Trump is an economist
ROFL
If you even had the remotest clue about Trump you would understand how ridiculous that sounds
:D:D.He is a businessman.
Not an economy guy for sure
Topic: Bitcoin Trump Bump = ~7% (womp womp) (Read 471 times)
ROFL
If you even had the remotest clue about Trump you would understand how ridiculous that sounds
:D:D.He is a businessman.
Not an economy guy for sure
I won't debate mixers here, but the notion that mixers are so critical to Bitcoin's success that to eliminate them somehow kills it is just not so.
I never said banning mixers is going to kill BTC, surely BTC will survive without privacy solutions. However, since there is no privacy in BTC's protocol level, privacy solutions like mixers become imperative for people who want anonymity, that is what i am saying, and so banning mixers affects people who to use BTC anonymously, not that it affects the network in itself. 3. Trump's policies involve a lot of new risk to the US economy. Trump has promised two gigantic changes to the US economy: massive import tariffs that will trigger a worldwide trade war, and the deportation of 20 million US residents, millions of whom work in key labor markets. Although it remains to be seen if Trump will actually implement these promises (the markets right now are betting he won't), this certainly adds risk that was not there under Biden.
Trump is an economist
ROFL
If you even had the remotest clue about Trump you would understand how ridiculous that sounds
:D:D.3. Trump's policies involve a lot of new risk to the US economy. Trump has promised two gigantic changes to the US economy: massive import tariffs that will trigger a worldwide trade war, and the deportation of 20 million US residents, millions of whom work in key labor markets. Although it remains to be seen if Trump will actually implement these promises (the markets right now are betting he won't), this certainly adds risk that was not there under Biden.
Trump is an economist and an entrepreneur, let's just give it a time to assume office and structures how he can manage the compatibility on how he can actualize those p promises. Probably those encouraging false alarms on his policies could be wrong at end.
But you can use Bitcoin just fine without a mixer. At least 99.9% of people who buy and sell Bitcoin don't use a mixer.
Yeah, you can use BTC without a mixer, but what is wrong in using BTC with a mixer? Yeah, nothing. You cannot tell people what they should and shouldn't do, if they want privacy and decide to use a privacy solution, i believe they should be allowed to do so. Even if you are correct that 99.9% of bitcoiners don't use mixers, the remaining 0.1% should be free to use it if they want to.
Yeah, you can use BTC without a mixer, but what is wrong in using BTC with a mixer? Yeah, nothing. You cannot tell people what they should and shouldn't do, if they want privacy and decide to use a privacy solution, i believe they should be allowed to do so. Even if you are correct that 99.9% of bitcoiners don't use mixers, the remaining 0.1% should be free to use it if they want to.
It's not wrong if you care about your privacy and you can have it with controlling your inputs, outputs well. If you want more, you can use Coinjoin for your transactions and mixers are farther than Coinjoin.I agree that individually it's nothing wrong when you use Coinjoin or Mixers, but you can have problems with centralized exchanges if you send your bitcoin there after a transaction with mixer or Coinjoin. You might have very small risk of issues with government but with centralized exchanges, risk is not small. Especially in recent months, many big centralized exchanges turned to be favorite targets of DOJ and expensive law fees.
But you can use Bitcoin just fine without a mixer. At least 99.9% of people who buy and sell Bitcoin don't use a mixer.
Yeah, you can use BTC without a mixer, but what is wrong in using BTC with a mixer? Yeah, nothing. You cannot tell people what they should and shouldn't do, if they want privacy and decide to use a privacy solution, i believe they should be allowed to do so. Even if you are correct that 99.9% of bitcoiners don't use mixers, the remaining 0.1% should be free to use it if they want to.I won't debate mixers here, but the notion that mixers are so critical to Bitcoin's success that to eliminate them somehow kills it is just not so.
Banning radar detectors is not the same as banning cars.
That's what I also expressed when Trump got elected but a few people were quick to get upset with my statement. I highly doubt that Trump's management is going to have any significant impact on Bitcoin, I don't believe he's going to change any laws regarding cryptocurrencies. This positive movement occurred because Bitcoin enthusiasts rallied for Trump after a few statements he made supporting Bitcoin and recognizing it properely (he had previously said it's made out of thin air in 2019). This momentum is what pushed the price even further, I doubt that Trump is actually going to help Bitcoin in practice.
But you can use Bitcoin just fine without a mixer. At least 99.9% of people who buy and sell Bitcoin don't use a mixer.
Yeah, you can use BTC without a mixer, but what is wrong in using BTC with a mixer? Yeah, nothing. You cannot tell people what they should and shouldn't do, if they want privacy and decide to use a privacy solution, i believe they should be allowed to do so. Even if you are correct that 99.9% of bitcoiners don't use mixers, the remaining 0.1% should be free to use it if they want to.Mixers are just tools, like every other tool out there that can be exploited by bad actors, and that is why i think the government is attacking them in order to indirectly attack BTC.
But you can use Bitcoin just fine without a mixer. At least 99.9% of people who buy and sell Bitcoin don't use a mixer.
It's like saying that banning the use of radar detectors is the government's secret way of attacking cars.
Mixers are allowed but if your mixer platform is used by criminals for money laundering, you as a mixer founder, operator will be imprisoned. So the law application is very risky for mixer founders/ operators because they can be sent to jailed anytime.
There is no way mixing services would know who uses their services and for what reason, mixers are meant to offer privacy to their customers, so they would defeat their purpose if they start seeking the origin of coins that are to be mixed.Mixers are just tools, like every other tool out there that can be exploited by bad actors, and that is why i think the government is attacking them in order to indirectly attack BTC.
Take note that BTC mixers is not banned in the U.S., at least there is no official law declaring them illegal, the only thing is simply that the government is attacking them and accusing them of money laundering and terrorism financing, that is why they are seizing them and shutting them down. You don't expect a centralized government to support privacy or anything that allows people to hide their finances from them, do you?
The USA and Europe are where you have biggest risk of operating a mixer / tumbler service. I don't know about their official law and as far as I know, there are no official law of absolute ban against mixers.The forum operates in the USA and if there was such official law ban on mixers, it has not allowed mixer advertisements for many years since a latest shut down against mixer advertisement months ago.
Mixers are allowed but if your mixer platform is used by criminals for money laundering, you as a mixer founder, operator will be imprisoned. So the law application is very risky for mixer founders/ operators because they can be sent to jailed anytime.
Are crypto mixers legal?
U.S. sanctions crypto mixer Sinbad.io for role in North Korean laundering activities
But all what I am concerned is the return of mixers. I don't know if he will allow that or not.
Take note that BTC mixers is not banned in the U.S., at least there is no official law declaring them illegal, the only thing is simply that the government is attacking them and accusing them of money laundering and terrorism financing, that is why they are seizing them and shutting them down. You don't expect a centralized government to support privacy or anything that allows people to hide their finances from them, do you? 
How I see it, the impact Trump will have in the crypto market price was exaggerated and so was the impact the talk of being pro-crypto had on the election outcome. There was a lot more that influenced the decision of over 70 million Americans to vote for Trump beyond him wanting to be accepting towards digital currencies.
My expectations is that the whole discussions on crypto will fizzle out eventually, except there is a big negative law that the Trump administration passes to limit bitcoin growth. If he just allows it to thrive as naturally as it has been, the crypto community should be satisfied.
My expectations is that the whole discussions on crypto will fizzle out eventually, except there is a big negative law that the Trump administration passes to limit bitcoin growth. If he just allows it to thrive as naturally as it has been, the crypto community should be satisfied.
I don't how it was but the involvement of Donald Trump in Bitcoin in his campaign train and other supporters in the US election boosted Bitcoin price more higher in the period and after the election we can all see that the price has hit it all time high again of $76+k and after the swearing in of Donald Trump then we will see the new price of Bitcoin. But all what I am concerned is the return of mixers. I don't know if he will allow that or not. Joe Biden first 2 years in the office, the price of bills was low and it was when campaign started and Trump started to accept Bitcoin then the price change.
Do you think Trump saying things about making BTC "US-made" just says about his ignorance and lack of knowledge, or some other intent in place?
Trump said bunch of stupid/crazy shit, and imho that's just one of them. I think stop attributing it to Trump is better.
While its true that bitcoin will (probably) keep going up no matter who US president is, it would b pretty ignroant to say that this recent pump and new ATH wasn't caused by TRump winning this elections, given his pro-bitcoin stance (even though its probably just bs). I mean, we would (most likely) get new ath if Kamala won, it would just happen a little bit later. 
I hope that people understand what is realistic and what is not, i.e. believing that the U.S. will make BTC a legal tender because Trump is president is being unrealistic and a tad delusional. The U.S. with its currency as the world's reserve currency will never make another currency a legal tender, and surely not BTC.
There is only little a centralized institution can do for the benefit of a decentralized network, that should be understandable to everyone by now i guess.
There is only little a centralized institution can do for the benefit of a decentralized network, that should be understandable to everyone by now i guess.
Absolutely! Us is not going to make cryptocurrency a legal tender. If they do, they will be creating another competitor for their own centralised currency. So I don't see a lot changing in terms of regulations.
But what could happen is, Donald Trump can stop regulatory actions against the cryptocurrency companies in US. That might help the industry flourishing without the fear of getting legal punishment. This can change for better understanding Trump!
I think stop attributing it to Trump is better.
People can expect many policies with Trump but he has only four years with us as a President from 2025 to 2029, not more according to Constitution of the USA. Attributing Bitcoin rise, I say rise, not bump because Bitcoin is not a pump and dump coin, to Trump is not too accurate. If we do this, it is like saying Bitcoin falls because of China and their policies switching on and off for Bitcoin.
It's short term and Bitcoin is strong with organic growth so that in long term, it has been rising since 2009, no matter who are Presidents of USA and whatever policies from China.
People can expect many policies with Trump but he has only four years with us as a President from 2025 to 2029, not more according to Constitution of the USA. Attributing Bitcoin rise, I say rise, not bump because Bitcoin is not a pump and dump coin, to Trump is not too accurate. If we do this, it is like saying Bitcoin falls because of China and their policies switching on and off for Bitcoin.
It's short term and Bitcoin is strong with organic growth so that in long term, it has been rising since 2009, no matter who are Presidents of USA and whatever policies from China.
Bitcoin rise 500% is Bitcoin been Bitcoin and has nothing to do with Biden
The situation of the nation then made many realised the beauty of Bitcoin.
I agree because Bitcoin market is globally, not nationally in a single country. But big countries like China, USA and their policy changes can have impacts on Bitcoin market and price. People on the market will react naturally to policy changes in these big countries and it won't change in future too.
Bitcoin exist in an environment, definitely it's price would be affected by changes in policy that affect the environment
But Bitcoin doesn't depend on any country to grow or survive.
If it did, it wouldn't had been called decentralized.
The situation of the nation then made many realised the beauty of Bitcoin.
I agree because Bitcoin market is globally, not nationally in a single country. But big countries like China, USA and their policy changes can have impacts on Bitcoin market and price. People on the market will react naturally to policy changes in these big countries and it won't change in future too.
But Bitcoin doesn't depend on any country to grow or survive.
If it did, it wouldn't had been called decentralized.
Yep - it's just the fact that politics and other factors influence BTC in small and not so much ways - and as time goes on, more and more levers will be put onto it, and may others would use it for their campaigns to get some votes / etc.
Bitcoin rise 500% is Bitcoin been Bitcoin and has nothing to do with Biden
In addition he has already launched his own crypto platform with his 3 sons, afaik he has 5 childrenin total but his 2 other children are his daughters actually.
Personally consider this a red flag. Especially knowing how that story went..
Jump to: