Are we excited yet?

[Gonzovision]

It cannot operate as a store of value because it has zero fundamental value in and of itself

It will be hard to unseat bitcoin as the top store-of-value crypto asset - Stanley Druckenmiller

So whether YOU think its a store of value or not is irrelevant, as it's being used as a store of value.

All the state needs to do is tax it to hell. Personally, I am looking forward to the implosion and tears when Revenue start to look for all that CGT people should have paid.

So not ban it then, just tax it now?
If people are converting to fiat, it's up to them to pay CGT, same as when you sell a stock or asset.

Bitcoin is a disaster on ESG grounds and is something that will hinder institutional adoption. There are several reasons, greenhouses gases, and the fact that it has been used by all sorts of criminals, not least to engage in tax evasion and laundering.

Clearly didn't read the Chain analysis data so, but sure you've your mind made up. If you actually think more fraudulent activity happens of the btc network compared to fiat, what can I say.

In terms of ESG, those points have been rebuked many times at this stage, just look at the latest article by Lyn Alden on the energy use and energy use when the system is scaled.

Current energy use of the bitcoin network is akin to a rounding error.
Obviously you don't understand proof of work and why it is necessary.

https://www.swanbitcoin.com/bitcoins-en ... lyn-alden/

Do the research, don't do the research, nobody really cares. You can keep saying it has no fundamental use case or value, but the network will keep growing, price will keep rising and more and more real world applications will be developed on L2 and L3.

[Memento Mori]

It will be hard to unseat bitcoin as the top store-of-value crypto asset - Stanley Druckenmiller

So whether YOU think its a store of value or not is irrelevant, as it's being used as a store of value.

Someone using something as a store of value, or thinking it is, does not make it a store of value. A fact that a Billionaire thinks it is (I could cite others who do not) does not make it so. Additionally, he adds the caveat in that he is discussing within the Crypto universe. I have no issue with thinking that Bitcoin is likely to remain the most expensive Cryptocurrency, out of the current universe.

So not ban it then, just tax it now?
If people are converting to fiat, it's up to them to pay CGT, same as when you sell a stock or asset.

Unlike some, I am not against gambling. If people want to do it, then fair enough, I would not ban it. But I would tax it heavily. As things stand, Bitcoin is a speculative "asset" within a bubble. Nothing more. I don't see a reason to ban it. But if it ever got to a stage, or it looked like it was imminent, (I don't think it will) where Bitcoin hindered or stood in the way of democratic control of monetary policy, or nullified the levers available to countries to direct their economy, I think it should be banned. But in all probability putting heavy tax on it before it got that far (if it ever actually could outside of libertarian wet dreams) heavy tax would stop it in its tracks. This is why investing on the back of this libertarian wet dream where Bitcoin will take over the world monetary system is incredibly stupid. It will not be allowed happen, even it could.

You are incorrect here regarding CGT. It does not have to be converted to fiat in order for it to be a taxable event. Any "conversion" or swap of one crypto for another is a taxable event. So if you swap to tether, or ETH or whatever, this is a taxable event, reportable as such. Many (anecdotally most) crypto "investors" are actually in breach of the law, because they, erroneously, believe that it is only when selling for "fiat" that a taxable event arises. This is wrong. I look forward to when revenue comes knocking, which they will. It was nice of so many anti-government control types to supply PPS numbers and such to brokers.

Clearly didn't read the Chain analysis data so, but sure you've your mind made up. If you actually think more fraudulent activity happens of the btc network compared to fiat, what can I say.

I did not say that, what is the point in having a discussion if you are either going to ignore points I make (which you have done here with your less than fulsome response) or put words in my mouth?

In terms of ESG, those points have been rebuked many times at this stage, just look at the latest article by Lyn Alden on the energy use and energy use when the system is scaled.

Current energy use of the bitcoin network is akin to a rounding error.
Obviously you don't understand proof of work and why it is necessary.

Lets try this again. Bitcoin, and all that is associated with it, does not produce anything, or add value anywhere. It is not a necessary evil. It is not productive. Any energy usage is wastage, certainly the amount Bitcoin uses, which is not trivial. Much activity escacpes the oversight and control of democratic governments (by design), making it useful for criminals. Even many of the ordinary Joes who use it are tax cheats. ESG is cited as a reason for many institutional investors avoiding it. I have already said that I am sceptical of letting ESG dictate investment decisions, I am merely stating the truth of the matter, which is that ESG concerns are a major downside in the eyes of those who buy into it.

https://www.swanbitcoin.com/bitcoins-en ... lyn-alden/

Do the research, don't do the research, nobody really cares. You can keep saying it has no fundamental use case or value, but the network will keep growing, price will keep rising and more and more real world applications will be developed on L2 and L3.

Yes, your speculative bubble may continue to inflate and you might make money, good for you, just don't go all in or be left carrying the bag.

I return again to my initial point that has called all this fuss: I think anyone who is solely invested in Bitcoin is on course for an (eventual) hiding. I think people will be safer and better served over the long term with a well-diversified portfolio of assets and equities (quality companies with a reasonable valuation). Stick a small % in BTC for a gamble if you want, and trim it if it rises. I would add that a few % of gold would fall under "assets" in my statement.

Nothing you have said has offered anything to counter the idea that this is a sensible way to do things, with Bitcoin exposure, if you insist on it, being kept to a small part of your portfolio. Putting all your money in Bitcoin with a "hold forever come what may" attitude is completely stupid (stupid to do this with any asset, but particularly a speculative one!) and no one should do it. In refuting my statement you said there are no reasonably valued companies. There are. You said equities have not delivered a return that has beaten inflation, this was wrong. You have abandoned addressing my other main point, which is that Bitcoin has no fundamental value (because you realised I was not fibbing when I said many Bitcoin fans admit or embrace that fact?). If you believe Bitcoin has a fundamental or intrinsic value, please explain why, and what your approach to calculating this (in a general sense) is.

[sequestrates]

Nothing you have said has offered anything to counter the idea that this is a sensible way to do things, with Bitcoin exposure, if you insist on it, being kept to a small part of your portfolio. Putting all your money in Bitcoin with a "hold forever come what may" attitude is completely stupid (stupid to do this with any asset, but particularly a speculative one!) and no one should do it. In refuting my statement you said there are no reasonably valued companies. There are. You said equities have not delivered a return that has beaten inflation, this was wrong. You have abandoned addressing my other main point, which is that Bitcoin has no fundamental value (because you realised I was not fibbing when I said many Bitcoin fans admit or embrace that fact?). If you believe Bitcoin has a fundamental or intrinsic value, please explain why, and what your approach to calculating this (in a general sense) is.

Memento, you are very much entitled to your opinion. From your responses it is clear that you have a superficial understanding of what Bitcoin is, have already come to your conclusion and are not interested in considering alternative opinions. There has been a huge amount of information and resources offered to you on this thread where you can dig in on your own time if you are truly interested in understanding what is going on. I don't think there is anything to be gained from further spoon-feeding information, you are either interested enough to put in the time or you are not. You don't like what is being said here, no problem, ignore it. That's the great thing about making your own investment decisions, you alone are responsible for the results.

Everyone can do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

[Memento Mori]

Memento, you are very much entitled to your opinion. From your responses it is clear that you have a superficial understanding of what Bitcoin is, have already come to your conclusion and are not interested in considering alternative opinions. There has been a huge amount of information and resources offered to you on this thread where you can dig in on your own time if you are truly interested in understanding what is going on. I don't think there is anything to be gained from further spoon-feeding information, you are either interested enough to put in the time or you are not. You don't like what is being said here, no problem, ignore it. That's the great thing about making your own investment decisions, you alone are responsible for the results.

Everyone can do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

Just because you do not like my conclusion (I am far from alone, even among Bitcoin fans) that Bitcoin has no fundamental value it does not mean I have not researched it. I am very interested if someone can explain how and why they believe Bitcoin has a fundamental value and how they, in general, calculate it, which would support or back up any claim that Bitcoin will be "x" (200k was mentioned) in a year or whatever. While it is never possible to accurately predict what an equity will trade at, it is very possible to calculate a range of figures which represent an intrinsic value for it and make investment decisions accordingly. This is because there is an intrinsic value that can be calculated and we have a clear conceptual framework for saying that a company (for example) which is trading at a price far less than what the sum of its parts is worth is underpriced, and can reasonably be expected, in time, to trade at a higher level. Or if you are a growth investor, there are ways to calculate stuff there too in an objective way to make an investment decision based on a probability (although a lot of so-called growth investors are buying "growth at any price" which is, again, speculation and stupid unless you go in with eyes open). The only reason why Bitcoin is trading at 40k, or 60k, or 50 cent is because people are speculating that someone will pay more for it tomorrow. They do not think "this bitcoin is actually worth 100k (or whatever)!". If you do, I would love to read how you have come to that conclusion and calculated any ballpark figure. In practice, the bull case seems to be something along the lines of "more and more people will use it, Bitcoin will take over the world, the upside is unlimited". This is speculation. There is nothing wrong with speculation, except when people portray it as being something else, and dupe people into betting everything on it on that basis.

[Thargor]

Things are holding up well and building nicely, I was sure we were looking at a similar dead cat bounce to the one after the madness back in 2017/2018 but it keeps going, touch wood.