Bitcoin Cracks $5000

[TheTexan]

$16,185

Crashing.

 

[Dark_Horse_Rider]

of CRCW?

Should have known better when I saw the headline. . . had the Bitcoin emblem front and center.

Just enough info to scare the folks that don't know enough about Bitcoin, away from it . . .

 

[Mordan]

I got that wrong. I owned it when the price action said I was wrong when it traded sideways. I'll be wrong a lot more in the future too. Fortunately, being right isn't very important to making money.

Price probably pulls back to around the 10 week average. That's what growth stocks do after a parabolic run. We'll see if it holds for Bitcoin.

to be honest I sold a small percentage after the failed 20k attempt. the more it rises the more a chance for a pullback. will buy more later.


however I am big hodler long term. Crypto is going to destroy banking like the printing press brought information to the people

 

[devil21]

however I am big hodler long term. Crypto is going to destroy banking like the printing press brought information to the people

Yes, because cashless society and a 100% trackable, controllable and intangible global currency must have the bankers peeing themselves in fear.

Delusional...

 

[dannno]

Yes, because cashless society and a 100% trackable, controllable and intangible global currency must have the bankers peeing themselves in fear.

Delusional...

The one thing you never mention is that it is voluntary.

 

[devil21]

The one thing you never mention is that it is voluntary.

I wrote a long, detailed explanation but then deleted it. There's no point arguing with you anymore since, if after 10 years on RPF and 50k posts, you still havent learned anything, you're not going to start now. I'll just continue to post for those with ears to hear.

 

[dannno]

I wrote a long, detailed explanation but then deleted it. There's no point arguing with you anymore since, if after 10 years on RPF and 50k posts, you still havent learned anything, you're not going to start now. I'll just continue to post for those with ears to hear.

Lol, wait a minute.. I thought after the first year I learned that the establishment was the enemy, even though I kinda knew that before.

The establishment comes out against Trump, and you back them up and attack Trump.

The establishment comes out against bitcoin, and you back them up and attack Bitcoin.

Notice a trend yet?? And I haven't learned anything??

Then you come up with this whacked out conspiracy theory, which admittedly could be true, but not very likely, imo, that they are purposely against Donald Trump to get people like me to support him, even though I didn't vote for him. And they are pitting the mainstream citizen against bitcoin, allegedly so that people like me, the minority, will support it. Why? I dunno. If they liked the blockchain why not just put it into the banking system that they already control??

If the lessons that I was supposed to learn on RPF is that the establishment is going to attack things that they like, to get me to like them, then why should I have supported Ron Paul to begin with

 

[devil21]

Lol, wait a minute.. I thought after the first year I learned that the establishment was the enemy, even though I kinda knew that before.

The establishment comes out against Trump, and you back them up and attack Trump.

The establishment comes out against bitcoin, and you back them up and attack Bitcoin.

You don't know controlled opposition tactics when you see it? Here's a hint. Everything that gets big media coverage is what they really want, by presenting only options that are acceptable to predetermined outcomes! When sentiment turns anti-establishment, offer controlled "anti-establishment" options like Trump. As if there's such a thing as an anti-establishment Jesuit trained NYC billionaire...

The rest isn't worth bothering with since it's all extensions of that simple tactic.

 

[dannno]

You don't know controlled opposition tactics when you see it? Here's a hint. Everything that gets big media coverage is what they really want, by presenting only options that are acceptable to predetermined outcomes! When sentiment turns anti-establishment, offer controlled "anti-establishment" options like Trump. As if there's such a thing as an anti-establishment Jesuit trained NYC billionaire...

The rest isn't worth bothering with since it's all extensions of that simple tactic.

Ya, I get it, I just don't agree that is their tactic here, it doesn't seem like their best option and they don't seem to be doing anything to benefit themselves.

Obama was exactly what you described. He was sorta the anti-GW Bush, Cinderella story, comin out of nowhere, beat Hillary the establishment candidate, media plastered him everywhere.. But what they didn't do was ruin all of their credibility overly attacking him constantly. That would have been counter-productive. It would have been counter-productive to go overboard attacking him if they actually wanted him to win... because if he won it makes them look bad, and if he doesn't win then what was the point?

Same thing with bitcoin, the media treats bitcoin more like they treat Ron Paul. They don't cover it unless they have to, after it's had like a 50x run or something. And when they do, it is completely crazy, it's a bubble, only criminals use it, blah blah blah..

It just seems like if their goal was to use blockchain technology why would they have the libertarians invest and profit off of it if they are their worst enemy? Why not have the banks do it, which they already control?

 

[devil21]

Ya, I get it, I just don't agree that is their tactic here, it doesn't seem like their best option and they don't seem to be doing anything to benefit themselves.

Obama was exactly what you described. He was sorta the anti-GW Bush, Cinderella story, comin out of nowhere, beat Hillary the establishment candidate, media plastered him everywhere.. But what they didn't do was ruin all of their credibility overly attacking him constantly. That would have been counter-productive. It would have been counter-productive to go overboard attacking him if they actually wanted him to win... because if he won it makes them look bad, and if he doesn't win then what was the point?

Same thing with bitcoin, the media treats bitcoin more like they treat Ron Paul. They don't cover it unless they have to, after it's had like a 50x run or something. And when they do, it is completely crazy, it's a bubble, only criminals use it, blah blah blah..

It just seems like if their goal was to use blockchain technology why would they have the libertarians invest and profit off of it if they are their worst enemy? Why not have the banks do it, which they already control?

Believe what you want. If you don't know that a cashless, fully trackable monetary substitute has been a major banker goal and bitcoin/crypto just happens to fit the bill and emerge into the mainstream right when the dollar system is being tossed aside then I don't know what else to say. They run the same playbook for social engineering changes over and over and people never pick up on it. This is the same playbook.

Heck, that bitcoin jesus guy Ver even plainly said on CNBC earlier today during Fast Money that he thought insider trading and corruption is fine, a "non-crime", and investors losing their money is their own fault. Sounds like a banker to me.

 

[dannno]

Heck, that bitcoin jesus guy Ver even plainly said on CNBC earlier today during Fast Money that he thought insider trading and corruption is fine, a "non-crime", and investors losing their money is their own fault. Sounds like a banker to me.

I doubt he said corruption is always "fine", it can be fraud.. I always thought that insider trading being ok was the libertarian position tho

 

[CCTelander]

I doubt he said corruption is always "fine", it can be fraud.. I always thought that insider trading being ok was the libertarian position tho

You thought correctly.

 

[axiomata]

Highly recommend a series of two articles posted at fee.org

https://fee.org/articles/what-bitcoin-isnt-a-ponzi-unbacked-tulipmania/

https://fee.org/articles/bitcoin-is-deflationary-transparent-and-antifragile/

 

[devil21]

I doubt he said corruption is always "fine", it can be fraud.. I always thought that insider trading being ok was the libertarian position tho

For you maybe. I think it's theft to materially mislead people with untrue claims (rampant in the crypto space) then profit from the insider knowledge of what the lies are. It's on the investor when the information is available and is ignored but that's not the case with crypto. It should be a large red flag when someone called bitcoin jesus says that investors losing their money (to him, presumably) is their own fault and insider trading is fine.

Besides, I'm well past subscribing to any particular political platform, whether libertarian, republican, democrat or otherwise. Those are herding techniques used to limit one's thinking.

Purely coincidence I'm sure.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...dec16379010_story.html?utm_term=.6d0239a13a4f

Over the past few weeks, investors have been flocking to bitcoin, the digital currency whose value has soared by about 2,000 percent in the past year alone. And while many economists are cautioning against excitement about bitcoin — which is caught up in what may be one of the biggest speculative bubbles in history — it’s important to note just how revolutionary the technology may be.

Indeed, the technology underlying bitcoin could fundamentally change the way we think of money.

It is only a matter of time before paper money is phased out. Sweden, where about 2 percent of value of transactions are done in cash, may eliminate physical money within five years. Most central banks are working on technologies to power a future digital currency.

 

[kpitcher]

Yes, because cashless society and a 100% trackable, controllable and intangible global currency must have the bankers peeing themselves in fear.

Delusional...

Dash, Monero, Zcash are all top 20 crypto coins with market caps in the billions, all with true private sending of coins. I think true privacy will be a growing concern for people.

Controllable.. perhaps. Although the design was made to avoid central control to be shut down. I haven't seen any country make an effort to shut crypto down to see if it can be achieved or not.

 

[Krugminator2]

Heck, that bitcoin jesus guy Ver even plainly said on CNBC earlier today during Fast Money that he thought insider trading and corruption is fine, a "non-crime", and investors losing their money is their own fault. Sounds like a banker to me.

It should be a large red flag when someone called bitcoin jesus says that investors losing their money (to him, presumably) is their own fault and insider trading is fine.

I doubt anyone would say corruption is fine. Losing money IS an investor's own responsibility. Not everyone is a winner.

Insider trading is a non-crime (that is actually the exact phrase I use as well). Insider trading should be legal. I've never heard of the guy but he sounds like me.

Just a horrible human being who has made a living prosecuting people for non-crimes like insider trading and playing poker. Authoritarian (redundant) liberals seem really upset about this. I am not sure what the reasoning was, but he is one of the least libertarian people in government.

 

[devil21]

I doubt anyone would say corruption is fine. Losing money IS an investor's own responsibility. Not everyone is a winner.

Even if it's because they were lied to? Look, I understand fully that the vast majority of humans are idiots and they make it difficult to be altruistic at times but spreading misinformation (again, the crypto space has been awash in mis/disinfo) with the intent to profit from it is theft. Never mind order spoofing and other decidedly "bankeresque" tactics. Everyone on the inside KNOWS these markets are fraudulent ponzis but sell it as something else entirely.

eta: Insider trading is a very broad term. I'd agree with you in some instances but this is about the crypto markets specifically.

Insider trading is a non-crime (that is actually the exact phrase I use as well). Insider trading should be legal. I've never heard of the guy but he sounds like me.

Great, I'll remember to never invest any money with you. Thanks for the heads up. Do you think ponzi schemes should be legal?

 

[devil21]

Dash, Monero, Zcash are all top 20 crypto coins with market caps in the billions, all with true private sending of coins. I think true privacy will be a growing concern for people.

Controllable.. perhaps. Although the design was made to avoid central control to be shut down. I haven't seen any country make an effort to shut crypto down to see if it can be achieved or not.

Errr....only the largest population country in the world. China!?!?

 

[Krugminator2]

Never mind order spoofing and other decidedly "bankeresque" tactics.

1. Order spoofing is illegal.

2. It makes me nostalgic. I've noticed no one whines about high frequency trading anymore. Zerohedge is awfully silent. You want to know why? The free market took care of it. HFT profits have been reduced to nothing through competition. Competition has forced good behavior and been amazing for the average investor.

 

[dannno]

Great, I'll remember to never invest any money with you. Thanks for the heads up. Do you think ponzi schemes should be legal?

Wait a minute, some libertarians want cannabis to be legal but don't want to use it themselves.

Are you saying that because he believes insider trading should be legal, means that he thinks it is moral and he himself would engage in it?

Are you saying that because a person says they believe insider trading should be illegal, that morally, they are against such behavior?