Topic: r0ach's Cryptomarkets Watch & Scamcoin Observer - page 30. (Read 47247 times)

in the end historically it always ends in hyper inflation and gold going through the roof.

Your saying collapsing governments and exploding fiscal budgets are not exactly a recipe for continually strong regimes. What makes you think some modern regimes you refer to today as strong are stronger than those hyper inflating in the past?

The halving is not some insignificant event.

That is a very oversimplistic understanding. And I don't have time to unravel your simpleton thoughts for you at this time.

I suggest reading Armstrong's blog from start to finish.

Maybe we could do this on video sometimes interactively so it would be more efficient to educate. I don't have time for writing it. Far too slow.

Edit: you are entirely wrong on hyperinflation. The history is that only revolutionary and totally broken regimes hyperinflate. The world is composed of very strong regimes and they will not lay down their power by hyperinflating. Armstrong covers this in great detail in his blogs. Required reading material for you.

The bolded is the path of least resistance, always taken by governments. Gold fares very well in hyper inflationary environment, what paper promises are worth is irrelevant.

There is no way to raise money other than print it or tax for it.

Checkmate.

There is some correlation, but making the projection that BTC will follow the gold price and going down with the gold price is more of a wild guess than a rational argument.

Please note, Armstrong latest blogs about the tangible assets indicate that crypto currencies could have the same role as property or blue-chip stocks, if and when the collapse will come.

Especially it is a wild guess, because it is not clear at all whether the decline of gold and Armstrong's projection will be materialized or not. The decline of gold price is very much on the table - just like the opposite is. (I am talking about mid and long term).

I fully understand what you say terms of the sovereign debt crisis and the unsustainability of the system. I totally get what Armstrong says and I subscribe to 90% of his analysis. However, you and Armstrong always forget that the central banks, the Troika and the crooks of Wall street are infinitely creative in coming up with all kind of solutions to preserve the status quo.  Armstrong could never imagine the central banks will come up with quantitative easing. Here we go, they did and bought another 5-10 perhaps even 20 years and a few elections for the establishment.
Logic dictates and history indicates Armstrong is correct and the system most likely will collapse at some stage, but there are many variables exist which could screw up and do screw up his projections from time to time.

There is a very strong correlation.

We will see who's smart and who's not when the halving happens. Iteresting times ahead.

I think you want to say alts will get bigger and bitcoin will have the floor fall out.

Anonymint, I don't know how you can fall into the beginner trap of saying the halving is "priced in".  For something to be priced in, it would imply there is some form of equilibrium at hand, meaning the price goes up, minining power doesn't increase with it, halving occurs, then mining power stays the same.  That isn't what happened at all though.  The price went up and more mining power joined the network, raising the price floor months ago and it has been shown to be pretty stable at the higher price.  Now when the halving occurs, the price is either required to increase a lot, or lots of miners will have to drop out.  There is no form of equilibrium at hand.  Tidal waves of cause and effect have to occur.

We also know that ASICs require lots of R&D investment and capital.  Since people have already invested millions of dollars in mining farms, there is no way in hell they are going to turn off their 16nm state of the art miners.  Current process node miners simply do not turn them off ever.  They always mine at a loss or buy coins off the wall to dollar cost average before doing that.  Even if you did think the Bitcoin price was unsustainable (it's not, market cap is still small), it's inevitable the price would spike higher before any unsustainable reality could set in.

The act of mining is also a decentralized exchange while Coinbase is a centralized exchange.  Supply is being cut in half on the DEX while demand remains the same because miners are simply not going to be turned off.  Centralized exchanges are forced to follow the price action.

Actually that's true. I pointed out several times in the Armstrong thread how wrong TPTB_need_war is with his Bitcoin forecasts, and that's the source of the errors: he is trying to correlate BTC with the gold model of Armstrong.

Obvious he is at least semi-trolling you.

Anonymint, you are trying way too hard to get Bitcoin to fit some Armstrong gold forecast when the two have no correlation...

The halving is not some insignificant event.  It dwarfs any tiny change in interest rates or other variables.  There is also the fact that Bitcoin would be seen by some as a failure if the halving was unable to produce any increase in price, so vested interests (me being one of them) will engineer it to prevent that from happening, hence why you already see a $25 price increase.  What is sustainable is unknown, and will only be known a month or two afterwards, but the price will be raised to find out.

Anonymint, you are trying way too hard to get Bitcoin to fit some Armstrong gold forecast when the two have no correlation...

The halving is not some insignificant event.  It dwarfs any tiny change in interest rates or other variables.  There is also the fact that Bitcoin would be seen by some as a failure if the halving was unable to produce any increase in price, so vested interests (me being one of them) will engineer it to prevent that from happening, hence why you already see a $25 price increase.  What is sustainable is unknown, and will only be known a month or two afterwards, but the price will be raised to find out.