Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion - page 61. (Read 26460894 times)

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

I am somewhat glad that you are enjoying yourself in the process.


Sure it is interesting, yet potentially not for the reasons that you believe it is interesting.


You are pretty close to believing such a thing with your nonsense change in nominal value hang-up.


If bitcoin and gold were starting from the same place, then that point would be relevant.

How can the basic idea of starting capital be staring you in the face and you still want to focus on a mostly irrelevant point.  It's almost like you are being disingenuous with your claim, yet part of the sadness is that you seem to seriously believe that you are making some kind of a relevant and/or materially meaningful point.

Yes, I will concede that percentage is not the ONLY framework, and I will concede that you are stating a technical truth, but the mere fact that you are stating a technical truth does not make it either a smart point or even a point that rescues you from retarded-ville. 

And, making the matter worse, you continue to argue the point.


Easier said than done.

You likely already realize that things are breaking down..

Sure, you can figure out some good habits and perhaps even figure out some ways to reverse your aging (or whatever damage that you already have), but 26 more years... .. that is no walk in the park at your age.. and then I am thinking such a thing will be a challenge for me  too, though I don't want to have negative thoughts, but I have already contemplated my mortality a few times, and surely I am trying to have good habits, but there is ONLY so much that any of us can do... diet, rest and exercise.. and perhaps not unwittingly causing damage to yourself... and there are always various environmental exposure matters too, such as plastics.. and some things we might not always realize to be negatively impacting us.


That is not saying much.

Not that I want you to give up Opsec, but from my point of view, most is more than 50%, and so maybe it will work out...


I sometimes consider various things that I can buy, but then I think of the hassle of various parts of the ownership.. but then it sometimes can be tempting.

The other day, I was movig some boxes around, and some other furniture, and things in storage, and some of the stuff was mine, some was my parents and some was dead relatives, and I was thinking, why do I have all of this stuff that I am not using, and other people seem to have had abandoned it.. and yeah, someone has to sort through it, and once in a while I will go through a box and decide to throw some stuff out or to put some of it to use or to give it away.. but still, there can be difficulties.

I have another situation where I had worked with someone else and build what is equal to a 6 car garage, but ONLY half of it can be used for garage type space and the other half is kind of like a shop, but then when I was working with the other person to build it, I had not realized that there was like another 30 feet that could have had been built in the same location, so then I have regrets about having had built it in that way... which could have had made it easier to buy a few more toys.. for the garage side.. so instead there could have been space for another 3-4 cars and maybe some other stuff... .. so yeah, there can be hassles when adding more things, sometimes.  I do have a pretty new car, very luxurious too... . .and sometimes when I go on a trip, I don't want to rent the same level car as my own car, since sometimes it could cost like $4k a month just to rent the same level car as my own, and I did that with some cars having some of the same features, but still costing $2k per month to rent and still end up with a way inferior car to the main one that I own.


I am not going to complain about UP.. yet sometimes we just seem to be in a kind of "stuck zone," and whether weak hands are being shaken or not, the length of consolidation time can sometimes be a bit aggravating, even though we are still not even in that bad of a place, especially if we consider where we were 1 year ago or even where we were 2 years ago.. so surely relative to the last couple of years, I feel that we are not in any kind of bad place, even though witnessing some more UP might not be a bad thing, I am just not as smug about our passing through noman's land/don't wake me up zone without any hitches, when largely we have been in such zone since about the end of February so that has been 6 months of such, which also is not unusual to have 6 months or more of consolidation, yet I had expected that we weren't in a consolidation zone, even though I would not have had been surprised to consolidate in the $40ks, so in some sense we are even in a better consolidation location than would have been my late 2023 to early 2024 expectations... I mean prior to passing through more than half of noman's land and making ATHs prior to the halvening.

bread prices in the usa are fucking nuts.

$6.29 for a 2 pound loaf of arnold white bread.

To be fair, store brand beans and bread are sold as loss leaders. Get people in for 20p beans and 12p bread and they might also buy a pack of Hob Nobs and a six pack of Guinness. This is not the same everywhere and buying bread in the US is often painful paying $2-$3 for a loaf. Though with that said, it seems to be a tactic that US stores are trying out. Wally world has 'Italian' and 'French' bread for $1 and Kroger has a reasonably priced loaf which I actually prefer to the popular US branded options.

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

Congrats! Looks like you're A-okay!

Keep enjoying life (and blocking Buddy!)

 Good to hear your cores are all clean, philipma1957!  

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

 He should hop on his private jet and gtfo while the gettin's good.

For sure, I was not exactly suggesting that you were a fan of gold, but just that your framing was a bit looney, but what else is new?


Now that I see where you are going with this, I feel a bit regretful by suggesting bitcoin's birth as a fair starting point, so starting close to zero value in terms of bitcoin not even really having a price in the very beginning is a bit of an unfair advantage for bitcoin.

It might be more fair to choose something like the start of 2012 and something like $5 as bitcoin's starting value (price) (so yeah instead of 15.5-ish years, we would just use something like 12.5-ish years), which would then give bitcoin a starting market cap of somewhere in the $105 million territory if we would be using 21 million as bitcoin's known supply into the future, even though right around mid-to-late 2012 half of bitcoin's total supply would have had come available by the time the first halvening took place..so ONLY around 10.5 million bitcoin would have had been actually issued, so bitcoin's starting market cap would have had been somewhere around $50 million-ish


I would say at least your going with market cap comparisons, but then your presentation is a bit confusing.

Maybe if we suggest bitcoin's market cap is in the ballpark of $50 million in early 2012 and I might be willing to concede that gold's market cap might have been in the $4.3 to $6.5 trillion range..  (let's just go with $5 trillion), so yeah, such a starting point would put bitcoin's market cap would have had been right around 1/10 million the size of gold's market cap (remove 6 zeros from each of the market caps).


Even though your presentation is confusing, we are likely in a similar territory since I am suggesting that now bitcoin's market cap is right around 1/15th the size of gold's market cap when historically (starting from January 2012) bitcoin's market cap was somewhere between 1/10 millionth the size of gold's market cap.


My first reaction was that I was going to call you the "R" word while throwing in a few curses, yet I am going to try to refrain a wee bit, since I can be nice like that sometimes.

Anyhow, if you are saying that bitcoin ONLY went up in value by $1 trillion (which technically it would be about 1.1999995 trillion (since bitcoin started with ONLY about $50 million of market cap) and gold's market cap went up somewhere between $9 trillion and $11 trillion (let's just say it went up $10million) , so therefore, gold went up more in value than bitcoin, and I am going to have to retract my temporary niceness for just a moment and call you fucking retarded.  That is largely an irrelevant way to be framing and hinging your argument on nominal increases in value rather than percentage increases in value... but hey, whatever, you can do what you like in terms of your coming up with such largely irrelevant and nonsensical framing and even arguing such a point as if you were actually saying something meaningful and important...

Ok.. let me cool down for just a second and concede that even though you are technically correct that bitcoin's market cap ONLY went up just shy of $1.2 trillion and gold's market cap went up in the territory of $10 trillion, but still bitcoin started from nearly zero (which was around $50 million if we use the start of 2012 as our starting point and gold started out at around $5 trillion in early 2012).


Another pie in the sky imaginary piece of evidence that might be technically true, but still fantasy land framing for some pie in the sky scenarios to play out...   Yeah, sure, any investment thesis should attempt to account for fringe possibilities, yet you are wanting to considerably denigrate bitcoin's value proposition based on fringe possibilities that largely ONLY are being argued by you (I haven't seen anyone else arguing that point, so you are seeming to be unique in that level of presumption of both Armageddon but also presuming that bitcoin mining would stop from such an outlier scenario).


You can believe what you like, even while your little fantasy gold ends up getting passed up by bitcoin, whether it is this cycle or the next cycle or sometime later down the road, it is not very difficult for bitcoin to reach parity with gold's market cap and then to thereafter to pass it up, even though there can be no real guarantee (or concrete assurances) proclaimed as to when it is going to happen, even though bitcoin's market cap parity with gold surely is within reach for even this cycle.

Otherwise, I stick with my original conclusions that bitcoin has been eating gold's lunch, is currently eating gold's lunch and likely to continue to eat gold's lunch into the future until such time as some kind of more representative value comparison starts to play out in the market in which bitcoin will likely come close to 1,000x or more of gold's market cap, even though there could be rough patches along the way in getting there, whether it is from bitcoin going up in value or gold coming down in value or a combination of the two, and including that it could take 50-200 or more years for such more representative prices based on value play out in the market.


Oh wow.. You seem to be arguing your points as if you really believe them.    Both things are factually true, but they don't hold the same amount of persuasive logic in terms of how you are wanting to use them for predictive power, even though you are free to assign whatever level of weight and persuasive power to your nearly retarded points as you would like. #nohomo


Your points are still dumb
and almost embarrassingly silly
no matter which assets/currencies you hold.


Great.

i can go back to calling you a retard now, without feeling guilty about it (hopefully, Gachapin does not get mad at me for calling you that).

Long live philipma1957!!!!


Your shit is clean then.  (or maybe I should say "your junk.")


I would like that too.. but geez Louise, February (or whatever month it is) of 2062 seems like such a long way off.. .. that is nearly 37.5 years.  It would be a stretch for each of us.

my Grand father and his two brothers.

died of it

In 1983 my granddad
1995 Uncle John
2005 Uncle Archie

Based on that record I have been watching it bigly for years.

My Psa doubled in 1 year from 2 to 4 which 4 sounds good but not when I have never been at 2.3

I range 1.7 to 2.2 .  I suspect my keto diet regime was not so good so I started diabetes med in March took the psa and got the 3.9 number. Doctor said the meds should not do that lets biopsy. Well I did and passed 14 cores all clean. A relief for sure.

Congrats!

That said, relatively high PSA could be just BPH.
I am sorry, but doctors often push for unnecessary biopsies while MRI could have been enough.
BPH often causes an increase in PSA (above 4 ng), but does not indicate cancer. MRI would have indicated the size of the prostate and also approximate it's weight.
Of course, if PSA is above 10 or 100, it's another story altogether.

It's a bit sobering that your relatives died from prostate cancer because this situation is not common.
Very common is when someone died "with prostate cancer".
The diagnosis was there, but the cause-something else.

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

well I can go back to longer term thinking. The biopsy of my prostate all 14 cores were benign.

Having lost a lot of relatives to prostate cancer and getting a high PSA test requires get the biopsy.

Which literally is a P.I.T.A. I was fairly terrified that some or a lot of the cores would turn out to be cancer.

They all were clean. So I just have to do PSA tests three times a year. Which is better then cancer.

Still hoping to beat the family record of 93 for males. Then get to 105 so I can give the btc away to JJG

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

btc full value jan 2009 about 1000 usd that is the value of the entire market cap.


today entire marketcap is around 1.2 trillion.

a gain of about 1.2 trillion


golds marketcap was about 5 trillion in 2009
and its now 17 trillion in 2024 a gain of 12 trillion


so the gold in cap did 12 trillion gain
the btc in cap did 1.2 trillion gain..

so in my measurement gold out preformed btc 10 to 1 in last 15 years.

yeah i know that people will say btc was say 1 penny and gold was 822 in 2009

so 1 penny to 60k crushes 822 to 2500 true it does.

but 1.2 trillon gain loses bigly to a 12 trillion gain.

just saying both things are fully true.

and gold does not need continued mining to stay valuable. btc needs current mining to stay valuable.

likely true but likely not an issue.


btw i have far far far far more btc than gold.

i hold

btc
silver

^^These time ranges were a little artificial.
Gold made a high in Sept 1980 at $843 (worth $1849 in dollar buying power in 2000 when gold was just $263.8 at the lows).
https://www.moneymetals.com/gold-price-history
So...gold LOST 1- 263.8/1849=0.86=86% of it's buying power in those 20 years.

From 2000 to now...gold went from 263.8 to 2513; however, 263.8 in 2000 is equal to 480.81 now, so gold went up 5.23X in 24 years or 7.14% per year, inflation adjusted.
But, the kicker is this: $843 in 1980 is equal to $3371 in 2024.
https://www.saving.org/inflation/inflation.php?amount=843&year=1980&toYear=2024
Therefore, over the last 44 years even gold did not outperform inflation (did worse than inflation), albeit gold did better than inflation in the last 24 years.

Of course, bitcoin VASTLY outperformed both gold and inflation in the last 15 years.
That said, the likelier scenario would be for bitcoin to outperform gold going forward just because bitcoin is roughly 1/18-1/20 of the gold value aka relatively tiny.
However, this depends on inflation.
Many people thought that gold under-performed inflated dollar in 1980-2000 because of a large deflation flux caused by the rise of China/cheap manufacturing.
If AI would play a similar role going forward, we might switch from high inflation (currently) to an outright deflation (at least in the cost of goods).

Therefore, a long bear market in bitcoin (and gold) is possible, starting in a few years (2029-2030?), perhaps, but right now bitcoin is still too small for this to happen, imho.

PAVEL DUROV is free.
Bail set at 5 millions € and cannot leave french territory till the trial.

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com