You gotta be careful trying to spend too much time trying to persuade others to buy bitcoin when they do not understand and/or appreciate bitcoin's investment case irrespective of what you are doing yourself and what you are telling them. In their minds, they believe that you are the crazy one.
Yeah, it might sound a bit harsh, but it's pretty silly when we try to convince others, especially when it comes to investing. Nobody can predict the future. We're actively involved in the market, which makes us believe in the potential of Bitcoin
and cryptocurrencies as the future.
I am ONLY talking about bitcoin. Fuck shitcoins and the vague and non-specific idea of cryptocurrencies.. whatever that is supposed to mean.
If you do not make it clear that you are talking about bitcoin, then some people are going to think that you are talking about shitcoins, especially if you are mixing up your terms and making vague references to cryptocurriencies, in which an overwhelming majority (if not all of them) are either scams at worse or just deserve a presumption of being a scam, at best.
In other words, presume all projects that have its own coin/token that is not bitcoin to be a scam.... there might be some limited reasons to invest (or gamble with shitcoins), but hopefully it is less than 10% of the size of your bitcoin holdings that you would use to fuck around with any shitcoin.
However, many people outside this market don't even understand what Bitcoin is, so how can we expect them to have faith in it?
That's true... even people who are in bitcoin might not really understand what bitcoin is, and surely shitcoiners are people involved in shitcoins/cryptocurrencies and those who use vague descriptions, such as "crypto" or "cryptocurrency" likely to not understand bitcoin enough in order to be more clear in their chosen language...and their chosen ways to make sure that they are being clear about bitcoin as compared to any reference(s) that they might want to make to shitcoins, if it is even relevant to the at-the-time discussion.
Those who want to understand will do so on their own. Trying to persuade others to believe in our views is just a waste of time and not very wise.
It does not hurt to talk about bitcoin from time to time and even mention it from time to time, even if many people who might be friends or relatives might not be interested in terms of hearing about bitcoin.. but sometimes, it might be helpful to mention bitcoin from time to time when it is relevant and even maybe saying.. bitcoin fixes this.. from time to time, as long as you are able to back up what you are saying in the even that they might ask any questions.
-snip-
I don't mind if you disagree with me.
We have more interesting discussions if people do not necessarily agree and if they are trying to make points that they really believe to be true.. so which part of what I said is disagreeable?
I know that mistakes can be made.. so if someone buys BTC and tries to secure BTC for the long run and they are in bitcoin for several years, maybe even a couple of cycles, so they have a lot of money, maybe even 20x profits, but if such longer term BTC HODLer/accumulator person does not know what they are doing, then they may not end up making any money from their having had been in BTC because they screwed up their ways of securing their bitcoin.. is that where you are disagreeing with me? or something else?
No..no, wait a minute, You have to look at the points I have bolded in your post. I mean, buying bitcoin and holding them for the long term is a profitable approach for investors or holders, but it will not be profitable for bitcoin. Am I interpreting it the wrong way?
I completely agree that a long term holder still may not be able to make money from their investment if they they screwed up their ways of securing their bitcoin. But that's not something I disagree with in your post and I already explained it in the first paragraph.
… but not profitable for Bitcoin.
It’s this statement that I feel drawn too, falconer are you saying holders essentially minimise the utility of Btc and this is what is not good for BTC? This is one topic I don’t see talked about much, it’s in my list of I need help understanding this.
You may be caught up in Keynsian propagandistic ways of thinking in terms of believing that the money has to circulate in order to have value, but the fact of the matter is that Gresham's law is going to apply whether normies realize that they are doing it or not..... so people are going to tend to spend their least valuable money/assets prior to their more valuable assets/money, but it does not mean that they are not going to spend their bitcoin, especially if they have run out of other assets/money to spend and they need to eat or they need lodging or they want to have a new Iphone 15.
There are likely always going to be some people providing liquidity to the market, even if there might ONLY be 500k bitcoin circulating and 20.5 million in cold storage.... whatever circulating may well have to circulate a lot more... until the price goes up enough for the HODLers to decide to use it.. and yeah you are suggesting that there needs to be incentives for sellers to even build infrastructure in order that someone will be able to sell their bitcoin in the event that they are wanting to sell their bitcoin.. ,so it won't do them any good if no one accepts bitcoin.. or there are no places to sell their bitcoin.
… but not profitable for Bitcoin.
It’s this statement that I feel drawn too, falconer are you saying holders essentially minimize the utility of Btc and this is what is not good for BTC?
so perhaps holding doesn't affect Bitcoin instead it makes the price to increase the more
Technically your right my friend, but on the other hand holding will give it a store of value in which it, as it is now, will be utilized and traded for more usable currencies. If absolutely no one wants to trade, then the market is dead, and no value can be assigned to it. By calculation, price is given if a trade happens, and if no one place any trade order, there's no price. But in reality, it can't happen that way, there will always be a buy and sell order when it comes to Bitcoin. Even if no one wants to sell, a buyer is willing to raise the price so high for someone to sell and then the price will go up instantly. So, in general holding bitcoin can be of advantage to those who wants are patient enough to hold till the desire price they want and of disadvantage to those who wants quick profit and might end up Lossing it on the way.
We all seem to focus on the how holding bitcoin will be of advantage or disadvantage to bitcoin investors. My questions is what if all Bitcoin were sold what will be the faith of those who have been holding for quite some time now?
Also what if no one wants to buy at the price that was set, definitely the price would go down drastically. and if no one wanted to buy even after the order was placed, then the price would go down even more. till there will be no trade.
You make no sense Hewlet.
You seem to be talking about some kind of a shitcoin rather than bitcoin.
Sure you can hypothesize about extreme scenarios in which no one would want bitcoin and therefore the BTC price will go down, so even if what you are speculating about is possible it is not too likely to be the case, so why blabber out such nonsense as if bitcoin were some kind of a shitcoin when it is not.
Mostly likely you are typing such nonsense because you hardly have any clue in regards to what bitcoin is... so good luck with that. Hopefully, you bought some BTC just in case you are wrong about your fears of bitcoin's hypothesized downward spiral.