I don't disagree with some of your overall points Hydrogen, except to the extent that you are striving to frame these matters in left/right frameworks or commie/capitalism bullshit.
We can leave the frame aside, but the Bitcoin at least theoretically, fits better with an Austrian School theory of economics (capitalist), than with a Keynesian economic theory (more socialist-left), let alone a Marxist one, with which it does not fit at all.
Sure both you and I might be quibbling a wee bit too much in terms of proclaiming that we do not want to get too much into any kind of exact framework, but still end up kind of falling into one framework or another or prioritizing one framework over another.. and maybe that it is wee bit what I was hoping to avoid, even though I am likely NOT even innocent of it myself.
Another point that I was attempting to make revolves around some proclamations that even with bitcoin we are neither going to get rid of government completely nor be able to really proclaim in advance regarding various balances that might be struck in terms of bitcoin becoming more and more dominant in various locations.... so perhaps I am attempting to fight some of the libertarian sentiments that sometimes stream through some of the bitcoin threads that attempt to presume that we are just going to be able to get rid of government and then some of the public resources are just going to end up taking care of themselves, whether we are referring to various public resources like air, water and airwaves (radio waves) or we are having some concerns about public health and welfare - which some folks like to proclaim that there is little to no public interest in some of the public health and welfare matters, and I am not even going to disagree that some governments do seem to take things too far in terms of pushing some concerns that might not even end up being very helpful to have government interventions in certain kinds of ways... but some of the point, also, is that we might not even be able to agree anyhow, so it's not like anyone or any group can really impose their values and then to say that this is how we should do this, because sometimes some public interests are a matter of compromise in which everyone is not going to be happy even in terms of the conclusions about whether a public interest (or public good) was sufficiently at stake in order to justify an interventions.
Another thing is that nowadays we have politicians everywhere who do not follow theories so much as what they believe will give them more votes.
I doubt that there is really very much different about politics these days beyond the mere dynamic of information being way easier to disseminate, so in those kinds of dynamics need to be dealt with... Politicians have always engage in a variety of games and gamesmanship and all kinds of weird things, but some of the various political ideas are being batted around more quickly, and whether the free-flow of information is distracting or not, sure it changes what is going on and what might be possible, but in the end, it seems like a BIG so what if we are devolving into attempting to prescribe rather than describing....
I would not even assert that you are completely wrong in terms of attempting to frame some governments trying to be way more involved in seemingly social benefits areas, and they might end up having struggles in dealing with bitcoin differently than governments who might be less inclined towards providing social benefits, but I doubt that it is helpful to just lump governments into socialist or capitalists and try to presume from there in terms of if there might be more room for their being friendly rather than hostile to bitcoin.
Yes, while I think the framework that Hydrogen puts forward is correct, I also don't think it's a hard-and-fast division that we're going to see:
1) Left-wing governments: ban bitcoin.
2) Right wing governments: embrace bitcoin.
There will be a lot of grey areas and I don't think he puts it that way either, he talks about what is most likely.
I suppose that we will see. I don't give too many shits, beyond attempting to appreciate that politics are going to continue, and bitcoin will go on either way.. and sure some administrations may well be more hostile to it than others, and to the extent that any of us might be concerned about politics in one direction or another we are surely free to join in on those circles.. and people from all political stripes can take a bitcoin position, so to a large degree it seems irrelevant and distracting to get too tied up in those frame works, at least from my current generalized thinkings on the topic.
what would you describe as strange exactly in terms of what is going on with bitcoin's price, bhooscream? Anyone else believe that there is something strange that is going on with bitcoin's price movements and price dynamics, currently? if so, please describe what is strange, exactly?
I am sure, you understand what I mean. What I am talking about is the situation that Bitcoin price hard to pass $50k lately. It has tried several times to maintain above $50k, but unfortunately always failed. One of the reasons is many FUDs spreading lately after we heard about China banned Bitcoin mining in the country. Then, we see the Bitcoin price move was mostly like dumped hardly in the last few weeks. It seems triggered by many FUDs spreading around us lately. However, it is only my personal view, sorry if it is not the same as you think, sir.
I just do not find price moves as playing out strangely as you have further attempted to describe.
Of course, each of us is entitled to our own opinion regarding what we believe to be strange or not strange, and it just does not seem strange to me and largely I had already provided my reasons in my earlier post as to why I don't consider BTC's current price position/dynamic to be significantly strange.