k so I can buy more!

Now I'll ask you the common question I pose around here to see just how honest you are: What will it take for you to admit you are incorrect about BTC? If you have no answer, basically you just have unfalsifiable beliefs that are a waste of time because that means you don't even really want to debate the issue. It's the equivalent of a child saying "No" or "because" in response to everything.

As for SMV, you have to first understand that women don't look at men like men look at women = SMV for men (from a woman's POV) is not based on physical things or age (like it is for men's view of women) solely. Women are malleable and have many more inputs for attraction, men not so much. This is obvious on several levels. That women would like a 25 year old billionaire muscle man is funny since it proves the point, their desire is the funny part, which means it simultaneously proves my point and shows that attraction is based on many things for them, but their wants are formed in accordance to their environment. Let's face it, men just want a young, fertile woman who isn't crazy and follows. Women have no idea what their biology dictates but men can analyze what it is, generally speaking - and since I am a man and know, I'm telling you because you obviously haven't seen that. If you are still lost, maybe the best example to help you would be that no matter how many billions Oprah has, I still can't get a boner around her - and I wouldn't care to anyway. The inverse of that situation has already proven me to be correct, once again, to anyone who knows reality and is honest.

You gave an honest response in my opinion. The main weakness in the response, in my view, is that you are claiming superior knowledge and that others just don't understand.

Regarding bitcoin, however, from this standpoint, you are mostly correct: "4. Being able to read the signs of the times is why certain people are rewarded handsomely (me here) and why others aren't (you). Of course, there is always risk involved, another universal reality for humans who attempt to gain anything in life," as I am not interested in getting caught up in bitcoin even if I think I can make money on it, besides maybe a scalp here and there. I'm just not interested in immoral crap like bitcoin any more than I am interested in getting a piece of ass from an ignorant 15 year old girl, which I could have done many times (dozens) and didn't (the interest from teenage girls peaked when I was in late 20s, by the way, not late 30s, and I was a late bloomer), but not any time past the age of 37 that I can think of. So what you need to understand and don't is that there are many people who do understand but are not at all interested. That doesn't make you superior in any way.

As far as women go, you still start your response with "you have to first understand", as you do with most everything else. No, I'm married to a woman who is 25 years younger than me and had my first child at age 58 last year. What I do understand further is that only 1 in 5000 men my age has a child in any given year, and there are reasons why. Statistics are what they are for reasons, and, while outliers are there, they are outliers, just as the current bubble mentality is an outlier and it will reverse dramatically when the herd least expects it. And with regard to the bubble, you are part of the herd, my friend, but I won't make any claims as to whether you know it or not.

Also, this is a fair question in my opinion:

"Now I'll ask you the common question I pose around here to see just how honest you are: What will it take for you to admit you are incorrect about BTC?"

It would be when I am forced to use bitcoin to get the necessities of life, or am unable to get the necessities of life because I need bitcoin to get them, but don't have any.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIYPu4MFLl4

Charlie Munger calls Elon Musk 'brilliant' and bitcoin 'stupid and immoral'

In this video, Munger gets really angry when he is asked about bitcoin. There is another way to look at bitcoin and this whole business of trading, though. On a deeper level, the morality of the whole business of trading is questionable (and of course Munger has spent his whole life doing it), and it is debatable as which aspects of it are more or less moral. My common refrain is that the Fed has forced anyone with assets to dance to the music, with the accompanying implication that the Fed is a bad actor. So what I'm saying is that while I look at bitcoin similarly to the way Munger looks at it, that's not necessarily the only or correct way to view it.

I see the generational divide as being those who made their money after the dissolution of Bretton Woods versus those who established themselves before (like Munger and Buffet). Of course, there are outliers, as in people like me who view the world closer to the way Charlie Munger views it. So when you see the billionaires and family offices like Tudor Jones and Druckenmiller getting involved in this, these are the guys who operated solely in the post 1971 bubble environment. They understand bubbles and they know what they are doing with regard to bubbles, but in my opinion that is all they know and they became billionaires solely because they are able to latch onto that kind of thinking (up or down). My view is that we have been in this bubble environment for a long time and it seems normal but is in fact quite abnormal and when it reverses, it will do so with an absolute vengeance. This is a multi-century extreme in my opinion. Few will survive the financial fallout and even fewer will survive at all. It's for that reason that I don't want to spend a lot of time debating this (I think full moon and tim are right, and it doesn't matter much whether they are right on the details or not - a bomb shelter in a remote location is good for many things besides surviving a nuclear war). I believe we are in the last days of the current paradigm, as many other posters do.

[Higgenbotham]

Again, for all of the others that are reading them (and for whom I'm trying to do service), notice how they still haven't identified what money is. That's because if you understand what it is, you can see the value, among other things that it possesses (which is much more), that BTC has.

Also, if they actually defined what it is (either they don't know or don't want to further embarrass themselves), they'd realize just how stupid the tulip comparison is.

He who he has eyes to read and ears to ear, let him hear.

As far as what money is, I'll discuss that further with you after bitcoin collapses to zero. I know you'll be eager to have that discussion at that time.

I wish you all the luck you deserve.

Just like I thought, you won't be discussing it at all, lol.

I don't rely on luck, since it is irrelevant to my analysis.

You're right that I won't be discussing it because you will have no electricity, no internet connection and no bitcoin (that is available, anyway). That was my whole point.

You'll need luck. If you don't understand the role of luck, you are the one who doesn't understand. I just wish you all the luck you deserve.

In financial trading, the only way I know of to negate the role of luck is to make a large number of short term bets, then analyze those bets to determine whether the role of luck has indeed been neutralized. There is no way to negate the role of luck when making one gigantic long term bet (see the discussion on Harry Browne I refer to from time to time here).

A good guy to read in that regard is Harry Browne, now deceased. He was on that first gold run in the 1970's. After a few more decades in the investment prognostication business (and probably a few failures, I don't know), he wrote some final words of advice about "fail safe investing" and a "permanent portfolio" where he discusses the difficulties in timing market outcomes. The longer I look at the various concepts of what drives price, like Harry, the more agnostic I become.

Forecasting the Future

Rule #4: No one can predict the future.

Events in the investment markets result from the decisions of millions of different people. Investor advisors have no more ability to predict the future actions of human beings than psychics and fortune-tellers do. And so events never unfold as we were so sure they would.

Yes, there have been forecasts that came true. But the only reason we notice them is because it's so exceptional for even one to come true. We forget about all the failed predictions because they're so commonplace.

No one can reliably tell you what stocks will do next year, whether we'll have more inflation, or how the economy will perform.

Investment Advice

Rule #5: No one can move you in and out of investments consistently with precise and profitable timing.

You'll hear about many Wall Street wizards, but the investment advisor with the perfect record up to now most likely will lose his touch the moment you start acting on his advice.

Investment advisors can be very valuable. A good advisor can help you understand how to do the things you know you need to do. He can help call your attention to risks you may have overlooked. And he can make you aware of new alternatives.

But no one can guarantee to have you always in the right place at the right time. And worse, attempts to do so can sometimes be fatal to your portfolio.

http://www.harrybrowne.org/articles/InvestmentRules.htm

You will keep chanting and pounding your chest as long as bitcoin moves higher (or, in your case, even remains relatively high, as you are exceptionally stubborn and bull-headed).

Price convinces.

But if bitcoin collapses, you will disappear. ***poof*** Just like all emotional gamblers like you do.

[Cool Breeze]

You gave an honest response in my opinion.

Thanks for the post, I enjoyed it because it was genuine. To clarify just one more thing, I am not superior, nor have I said that I was. My posts either demonstrate a command of the matter at hand, or they do not. Of course, others who are reading (if this is the case) can decide.

A possible scenario I foresee will be that BTC will be an asset for those who are in fact at an elevated, or separated, status due to the fact that the plebs will have to deal with a digital dollar that is manipulated even more by the US (or whichever) gov't. That's why your meager definition of necessities allows you wiggle room enough to never admit it. The problem with your answer is that BTC could be a phenomenally important and advantageous asset class, but you still won't admit that you were wrong if you get to eat bugs and survive? Nobody is buying that. But I have my answer.

John, you should know what I'm gonna say about BTC and being wrong, because a) I'm honest and b) there's only one way to go. So I don't mind talking about it --- but I've exposed that you are still stuck in unfalsifiable thinking --- and you don't like that I point that out. Time to come clean.

The answer of when I'm wrong about BTC is when it is an utter failure (your prediction), which is obvious. Banning it is not an utter failure, since portability and game theory make it a game changer from a world wide mover point of view. If I can get value elsewhere, and easily, it is a winner.

And a winner it shall be.

[Cool Breeze]

You will keep chanting and pounding your chest as long as bitcoin moves higher (or, in your case, even remains relatively high, as you are exceptionally stubborn and bull-headed).

Price convinces.

But if bitcoin collapses, you will disappear. ***poof*** Just like all emotional gamblers like you do.

Now you are making contingencies because you know that BTC will keep rising. Interesting.

If you can define luck, go ahead. If you can discern a great call from luck, go ahead? People who have command on topics, make predictions, are vindicated ... then denigrated by the salty who can only say some term like "you got lucky" are proven to be the winners they are when the chips fall.

If I need luck I have no hope. You believe with religious fervor that BTC will go to zero, right?

Why would your "luck" idea save me then? I must be blessed by some god-like creature called "Luck!"

Understanding BTC to be the most asymmetric trade of our lifetime implies correct understanding of risk and reward. It is you that is betrayed by Harry Browne's thesis there, since you claim you know the future with certainty that BTC is going to zero. Notice I don't make any such upside claim, just that it is a great asset and I'll be rewarded handsomely. That's why one makes a trade.

You won't short BTC, so guess who the real bloviate-r is? I have skin in the game. You have hollow words on an internet forum, and you make grandiose and seemingly guaranteed claims. I have done no such thing.