Dakardii's topic

[DaKardii]

** 20-Jan-2021 World View: Jumping posts

> The conversations are hard to follow because I think the responses
> and jumping from thread to thread.

Sorry. I moved the wrong post, but moved it back again.

Still, it would be very helpful if you didn't call someone a woman
just because he disagrees with you. If you didn't do things like
that, then I would have to move posts.

The post you moved is still here.

It's alright, John. Let's just leave it as is. I'll respond to that comment here.

Actually, there is an existential threat coming out of the Middle East. It's called the petrodollar agreement. That goes, and our economy instantly collapses like a house of cards.

False. Just like your BTC fear porn. I'm not against precious metals and have some, but you can't eat them or do anything with them, and if the situation is dire, they are pretty much just as useless as anything else that you claim will be "gone". And silver at that point is even more practical than gold on many levels. The issue is that metals won't increase in value very much, although they will increase, but relative to BTC they'll be orphans - and there are many reasons why.

Conspiracy theorists talking about the Petrodollar system have been deluding people for years. Martin Armstrong discusses the silly topic in many places, but here is a morsel for your edification:

I have explained that there is no PETRODOLLAR. This is completely bogus. I really do not understand how they can keep saying this factually incorrect information to get people to hand them their life-savings. The oil and gas drilling sector make up between 4.6% and 6.5% of the global economy. That is it. How can you call this a “PETRODOLLAR” by any rational means?

As usual, fear porn reigns and I have to set people straight. The issue is never that any of you are totally wrong, it's that you talk out of your ass and without reason, exaggerate, etc which is what emotional people do (also scared people, or hucksters) ... no wonder Burner calls you names like "woman."

First off, the petrodollar is real, and it's about what de facto backs the dollar. I say "de facto" because it's not official policy. Rather, it's a system that serves as a defense mechanism (and probably the primary defense mechanism) against speculators who wish to undermine the dollar's value because of all the debt that's behind what is a de jure fiat currency. What happens if that defense mechanism goes away? What happens when a currency is backed by nothing but debt and economic theories cooked up by college professors who may or may not know what they're talking about, especially for an extended period of time? Also, do the same rules apply to cryptocurrencies? You tell me.

And second, sure I can get emotional at times. That's not a gender issue. Some people are more sensitive than others. And more importantly, some people are more idealistic than realistic. I can be very realistic about some things, but very idealistic about others. It's just my natural personality. I don't know. Maybe it's because I'm young. I'm in my mid-20s.

[John]

** 20-Jan-2021 World View: Bad mood

> I said Burner did, which was true.
>
> BTW John, I think it is important for others to see that Kardii's
> petrodollar nonsense is rebutted, and well, by others whom I have
> referenced.

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to make your point without making
me get involved, especially when I'm in a bad mood -- which is pretty
much always.

[Cool Breeze]

Ok, I appreciate the answer.

all currencies are backed by "nothing," btw

btc is backed by something very valuable, otherwise why would people be buying it? whatever you say even gold is backed by, btc is backed by more

and that's why it is, or will be worth more

[Cool Breeze]

** 20-Jan-2021 World View: Bad mood

> I said Burner did, which was true.
>
> BTW John, I think it is important for others to see that Kardii's
> petrodollar nonsense is rebutted, and well, by others whom I have
> referenced.

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to make your point without making
me get involved, especially when I'm in a bad mood -- which is pretty
much always.

Ha, thanks for the heads up. I definitely chuckled.

[DaKardii]

Ok, I appreciate the answer.

all currencies are backed by "nothing," btw

btc is backed by something very valuable, otherwise why would people be buying it? whatever you say even gold is backed by, btc is backed by more

and that's why it is, or will be worth more

Bitcoin is backed by something very valuable? What is it? Or are you saying that very valuable thing a special kind of "nothing," since you said all currencies are backed by "nothing?"

Ugh. How times have changed. Once upon a time in America, the only type of currency that was constitutionally permissible to use for paying off pre-existing debts were metal coins which were backed by whatever they were made of. When greenbacks were first issued in 1862, many people believed that they were unconstitutional, and the debate eventually reached the Supreme Court. In Hepburn v. Griswold (1870), the Court ruled that issuing paper money to use for paying off pre-existing debts violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. But it would then reverse itself the following year with Knox v. Lee (1871) and Parker v Davis (1871).

Since then, the cause for "sound money" has never gone away. Many people believe in it, especially on the right.

[Cool Breeze]

And bitcoin is the hardest money of all time. Will it be used by (current, fiat WEF) governments? No. Being honest and using hard money is not in their interest. But other governments and countries may, and also some portion of CBs may hold bitcoin as a reserve asset, even if it is not THE reserve asset.

I'll let you figure out why it is backed and what by, as I don't care to argue the point and don't need to convince anyone anymore, particularly skeptics who have another horse. I'll let time take its course, which will prove my assertion correct, in any case.

[DaKardii]

And bitcoin is the hardest money of all time. Will it be used by (current, fiat WEF) governments? No. Being honest and using hard money is not in their interest. But other governments and countries may, and also some portion of CBs may hold bitcoin as a reserve asset, even if it is not THE reserve asset.

I'll let you figure out why it is backed and what by, as I don't care to argue the point and don't need to convince anyone anymore, particularly skeptics who have another horse. I'll let time take its course, which will prove my assertion correct, in any case.

Okay. I just looked into it more, and it turns out there's this "Bitcoin Protocol" which says that a finite number of bitcoins will be "mined." 21 million to be exact; Investopedia projects that the last bitcoin will be "mined" around 2140.

I see what they creators of bitcoin are trying to do here, and I commend them for thinking outside the box. I'll admit that I underestimated them in that regard. But there's still a lingering issue: the "Bitcoin Protocol" is a man-made law. In theory, it could be changed at any time. The same cannot be said regarding gold, an element whose finite amount on Earth was determined eons ago by forces that mankind cannot change.

Meanwhile, what also needs to be addressed is the fact that bitcoin, as a digital asset, will be extremely vulnerable during the upcoming war. Large parts of the internet will be down to begin with, and then there's the possibility of an EMP attack. Then what?

[John]

** 21-Jan-2021 World View: Bitcoin Protocol

> I see what they creators of bitcoin are trying to do here, and I
> commend them for thinking outside the box. I'll admit that I
> underestimated them in that regard. But there's still a lingering
> issue: the "Bitcoin Protocol" is a man-made law. In theory, it
> could be changed at any time. The same cannot be said regarding
> gold, an element whose finite amount on Earth was determined eons
> ago by forces that mankind cannot change.

Actually, the mathematical algorithms behind Bitcoin do not permit an
expansion beyond the 21 million. In that sense, it's like gold, and
that was the specific intention of the original reclusive implementor
of Bitcoin. That's been one of the primary motivations for Bitcoin's
popularity, as compared to gold, and as contrasted to so-called "fiat"
currency.

[DaKardii]

** 21-Jan-2021 World View: Bitcoin Protocol

> I see what they creators of bitcoin are trying to do here, and I
> commend them for thinking outside the box. I'll admit that I
> underestimated them in that regard. But there's still a lingering
> issue: the "Bitcoin Protocol" is a man-made law. In theory, it
> could be changed at any time. The same cannot be said regarding
> gold, an element whose finite amount on Earth was determined eons
> ago by forces that mankind cannot change.

Actually, the mathematical algorithms behind Bitcoin do not permit an
expansion beyond the 21 million. In that sense, it's like gold, and
that was the specific intention of the original reclusive implementor
of Bitcoin. That's been one of the primary motivations for Bitcoin's
popularity, as compared to gold, and as contrasted to so-called "fiat"
currency.

Sure. But what happens if the algorithm is altered? Not in isolated instances (i.e. hackers), but in general?

Or am I overthinking things here?

[Higgenbotham]

Bitcoin is backed by something very valuable? What is it?

I'll let you figure out why it is backed and what by, as I don't care to argue the point and don't need to convince anyone anymore, particularly skeptics who have another horse.

Bitcoin is backed by tulips.

This is a serious response.

What I mean by that is nearly the exact forces that took tulip prices to the moon 4 centuries ago are doing the same with bitcoin.