Financial topics

[John]

** 22-Mar-2021 World View: Everything is a bubble?

> Here's your problem, and why you can't think straight about this
> topic: everything is a bubble to you. You can't even differentiate
> value from a bubble, because your whimsical approach doesn't
> define what either is. Sorry, you don't get to just declare
> something is a bubble without any reasoning. Tell me something
> that ISN'T a bubble (for example, something that is increasing in
> price, just to make it a comparison) and why?

> I hope everyone notices the response to this, will yet again, be a
> nothing answer.

I don't think that you actually care, but the following article
describes the analytical method for determining a bubble:

** WSJ's page one story on Bernanke's Princeton 'Bubble Laboratory' is almost incoherent
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e080518


The problem with Bitcoin is that it has no history. The 1929 crash
was entirely predictable because it had many decades of history. The
1987 false panic was not a crash, as could be proven by applying the
analytical method to decades of data.

But in the case of Bitcoin, all we can do is compare it to other
values that had no history, and Tulipomania and the South Sea Bubble
are the obvious choices. Without historical data, and with a
parabolically increasing value, the burden of proof is on the side of
proving that it isn't a bubble, but it obviously is.

[Higgenbotham]

For each item in the Cool Breeze "People just don't get it" list, I've noted underneath each post who "just didn't get it."

There are at least 10 of us who "don't get it" here.

People just don't get it.

Clearly, none of you understand that as being far more valuable than anything anyone has dreamed of.

(to Burner Prime)

It's not amateur hour, otherwise, you are adding to it. It was a short statement of what's going on since I'm not going to write a tome on why you aren't realistic and are remarkably biased in your views (on this issue).

(to Burner Prime)

This is what you are missing. The legacy and pricing (volatility) isn't settled yet for BTC, thats why you are confused.

(to Higgenbotham)

All the more reason that continual stubbornness and ignorance regarding btc will also cause more problems

But that's fine with me, I'll be a 1% while others keep calling it a ponzi

(to Aeden)

Just like your BTC fear porn.

(to DaKardii)

The problem is that your opinion of BTC is so hollow it's hard to take you seriously.

(to Higgenbotham)

It's funny you think bitcoin is gambling, since it ... isn't.

(to Higgenbotham)

Do you think they are investing in BTC? LOL. You gotta know the game

(to entire Financial Topics Forum)

As a smart person, you should be able to at least guess. If you can't, you literally have no idea what BTC is and shouldn't even be asking questions about it since you clearly don't even care about it or the debate.

(to Richard)

It's time to step up your game, you guys don't even know what mixing is, etc.

(to John)

The oddity of the totally vacuous criticisms of BTC is really breathtaking, but in reality it's actually yet another proof for bitcoin.

(to entire World View News Forum)

The problem is that none of the criticisms are beyond an emotional level, most are nonsensical (tulip mania lasted 1 year and it was something that had no value and didn't even bankrupt people, which was my point).

(to entire World View News Forum)

Good luck lugging around a bunch of nickels to a new land that isn't crushed by fall out or has ruined water or land - whoops you didn't think of that. Why? Bitcoin is optimal for that and you hate BTC for no good reason.

(to Tim)

Notice that Higgy still doesn't have a real objection to BTC. My conclusion is that he actually doesn't understand it. At all.

(to Higgenbotham)

The best example is your non-criticism of BTC and lack of understanding of it.

(to Higgenbotham)

Here's your problem, and why you can't think straight about this topic: everything is a bubble to you. You can't even differentiate value from a bubble, because your whimsical approach doesn't define what either is. Sorry, you don't get to just declare something is a bubble without any reasoning.

(to Higgenbotham)

[Higgenbotham]

** 22-Mar-2021 World View: Everything is a bubble?

> Here's your problem, and why you can't think straight about this
> topic: everything is a bubble to you. You can't even differentiate
> value from a bubble, because your whimsical approach doesn't
> define what either is. Sorry, you don't get to just declare
> something is a bubble without any reasoning. Tell me something
> that ISN'T a bubble (for example, something that is increasing in
> price, just to make it a comparison) and why?

> I hope everyone notices the response to this, will yet again, be a
> nothing answer.

I don't think that you actually care, but the following article
describes the analytical method for determining a bubble:

** WSJ's page one story on Bernanke's Princeton 'Bubble Laboratory' is almost incoherent
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e080518


The problem with Bitcoin is that it has no history. The 1929 crash
was entirely predictable because it had many decades of history. The
1987 false panic was not a crash, as could be proven by applying the
analytical method to decades of data.

But in the case of Bitcoin, all we can do is compare it to other
values that had no history, and Tulipomania and the South Sea Bubble
are the obvious choices. Without historical data, and with a
parabolically increasing value, the burden of proof is on the side of
proving that it isn't a bubble, but it obviously is.

As the saying goes, "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."

Lately, I've been focusing on the "quacks like a duck" aspect. The noise that is emanating from the Bitcoin bubble sounds very familiar.

And as you note, the Bitcoin bubble looks familiar too.

[aeden]

Geert Vanden Bossche
Genetic Code Injection "GCI" and it is only ALLOWED to be classified as a vaccine because America is under a National Public Health Emergency (which has been extended until end of April 2021). GCI is an experimental disease "treatment method" to cause your body's immune system to produce an "antibody" protein in order to counter the production of a "spike" protein introduced into the cell by nRNA incased in Lipid nanoparticles.

thread: amos

[Cool Breeze]

** 22-Mar-2021 World View: Everything is a bubble?

> Here's your problem, and why you can't think straight about this
> topic: everything is a bubble to you. You can't even differentiate
> value from a bubble, because your whimsical approach doesn't
> define what either is. Sorry, you don't get to just declare
> something is a bubble without any reasoning. Tell me something
> that ISN'T a bubble (for example, something that is increasing in
> price, just to make it a comparison) and why?

> I hope everyone notices the response to this, will yet again, be a
> nothing answer.

I don't think that you actually care, but the following article
describes the analytical method for determining a bubble:

** WSJ's page one story on Bernanke's Princeton 'Bubble Laboratory' is almost incoherent
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e080518


The problem with Bitcoin is that it has no history. The 1929 crash
was entirely predictable because it had many decades of history. The
1987 false panic was not a crash, as could be proven by applying the
analytical method to decades of data.

But in the case of Bitcoin, all we can do is compare it to other
values that had no history, and Tulipomania and the South Sea Bubble
are the obvious choices. Without historical data, and with a
parabolically increasing value, the burden of proof is on the side of
proving that it isn't a bubble, but it obviously is.

Of course I care, and I enjoy valid criticism, but you still leave that to the wayside. Why? Well, you want there to be a history to this "bubble" but you'll never know now, will you, if this is the beginning of something (like gold, the internet, fiat, credit cards, etc) HUGE that will indeed survive. So the history angle is folly. Everything has a starting point, so you can't use that as a negative element or proof of something being "a bubble". That logic alone would prove again that the only thing you could do is call things a bubble. Which is funny, it makes the whole conversation null and void, and preposterous, since you'd obviously be wrong ALL the times something wasn't a bubble. But losers can't pick the winners, so they call everything bubbles, or other names without any meaning.

Even saying that it doesn't have a history (which is untrue, it's been around now 12 years), it has far more history than any of the so called bubbles you have mentioned, in particular the stupid tulip example.

Your last statement not only is a logical fallacy, I'll prove it yet again - How do I prove to you that it is not a bubble?

Come on, you are better than this, that's logic 101 and the most utter foolishness.

By the way, gold has been quite volatile in the last year or so. Does that mean it's "useless as a store of value"? LOL.

[aeden]

https://mashable.com/article/sec-coinba ... nts-fraud/

Like our 5th or 6th rabbit hole to fill in.

[Higgenbotham]

** 22-Mar-2021 World View: Everything is a bubble?

> Here's your problem, and why you can't think straight about this
> topic: everything is a bubble to you. You can't even differentiate
> value from a bubble, because your whimsical approach doesn't
> define what either is. Sorry, you don't get to just declare
> something is a bubble without any reasoning. Tell me something
> that ISN'T a bubble (for example, something that is increasing in
> price, just to make it a comparison) and why?

> I hope everyone notices the response to this, will yet again, be a
> nothing answer.

I don't think that you actually care, but the following article
describes the analytical method for determining a bubble:

** WSJ's page one story on Bernanke's Princeton 'Bubble Laboratory' is almost incoherent
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e080518


The problem with Bitcoin is that it has no history. The 1929 crash
was entirely predictable because it had many decades of history. The
1987 false panic was not a crash, as could be proven by applying the
analytical method to decades of data.

But in the case of Bitcoin, all we can do is compare it to other
values that had no history, and Tulipomania and the South Sea Bubble
are the obvious choices. Without historical data, and with a
parabolically increasing value, the burden of proof is on the side of
proving that it isn't a bubble, but it obviously is.

Come on, you are better than this, that's logic 101 and the most utter foolishness.

In your mind, he can't be better than this unless he agrees with every foolish thing you say about Bitcoin. Logic 101 to you is Bitcoin is going to the moon full stop 100% guaranteed. Utter foolishness to you is calling Bitcoin what it is, a bubble.

[Higgenbotham]

SHILLER: It's like a - see, it's like a mental illness. If you look at the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, which defines mental illnesses, the mental illness definitions consist of a checklist of symptoms.

SMITH: OK. So let's go through this Shiller checklist of symptoms you may be experiencing if you are living through a bubble. And we'll see how it applies to the most recent housing boom. OK. Bubble - first of all, he says, a bubble is a time of rapidly increasing prices.

KESTENBAUM: Check. Home prices in Miami basically doubled in a few years.

SMITH: OK. He says people tell each other stories that purport to justify the reasons for the bubble.

KESTENBAUM: Check. I have a book at my desk from this very time period. The title is "Why The Real Estate Boom Will Not Bust."

SMITH: (Laughter) Best-seller. People tell each other stories about how much money they're making in a bubble.

KESTENBAUM: Check. The subtitle of the book is "And How You Can Profit From It."

SMITH: And, of course, there is the time when people feel envy and regret that they too did not participate in said bubble.

KESTENBAUM: Check. I did.

SMITH: Shiller says it's like a social epidemic.

SHILLER: There's an impulse to buy into it because of the swirl of emotions that one feels and it trumps your common sense. Oh, I would add one more. First of all, the news media are involved.

(LAUGHTER)

KESTENBAUM: Thanks a lot for that.

SHILLER: Well, there were no bubbles before there were news media. The first famous bubble was the tulip mania and Holland was the publishing capital of the world. There were newspapers, there were broadsides, there were pamphlets. And I think that's necessary.

SMITH: Now, Shiller says that this pop psychology definition of bubbles, this used to be heresy in the economics field but it's not anymore.

SHILLER: Yeah. I used to feel embarrassed to say the word bubble. It's like showing up at an astronomy seminar and talking about astrology, you know, you don't get a good reception. I went through finance textbooks and, look, is the word bubble in the textbook? This is like 20 years ago. Absolutely not. That's just rubbish. Don't ever say that around here.

KESTENBAUM: Now it's in a textbook?

SHILLER: Now it's back into the textbooks, yeah.

[aeden]

Its a jungle H.
Algos busted by SEC as people wiped out by this BTC effect.
The only future I see is forensic software to recover the thefts
which is a stretch in itself. That position was noted.
MIT posted work on the end of it with quantum algo anticipated.
That was in 2018 and they halved the chips that mine recently
so they gained a lot of time on cracks which looks like the forensic
aspects are going to get to work it more than appears.
Cariboo will break a leg in a rabbit hole sooner than anticipated.
The only accurate thought map is when is closer that some realized.
The only factor seen is the fud heading into it.
To be clear MIT is closer to a solution they never seen.
Like our 5th or 6th rabbit hole filled in.
Once and awhile we consider its easier for them to attack then do some
honest to God research.

They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
Every few years we get to witness it more than we wish.

So we are pushed out on the risk curve by you know who also.
I will recheck weighting and z scores while they ignore three day to three weeks to three months out.
It happens.

[aeden]

https://nationalfile.com/video-dominion ... n-georgia/
Also the Italian issue look really bad as the Father explained. Truly we in days few rather understand.
History from Alexic.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/PI8GfcvSBPif/
They are known mass murders.
They don't want sense. They are getting much worse.

At some point even the useful idiots will realize that they are on the menu.

thread: amos