Are you expecting another crash in the near future /biz/? When? What are you going to do with your investments in anticipation of this? Pull them all out?
Yes.
Latest by end of 2017. I reckon it'll happen later this year.
I've already put gold and cash in a safe. Have like 1k ounce of silver lying around my house.
My problem is I don't know how bad it's going to get. Will the populace at large starve? Will governments be going bankrupt? What'll happen to cash? Gold? Property prices? Stock Prices? How long will it take to reach the bottom? What tools and items should I buy now that I won't be able to buy later?
I'm seriously thinking about it. Not sure if if there are any safe investments at the moment. Even cash deposits might soon get charged interest.
Everything is unsafe, even gold.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-06/greeks-confiscate-largest-amount-gold-ever-smuggled
The exception is Bitcoin. The growth potential is too insane to process at only 6 billion marketcap yet.
things will go down, brutally.
i think later this year
vc/startup fuckhole is mostly over
time to get real
my prime example:
http://www.businessinsider.com/juicero-raises-120-million-2015-1?IR=T
Subprime auto loan bubble will burst soon-ish. The the asset-backed securities into which they've been bundled (given bullshit A and AA ratings by gutless shills in the agencies) will also get fucked.
It won't be as bad as a mortgage crisis because cars can be reposessed way faster than houses. But lack of efficient transportation can hurt an economy and that's what will happen as more people start having their cars taken away. Default rates are already less than 1% lower than their worst levels after the 2008 crash.
The American auto sector, which is still comparatively pitiful, globally speaking, is one of the few sectors of the economy that's not absolute crap.
People are working more low-wage service sector jobs and they're being enticed into 84 month loan repayment plans to buy expensive cars they can't afford because Obama's cash for clunkers stupidity reduced not just the used supply (also reduced the secondary market since newer cars need less maintenance).
All these things have knock-on effects and, since interest rates are already almost as low as they can go, the Fed basically has no more levers they can pull once things turn so shitty that they can't even hide it anymore, as they're doing now.
>>1179578
Bitcoin is for faggots
What the fuck do yall think is going to cause this massive recession?
Litterally no basis for this paranoia. Just speculation
>>1179947
Maybe the world markets getting assblasted and rates already being low as fuck?
Nothing negative rates to cause a spook.
>>1179578
gold is not unsafe you retard.
but sure bitcoins are easier to transfer.
of course in case the internet gets split up (like a cyber attack forces regions to separate) the chaos that enfolds from competing valid blockchains makes it worthless.
>>1179324
yes a crash is coming.
they put it off in 2009-2010 it's gonna hurt that much more.
imo we are still in the 2008 crisis.
>>1179952
A crash is very likely on the horizon but it seems the central banks will have at least a few more years before it all goes to pot.
There is nothing that will act as a trigger to cause a crash. Further, the CBs are on high alert to prevent a stock market crash from occurring.
I suspect that stock markets will be volatile over the next few years but will essentially go nowhere. Unless the CBs make money far, far too easy (even easier than now) and create the credit bubble to end all credit bubbles. But that hasn't happened yet.
Unfortunately, it means that there are going to be lousy returns on all assets for the next few years.
>>1180170
Which economic indicators do you follow to conclude that crash is coming?
>>1180195
the main concept is that the entire uptrend in stocks is artificially inflated by increased currency supply and since they didn't let the market correct itself and go into undervaluation in 2010 with this quantitative easing thing shit is gonna go bang harder than if the let it and we got though deflation as we should have.
i just look at the charts and have this feel, it's not very scientific, but i'm playing on it.
basically i think stocks should be sold and cash held until good buying opportunities present.
if you are afraid of currency devaluation then you might try to hedge it. gold shows some signs of this increased private ownership.
so what the fuck am i supposed to do?
>>1180223
pray.
I don't know if it's coming but I'm happy to wait it out, I have plenty of cash so, if a crash does happen, I can buy monthly and wait for the bounce.
>>1179324
No.
https://endzog.wordpress.com/2015/04/15/why-there-will-be-no-economic-collapse/
>>1180285
>https://endzog.wordpress.com/2015/04/15/why-there-will-be-no-economic-collapse/
>endzog.com
You must be a literal imbecile.
>>1180460
Not coping is for faggots
>"gold isn't useless!"
We've been in a depression since 2008, it's just been covered up with the Fed pumping money into the system and trickery with job statistics. You'll see rolling waves of crashes as debt in different areas becomes unmanageable. Who knows when it'll hit, predictions never seem to hit right on with this. You can see it happening but when it happens will be anyone's guess.
>>1180460
retards... retards everywhere
>>1179324
as far as i am aware italy will be the next one with having a volume of over 20% unsecured mortages,
dunno how to profit from this
>>1180540
doesn't rust
one of the fastest conductors
malleable
shiny
irreplaceable in all kinds modern processes and devices. but that's only a small part of its demand. However many markets open up around the $500/oz level. many of these processes highly destructive, so the simple effect of scarcity and opportunity costs will keep prices stable.
bitcoin however has limited use outside of its transactional easing and reporting.
Government bonds will collapse, stocks will rise rapidly as investors seek safety in private equity
Political revolutions too
>>1179947
Because recessions always happen. It's just a matter or when.
I'm expecting a significant crash in the next 7 to 18 months. I'm going to do exactly what I did in 2001-2 & 2007-8: ride that shit out. Every single one of my stocks is a dividend payer that is in a DRIP so I'll be getting more shares the lower it goes. Maybe pump up my 401k contribution again. Maybe take some extra cash and buy more stocks.
And if companies like Honeywell, Chevron, Archer Daniels Midland, and Altria go bankrupt, well shit, I've got bigger things to worry about than how much I lost. You know, things like the dissolution of modern society and how to prevent myself from getting butt-fucked by rampaging hordes of starving suburbanites.
i'm leaving the navy in about a year. i was already planning on pulling out of the markets, but this shit has made it harder to do. still got a few positions i want to close out of, hoping to ride the wave alitlle more
i honestly think we're in the bull trap right before a full recession. i'm thinking it'll most likely happen at the end of april - earnings season. they probably won't look good, and that's when people will pull out.
now i'm leveraging into selling USD.JPY, and i'm looking to sell index futures, once it's obvious the market's dropping.
>>1179362
Precious metals are basically the only "safe" investment. I mean if everything crashes, technically your silver/gold retains its purchasing power unless the crisis is so bad that theres not even enough food for everyone.
>>1179947
5000 years of history shows that economy always goes in cycles, The cycles always repeat no matter what.
>>1180223
put some of your assets away into stuff that will retain its value when shit hits the fan
>>1180272
Unless your cash is so inflated to the point that you need wheelbarrows of it to buy a loaf of bread.
>>1179324
Make investments in gold , Gold has only being the real money and the cureency always come back to his real value, cero
>>1181310
Holds its value over long periods of time
>only hold of value to last 5000+ years while every other currency has 100% failed
Define Crash
>>1181315
This is a possibility. A sharp correction in stocks as TSHTF, but then as people realize that Europe and China are fucked worse than the US, and gov bonds are no longer thought of as safe, then money could start piling into US stocks as a world safe haven...for a year or so perhaps.
silver started an uptrend
i think it's very clearly behaving differently than in the last years.
it's finally going after gold.
thank god i bought a lot of it not long ago.
>>1179324
No, we are not looking a crash in stock market or major commodities in near future. Bonds are in trouble.
And yes, i've called correctly now 3 times past 9 months that we are not looking crash in stock market (especially in usa) while 95% of pro analysts and public called a complete meltdown both last autumn and start of 2016
People dont understand you cant hide money under your pillow. When bonds are out of question the money goes to stocks.
And on top of that we have insanely low retail participation still in stock market, people have been waiting for another crash since 2009, yet, missing completely the 2nd best rally past 60 years.
I'm expecting my dick to crash into those asses every time I see this pic.
Other than that, no crash. I mean it's still crashed from 2008. Before we can have another crash, we need some kind of actual recovery.
However even stocks dont look too good everywhere you look. You have countries in europe especially that are in serious trouble. European banks are looking really bad, and when they go, there might be serious trouble in europe all over. So make sure you dont have euro stocks only too heavily. You'll get the currency melt down there too.
>>1180211
>I feel it despite science and all the evidence to the contrary
T. Every poor retard ever
>>1181315
Fucking Christ this is up there on the list of dumbest shit I've read on 4chan
Why do I bother to come here?
explain because i am stupid
why not buy stocks when the markets crash? it's all cyclical bullshit. there hasn't been a crash yet that the world economy didn't recover from. if every "oh fuck i'm poor!" is followed by "fuck yes i'm rich!!!", why not buy stocks?
or are we supposed to pretend that each of these 'catastrophic events' will permanently dismantle the world economy even though that has yet to happen? not even ten years after the housing crash and people are back out there buying shit they don't need
isn't it essentially a guarantee that the markets will rise once again and your shares will be worth more than you paid?
>>1182849
For fucks sake ye clever little bastard I came here to post that. Well done ya wonderful fuck.
>>1183175
You're trying to be way too logical. The next crash is clearly going to be the one that drives humanity back to the 12th century dark ages.
>>1183175
It is a guarantee that markets rise and fall indefinitely. They actually follow a pattern that will always repeat itself time and time again.
>>1183175
Sometimes, especially with U or W shaped movements, a stock that has a low price will just become straight up worthless (pets.com, Bear Stern's) If you buy the right stocks then sure, you just ride it back up. But if you're shopping at the deals, you've already accepted that you might pick the permanent losers. The economy might come back, but your portfolio isn't.
The Fed announced they're having an unplanned closed door meeting on Monday. Can't bode well. Maybe more money printing?
https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/boardmeetings/20160411advexp.htm
>>1183191
European banks will begin to meltdown soon, it's already begun in Italy
>>1183191
Look up how much the stock market goes up on ACG whenever there is a fed meeting and then don't post ever again
>>1179324
I took most of my money out.
Currently have 1.5m cash, 300k in stocks and 150k in cryptos.
I honestly don't know what to do. I feel like this could go one of many ways, and it's scary to think that my hard work could be obliterated.
>>1183175
These cycles can last hundreds of years. Sure, go ahead and buy the dip, but you wont be alive to see the profits.
>>1179324
Morningstar and Wallstreet Journal did studies about this and investor returns are usually low than the market returns. They made some guesses about this as investors were taking out money when the market was crashing and did not put money in until after the market rebounded.
Suffice to say if you invested at the peak in 2007 before the crash, you would still be up 30% now.
Historically the markets have always gone higher than the peaks before the crashes. So if you ignore your investments and wait a long time then you will still get out ahead.
This goes contrary to what most people believe which is that managed investing beats the markets. Which is possible, but most people can't predict shit.
>>1179324
I'm long SPXU
>>1179361
>>1179362
>>1179937
>>1180164
>>1181615
>>1182751
>Goldshills nocoiners
You are pathetic guys, talking shit about btc and how much it fluctuates, btc is better by every standard, also the fucking fees and hassle of moving trading gold is fucking hell, you guys live in the past millennia.
At least diversify, I agree gold is going uptrend, but it is not that great when you consider fees.
Pic related.
>>1182847
yeah just not now
the stocks are way overpriced if you put it in stocks now you are gonna be hurting bad soon.
>>1183316
>btc is better by every standard
in your dreams it's utterly impractical.
try paying in war torn east ukrain with bitcoin you will learn.
>gold is going uptrend, but it is not that great when you consider fees.
at least you are not a complete moron.
my problem is i can trust the gold and silver i have in my hands to stay in my hands.
bitcoin is a completely different deal even if you believe you have it you might not have it in less than ideal circumstances.
>dot com bubble caused by low interest rates + crazy speculation on budding internet
>bubble crashes, interest rates lowered to recover
>easy money combined with shoddy financial practices create housing bubble
>bubble pops and threatens to take everything down with it
>interest rates lowered to nothing, even negative in some places, and trillions of dollars dumped to keep economy afloat
>we are pretty much exactly where we were in 2007, except we have even lower interest rates and even cheaper money
>every startup and their grandma going unicorn
>pretty much 0 reform in financial institutions
>china just had to do their own bailout to stop their markets from crashing
>Europe is broke as fuck
>bubbles everywhere because of free money
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90HUOD5b8EI
>>1183450
bubbles everywhere indeed.
but when they pop the world does not end it's not an apocalypse.
when they pop the financial world reverts to a healthy state.
lot of people go broke of course these bubbles are constant opportunity for the rich to take money from the poor. on the way up or on the way down doesn't matter.
>>1183443
If you are quoting at least don't forget this part "At least diversify".
BTC is not a different deal, it is actually better in many other scenarios, and while I agree there are extreme circumstances where BTC have the drawback of needing electricity-internet, have nice advantages on the other side
Flee the country carrying all your gold? nope. BTC paper wallet same size to store 50BTC or 1, data redundancy, double and triple factor of authentication... pretty much the only point of failure is the user)
>my problem is i can trust the gold and silver i have in my hands to stay in my hands
>bitcoin is a completely different deal even if you believe you have it you might not have it in less than ideal circumstances.
If you think you can protect your gold in your house better than google their servers... good luck.
In terms of ideal circumstances there are many alternatives for technological illiterate people.
I have been a big advocate for gold since always, but honestly, people is deluded about it, also very statical thinking in a change of paradigm.
I love when people tell me
-But bro, gold was always the safe asset and used throughout history.
I always wonder why they didn't use the obv superior BTC back in the roman empire.
I'm sure they would keep talking shit about horseless carriages back in 19XX.
-But bruh, I can trust horses, they've been the thing since always.
TL;DR: take both.
>>1183561
>there are many alternatives for technological illiterate people
lol dude i'm a software engineer and heavily involved in crpytography.
get off your fantasy pony!
>>1183561
an other point is:
industry needs gold so it will always have value.
the industry doesn't need bitcoins tho it does not have any other value than faith value.
>>1183563
>heavily involved in crpytography.
Translates to:
>I did some courses in codeacademy also learn how to import libraries, and store hashes in my DB instead of plain text, also read couple articles about it, also installed kali linux once! and know how to sniff hashes and brute force with rainbow tables! what a hax0r
Cool story bro.
The reverse ad hominem argument is pretty autistic, revealing quite the opposite of your purpose.
In case of true, still don't see any point. Bring me arguments, not authority fallacies.
(didn't meant you are illiterate specifically, just meant there are solutions for those who are concerned about it and lack of knowledge)
>>1183569
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-06/barclays-u-k-regulators-embrace-bitcoin-in-deal-with-startup
>tho it does not have any other value than faith value.
That argument, not only shows your lack of true knowledge in any currency form(even gold), but also your lack of knowledge in cryptocurrencies (and their intrinsic non debatable value in many decentralized solutions).
Also exposing your faith for gold which is kinda ironic (don't expect you to understand this part)
"Faith" is involved in ANY form of currency.
>>1179616
so with more and more people struggling for transpo, how do you think ridesharing (e.g. Uber, Lyft) will respond?
zerohedge just had that article about how the US among others will let bonds collapse, so that wealth pours into stock markets as the last bastion of investment that would be available. Sounds pretty out there but it does fit with a NWO-type scenario where corporations rule and governments become increasingly irrelevant. Whether it will work or last or happen is a different matter.
From the article:
"This time, stocks—and especially commodities—are likely to explode on the upside as people panic into them to get out of depreciating dollars in general and bonds in particular. Real estate will be—next to bonds—the most devastated single area of the economy because no one will lend money long term. And real estate is built on the mortgage market, which will vanish."
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-08/greater-depression-has-started-comparing-1930s-today#comments
>>1183221
The "stock market going up" is not inherently good if it occurs out of increasing dependency on easing. Price discovery is actually a good thing--no matter how long we try to pretend that gravity doesn't exist.
>>1183583
>Translates to:
>I did some courses in codeacademy
no it translates to i write cryptographic software and use everything i know in real life applications.
>"Faith" is involved in ANY form of currency.
that's true but some items have market value aside from the currency value because they have industrial applications.
bitcoin used to have it's value based on electric cost to mine it. simple as that. that was a long time ago. no matter how much you shill i won't touch bitcoin over $10.
>>1183594
Just remember your words in some years after the uptrend ends.
>have market value aside from the currency value because they have industrial applications.
So if you invest in gold, and it crash to 200$oz you are gonna tell me, oh no I'm fine, I'm sure it still has applications, I lost 95% of what I invested given fees and taxes, but everything is fine, I'm fine, gold is gud.
Then again, bitcoin and blockchain have applications, even more valuable in current era.
>no it translates to i write cryptographic software and use everything i know in real life applications.
What part of I don't care you don't understand?
If I come to 4chan is precisely to judge conversations and arguments without prejudices. As far as I'm concerned everyone is "Anonymous", I'm not gonna kiss your ass, nor ignore you for working in McDonalds, so cut the bullshit already.
Pic related: seems like a pretty stable asset, now I see, indeed.
I just find funny that I'm called shill for telling that BTC deserves a proper reconsideration, and gold is overvalued.
>>1183610
>So if you invest in gold, and it crash to 200$oz you are gonna tell me, oh no I'm fine, I'm sure it still has applications, I lost 95% of what I invested given fees and taxes, but everything is fine, I'm fine, gold is gud.
if gold would crash to $200 i would buy it all.
>What part of I don't care you don't understand?
i don't care about your stupid ass and what pipe-dreams are you smoking currently i just told you so that maybe it sinks in even professionals that fully understand the cryptography involved can easily have issues with bitcoin specifically.
>>1183619
You live in denial.
Do your thing, I'm not here to show off.
>>1183184
That's why you buy into ETFs in a meltdown. You don't have to worry about which companies never recover.
>>1183625
agreed.
when all is said and done bitcoin is an interesting thing but it's a typical scam in two accounts and i'm not going to be participating in it.
and as a currency it does not satisfy my needs and expectations. i like crpytography and i would like a crypto currency i don't like bitcoins and their clones and the open source and distributed aspect does not impress me nearly as much as the bitcoin fanatics. where most people see strength i see vulnerability.
you can speculate in it all you want but your hard work and taking risks will yield a lot more to other people (ie "early adopters" or the top of the pyramid) than to yourself.
you could use the fraction of the massive commuting power to maintain a single ledger and have a functional cryptocurrency if you can find a trusted authority to maintain it so it's also fucking inefficient in my eyes.
>>1183587
Dude. There is so much bullshit posted on zerohedge. Learn how to tune retarded shit like that out or don't read it.
80% of what is posted on there is quack bullshit. Seriously don't bother reading it if you can't analyze the articles for yourself.
That quote is so stupid. "Stocks and commodities, (these are denominated in dollars), are going to soar in value while dollars are depreciating"
It's terrible that people who spout retarded shit like this are given a voice on the internet.
>>1183637
So wait a second.
Your solution to decentralization, which is an alternative/solution to centralized(trusted authority) solutions is, having a trusted authority in charge of it.
Bravo.
You cleared any doubt, you have no clue what true decentralization and how self-correcting "power" inefficiencies works.
Also I'm absolutely certain, you never designed data redundancy systems and load balancing high availability systems. Or bothered thinking why those solutions when on top of one point of attack offer no value to some scenarios, also adding more problems and trusting 3rd parties.
I wonder why Microsoft is adopting shitloads of blockchains in development, I wonder why every big guy is interested in not needing to trust any point of authority (aka more attack surface), because not having a point of authority means having the lowest attack surface possible, all of this are just cool ideas that still need a lot of testing and development. But discrediting such concept and their benefits in many scenarios, shows nothing else but absolute ignorance.
When you say I don't like open source, you are fucking retarded, closed and open source are two different solutions to many different scenarios that deserve different considerations and not generalizations, FUCKING AGAIN SHOWING STATICAL THINKING.
>>1183645
if dollars depreciate against stocks it would make sense that those stocks would gain in numeric value. your criticism is warranted but I see no actual analysis in your post. please try again. what do you think people would have thought about QE or NIRP 10-20 years ago, for instance?
This is why people can't make money on the stock market. Too much fear and believe every doomsday theory. Literally this thread is half survivalists. It's like you want to stay poor
>>1183674
we would rather buy and hold than be traders. the market has not yielded in this context for over a year. why would we want to buy in at record highs that can't break through? why buy into a market that's dependent on commodities and money printing?
>>1183664
>Your solution to decentralization, which is an alternative/solution to centralized(trusted authority) solutions is, having a trusted authority in charge of it.
>Bravo.
when decentralization introduces vulnerabilities and performance issues yes.
btw it is possible to have both, for small payments a bitcoin bank will vouch for your based on it's own account you deposited with the bank.
however such banks put too many eggs in one basket and the incentive to act dishonestly and bounce with the booty is high. (as it already happened a lot of times so far)
so if you gonna trust a bank anyways to use your currency to buy coffee in the morning then why not extend this trust and let it process all the transactions?
it's a logical extension.
single point of authority is historically trusted because it's easy to control and regulate a single institution or person. but it gives this person a lot of power and responsibility also. and a lot of opportunity to scam everyone else.
usually you seek distributed applications when they increase efficiency AND availability. in case of bitcoin it's not true. the sole fact that the masses that supposed to use it have no control over their transactions anymore is also a perversion of the system many beside myself don't like.
>When you say I don't like open source, you are fucking retarded
lol i never said that you moron, i'm just not impressed with it in this case a scam can be out in the open it's still a scam. i love opensource too bad vulnerabilities can lie dormant for decades on opensource code anyways. closed source cryptography is bullshit anyways snakeoil shit.
>>1183681
Big bunch of non sense, circular discussion not going anywhere.
TL;DR: different solutions for different situations.
open-closed source
centralized-decentralized
There is not one best solution in any, both good and bad things.
It seems like you forgot centralized solutions offer vulnerabilities, and again one vector to attack.
>the open source and distributed aspect. where most people see strength i see vulnerability.
That's why I said what I said, I doubt any intelligent person familiar with the concept of decentralization and blockchain, can read that without laughing.
And don't tell me that is possible to have both, Already linked to a hybrid solution, I'm quite aware of it, but in order to get hybrid, you first have to at least admit the validity of the concept itself, and no I'm interested but it is flawed doesn't add anything, like judging internet for being flawed in 1980, either you offer constructive criticism, or your opinion has negative value.
>single point of authority is historically trusted because
And again with the fucking historically trusted bullshit, decentralized solutions were nothing more than a crazy dream prior to bitcoin you dumb shit, if there is not an alternative there is not room for consideration that argument is fucking buuuuuuullllshiiiiitttt, last time I repeat it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bhagwan-chowdry/i-shall-happily-accept-th_b_8462028.html
You also admit the problems with authority points, I had enough.
>>1183711
>There is not one best solution in any, both good and bad things.
I meant not one solution for every problem, there is not one "best" thing, they are different alternatives.
BTW sorry if my engrish make your eyes bleed from time to time.
>>1183679
buy and hold is fine. gold and bullets is a bad strategy is all I'm saying. 3 years ago people were saying don't buy it's at the peak.Could be the same 3 years from now but who knows.
Buy gold stocks (not bullion, ETFs or futures contracts) but stock in gold producing listed companies.
Keep a large amount in cash.
>>1183711
>Big bunch of non sense, circular discussion not going anywhere.
Finally, someone gets it. The crypto discussions on this board are fucking pointless. Bitcoiners have been saying that bitcoin is going to be the next paradigm for years, meanwhile (in the real world), people are just hoarding this shit and merchants have began to drop it en masse. The only reason it even got pumped in the first place is pump n dump market manipulation due to bots and shady exchanges. Bitcoin is mostly speculated on and not used as it was originally intended for, mostly because libertarians are a small minority. It would be like if you created a currency for faggots and then expected everyone to want to use it.
>>1183441
that's called gambler's fallacy. just because stocks are all time high does not mean a bubble. we definitely do not have a bubble in stocks. we have interst rates that are unheard of, this is nothing similar to what people have seen before.
>>1183711
what are you 12?
people will disagree with you as most people on the planet right now do disagree with you as the market share of bitcoin is laughable in the scale of global economy. try deal with it like an adult and don't jump into conclusion about what people think when they never said so and stoop insulting people when you are out of rational arguments.
>That's why I said what I said, I doubt any intelligent person familiar with the concept of decentralization and blockchain, can read that without laughing.
that sentence reveals a lot more about you then ma to be honest.
i full understand the bitcoin concept and protocol, and i don't like it. i don't like the current monetary system either that doesn't mean i have to like bitcoin or accept it to be superior in any way. it isn't btw.
>And again with the fucking historically trusted bullshit, decentralized solutions were nothing more than a crazy dream prior to bitcoin you dumb shit, if there is not an alternative there is not room for consideration that argument is fucking buuuuuuullllshiiiiitttt, last time I repeat it.
your rant has nothing to do with my point again so i will just ignore it.
>>1183587
zerohedge is a humor site. they have been calling a major crash past 5 years pretty much every day now lol. and everytime dow declines 10% it's the end of the world.
they have not gotten it right a single time i think.
>>1183736
stocks are not in a bubble because they cost a lot because they cost an awfully lot compared to the 10 yearly dividends.
there is no way you will convince me this is not a bubble.
>>1183741
no you cannot look just stocks, dividends or whatever bullshit. the money has to go somewhere. what options do the money have?
>>1183736
that presumes that the stock market is fundamentally gambling. which I would prefer not to believe and I would not take part in if it were true. there are metrics like p/e you know...
ITT: sure is /pol/ in here
>>1183731
>It would be like if you created a currency for faggots and then expected everyone to want to use it.
Hahahah holy shit this is dead on. You forgot to add the part where all the faggots are astonished everyone doesn't want to start sucking dick.
>>1183745
you misunderstood i told him he believes in gambler's fallacy as he looks that the market is all time high, thus it must melt down soon. excactly what 95% of "pro" analysts and majority of public have been doing too. and they all have been wrong past years, completely wrong.
>>1183740
they have underestimated western nations' ability to print money and do shenanigans to keep markets afloat. I will state again that markets have been flat or negative for over a year.
It is unlikely that this amount of effort(and debt from money printing) will be tossed aside and the markets will be allowed to correct. I think undermining the value of nations is very much on the table at this point.
Why is the Fed holding what amounts to a surprise meeting on Monday? The context has been stated to be interest rates. What can they do going forward?
>>1183569
people will always need a safe way to store value and to transmit any amount of value anywhere in the world quickly, discreetly and cost effectively
>>1183753
you are inferring. he stated that markets are overvalued, you brought the context of all time high into the discussion.
>>1183755
>transmit
Maaaaybe. Bitcoin is not without its shares of fees to convert it to fiat though.
>store
No. This is where bitcoin sucks.
>>1183739
We agree to disagree, name one flaw at least, non abstract ones like you did, I have no problem to tackle if you don't name one.
I don't insult cause of lack of rational arguments, If I believe you are retarded and talking out of your ass, first I will disprove what you say, since you didn't fucking name one single problem, and then I will keep saying you are a fucking retard talking out of your ass until you back up something, and I promise I will eat my words.
No the word don't disagree with me, I know the bitcoin market cap is a minuscule grain of sand in the immense economic mountain, so what? That's exactly my basis to qualify it as a good investment since there is plenty room for growth.
Still not even a good point, since is a completely new paradigm.
Still after hours of non sense, you didn't name one single specific problem.
>single point of authority is historically trusted because it's easy to control and regulate a single institution or person.
>And again with the fucking historically trusted bullshit, decentralized solutions were nothing more than a crazy dream prior to bitcoin you dumb shit, if there is not an alternative there is not room for consideration that argument is fucking buuuuuuullllshiiiiitttt, last time I repeat it.
>your rant has nothing to do with my point again so i will just ignore it.
Absolutely on topic with your "point".
You deserve no respect until you prove the opposite so stop focusing in my insults, and focus on the arguments.
>>1183762
>Bitcoin is not without its shares of fees to convert it to fiat though.
there are still huge savings over any alternatives, and it is more convenient
>No. This is where bitcoin sucks.
I disagree. it's on a long term uptrend, has been stable for months now, and is expected to go higher. it's an attractive solution to many problems and adoption and growth are continuing. NIRP and the push for cashless society will only help it
>>1183766
I'm geting cancer rereading me, and how I structured some phrases, but.... meh..
>>1183774
yeah it's giving me cancer too
>>1183766
Not him but I will give it a shot off the top of my head.
Problems with decentralization:
>no central point of authority
>no way to regulate
>no eay to stop pump n dumps and market manipulation
>no way to shut down if used illegally
>tax evasion
>money laundering
>most existing decentralized apps that exist serve illegal means (silkroad, popcorntime, etc.)
>no chargebacks in case of fraud or thefts
>no control over value like a real currency (volatility)
>waste of enormous amounts of electricity and resources
Should I go on?
>no you cannot look just stocks, dividends or whatever bullshit. the money has to go somewhere. what options do the money have?
i have no clue what you are trying to say here.
>>1183776
Can't blame you lol
>>1183769
A big fuck no to all 3
>long term uptrend
Down 70% in the last couple years
>stable
Still fluctuates 10% or more. Name any major currency that does that.
>expected to go higher
Says who??? The winklevoss twins? Kek
>>1183778
Are we talking about BTC? blockchain? the btc network? the idea of decentralization services?
>no central point of authority
kinda the point of a decentralized network
>no way to regulate
kinda the point of a decentralized network
>no eay to stop pump n dumps and market manipulation
seems like no one is doing this sort of tactics out of crypto, completely btc and blockchain flaw
>no way to shut down if used illegally
who is shutting down USD when it is being used for illegal things?
Who is not evading taxes? panama papers? hello?
>money laundering
previous point
>most existing decentralized apps that exist serve illegal means (silkroad, popcorntime, etc.)
captain obvious, still as a tool, great for many legit purposes, and a necessity in many others.
>no control over value like a real currency (volatility)
¿? I compared it to gold, everyone seems to use it as the master race of assets, still proved to be quite volatile like any free market, deal with it.
>waste of enormous amounts of electricity and resources
How is that even a point? is offering things that nothing else can offer, of course there will be a drawback, not even a valid point, when you actually analize it, and how it will be self corrected if it is non profitable for the users running nodes/mining
>should I go on?
Oh please, try a little bit harder next time.
>>1183782
>Down 70% in the last couple years
measuring from the absolute peak of a bubble? it's up thousands of % over 6 years.
>>1179616
>interest rates are already almost as low as they can go
They did increase it a little, from having been at 0% since 2008 (most people don't know/realize this). Swefag here, ours is at -0.5% - we're doing great guys, don't worry, says the economists! :^)
>>1183805
btc is compared to gold I meant fml
shit is bad already i hope it doesnt crash
but i think it will. i 've been thinking that for 6 years now tho.
so i know nothing
>>1183778
>>1183792
>no way to shut down if used illegallyi would disagree with that point if governments decide to shut down bitcoin they can almost completely obliterate it.
since the protocol is open (otherwise it wouldn't work) it's visible to everyone and governments do keep a thumb on the network infrastructure they can not only block the communication between peers they can even track you down and confiscate your private keys if they go into full nazi mode.
also separating parts off the internet would create competing blockchains where real value was exchanged and gets invalidated at a further point. which is a huge problem and even can happen by accident.
you think you have money hen next day you don't. that's bitcoin when the distributed network splits.
>>1182849
>Before we can have another crash, we need some kind of actual recovery.
Stupid goy. Didn't you know that the S&P has hit new highs? We're doing great, clearly. Repeat after me: this is the best of times.
>>1183792
>kinda the point of a decentralized network
So... the point of decentralized networks is to suck? Ok.
>seems like no one is doing this sort of tactics out of crypto, completely btc and blockchain flaw
Lol thats the point you fucking retard. Cryptos are flawed.
>who is shutting down USD when it is being used for illegal things?
Digital USD is traceable idiot.
>Who is not evading taxes?
This is something they are trying to stop,
not enable further.
>captain obvious, still as a tool, great for many legit purposes, and a necessity in many others.
Like what legit purposes???? There is nothing legal that can't be done better with a centralized system.
>¿? I compared it to gold, everyone seems to use it as the master race of assets, still proved to be quite volatile like any free market, deal with it.
Everyone? You mean just a few libertarians, right? I kekked hard at "master race of assets". Don't know if you meant it as a joke or not.
>how it will be self corrected if it is non profitable for the users running nodes/mining
In the real world, things rarely ever self correct. Come check out reality for a while, you might like it.
>>1183800
>from the peak of the bubble?
Yes exactly. Ever since the bubble burst its been on a downtrend. Isnt that funny how bubbles work?
>>1183825
measuring a trend from the peak of a bubble is like measuring your dick from its distance to your asshole
>>1183820
free market always self-corrects but it takes time and can hurt a lot.
>>1183585
Probably pretty well but it's kinda like a taxi service, you don't necessarily use it every day to get to work.
>>1183820
The point of a decentralized network is to be decentralized.
Read panama papers, and many tactics of money laundering currently used withing the US
pumps and dumps was invented in stocks you ignorant
No one is stopping it, and as I said, decentralization is a tool, that of course it will be misused like any other.
>captain obvious, still as a tool, great for many legit purposes, and a necessity in many others.
Like what legit purposes???? There is nothing legal that can't be done better with a centralized system.
explain me why every top notch company is puring millions in blockchain technology if can't be done, better, another fucking retard who don't know shit of what he is talking about.
Of course I meant it as a joke, but it is the only comparison available, and usually considered safe investment by many, not only libertarians.
Self corrections happens, and they happen faster than you might think, specially in a world changing with a exponential speed, check singularity, you might like it.
>>1183820
You are that kind of person that defend your right to have a gun, but are against on this topics, am I right?
>>1183851
>The point of a decentralized network is to be decentralized.
No shit faggot. The whole point of this argument is me saying that decentralized netoworks are inferior and cultivate scams and frauds.
>pumps and dumps was invented in stocks you ignorant
>Hurr durrr I don't know what the SEC and regulation is.
>explain me why every top notch company is puring millions in blockchain technology
Because companies are centralized and want to use it for centralized purposes? Holy shit are you this dense?
>considered safe investment by many
>safe
Hahahahahah
>Self corrections happens
Like I said, they are very rare. Bitcoin is using more and more resources and electricity exponentially as the difficulty increases. Anyone with any amount of common sense can see that this is bad and stupid.
>>1183858
You are the type of person to make off base strawman arguments because you are a faggot, right?
>>1180712
It's gonna happen in September 2015, I guarantee it. You doubters just fucking wait.
>>1183865
>The point of a decentralized network is to be decentralized.
>No shit faggot. The whole point of this argument is me saying that decentralized netoworks are inferior and cultivate scams and frauds.
Simply not true, like arguing about blue being the best color.
>explain me why every top notch company is puring millions in blockchain technology
>Because companies are centralized and want to use it for centralized purposes? Holy shit are you this dense?
Again, are we discussing of btc itself, or the idea of decentralization as a service with many valid uses?
>considered safe investment by many
>safe
>Hahahahahah
Y we agree here pretty much.
>Like I said, they are very rare. Bitcoin is using more and more resources and electricity exponentially as the difficulty increases. Anyone with any amount of common sense can see that this is bad and stupid.
Not true, corrections happens quite fast in block-chains and nodes, and it is not bad nor stupid, it is a different solution for different problems, again.
factom, for example is a very interesting concept, and how they are adapting it to keep legal records immutable, which is a pretty cool idea.
>>1183858 (You)
>You are the type of person to make off base strawman arguments because you are a faggot, right?
I asked, and didn't used it as any point in my exposition, so no strawman, right? but not gonna defend my manners, I act like a kid, bad grammar, awful engris, and insults, so you are still somehow right there.
im going to hide my $300 in a shoe in my closet
>>1183885
Saying a decentralized solution is not as power-efficient, is like saying a truck is a bad race car.
>>1183843
well maybe i'm wrong but every single instance my government interferes with the market it's making things go worse less efficient and more corrupt and costly to us all.
maybe they just doing it all wrong maybe some government actually does it right i'm skeptical tho.
>>1183885
>Simply not true, like arguing about blue being the best color.
That analogy would be close if you used "puce" instead of blue. Most of the world agrees that puce is a shit color.
>Again, are we discussing of btc itself, or the idea of decentralization as a service with many valid uses?
You can't seperate btc from decentralization. Btc will always be decentralized and this makes it a shit currency and a bad commodity since gold is actually used for legit purposes and btc is just hoarded and used for drugs and illegal shit.
>Y we agree here pretty much.
Good. Bitcoin is a lot of things but "safe" is not one of them.
>keep legal records immutable
Legal records are already immutable. You're solving a problem that does not exist.
>>1183898
Creating decentralized systems that do the same things that centralized systems do but poorly, is a waste of resources. The only thing that decentralized systems enable is a way to screw governments, companies and laws by circumventing them.
>>1183913
worth noting that the entire internet is highly centralized today in most states, so if you dream about truly decentralized system that can withstand infrastructure going down or war or anything you are deluded.
i know this was the original concept but it's not how the topology looks today.
>>1183905
>Legal records are already immutable. You're solving a problem that does not exist.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/factom-partners-honduras-government-build-blockchain-backed-land-registry-1432065422
again I'm sure that you don't understand the benefits or the concept, not meant to use it as an attack, but there is no debate.
>illegal shit like preordering a tesla model 3
>Good. Bitcoin is a lot of things but "safe" is not one of them.
bitcoin is safe, volatile, but safe, don't mix concepts
>>1183913
Also more secure, but not gonna be able to debate if you are not a security expert probably.
>>1183922
>bitcoin is safe
it would only be safe if you could guarantee in any way that your bitcoins will not be invalidated at a future date.
let's say somebody generates an entire new blockchain except your transactions where you got bitcoins are missing and it becomes the longest blockchain. you basically by the bitcoin protocol can rewrite history and make things that happened unhappen. i mean wtf. even a theoretical possibility should unnerve you.
sure it sounds futuristic but in the realm of possibilities. now try that with physical gold. try to make my gold disappear with a magic accounting trick.
nothing is safe anyways physical gold can be stolen too you just need to lay your hand on it first.
>>1183913
governments and companies don't have divine right to rule over us. if a new system that's better comes along then it's in everyone's interest to adopt it even if it hurts the feelings of people who were in power under the older system. if the option to move money , freely without friction, when and how you want exists, we should be able to use it. holding back progress because "muh terrorists" is absurd
the argument simply comes down to you being a statist versus others who are more libertarian
>>1183922
the land ownership record thing is intriguing and much more to my liking.
first of all it's not a made up free floating thing they make ownership registration of, but land, and the transaction speed is not prohibitive to buy land you probably gonna spend days with the paperwork if not weeks as of now. and even if the system halts to a crash temporarily the transactions and ownership ledger can be reproduced from paper based contracts.
>>1183922
>http://sys.4chan.org/derefer?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbitcoinmagazine.com%2Farticles%2Ffactom-partners-honduras-government-build-blockchain-backed-land-registry-1432065422
Oh look you found a government so corrupt that they cant do anything about land titles being forged on a massive scale. Holy shit that is neat-o. This would also be solved by, I don't know, actually keeping a secure central database that isn't allowed to be accessed by every Tom, Dick, and Carlos or I don't know, actually firing corrupt officials.
>No, instead lets create a whole slew of other issues with an overblown resource intensive blockchain!
>bitcoin is safe, volatile, but safe, don't mix concepts
Tsk, tsk. You forgot what you posted didnt you? You didnt just say "safe", you said "safe investment", which is why i laughed so hard.
>also more secure
Wrooooong. It is AS secure. Cryptography doesnt have different levels of security. Either it is secure or it isnt.
>>1183934
>let's say somebody generates an entire new blockchain except your transactions where you got bitcoins are missing and it becomes the longest blockchain. you basically by the bitcoin protocol can rewrite history and make things that happened unhappen. i mean wtf. even a theoretical possibility should unnerve you.
Theretically every protocol, centralized or not is vulnerable, and since we are talking about services running in the internet, yes it is a risk, then you add layers, your own internet connection, router, MITM, common viruses, vulnerable clients(which is one of the biggest concerns surrounding bitcnoin and cryptos that no one talks about) and yeah it nerves me, not more than Europe collapsing in my ass tho.
In terms of gold, most of the people that invest in gold relay in 3rd parties, which not only cost you % to store and taxes, but have the given plus of again having to trust organizations, and in your case, if you store it in your house, don't tell anyone.
I like the idea of having a lil bit of gold in my house, never said the opposite, but when it comes to large sums of money, things can get nasty.
As I said since the first post, diversify.
>>1183939
> if a new system that's better comes along then it's in everyone's interest to adopt it
Fucking this. Bitcoin is not better which is why it is not being adopted. Merchants have began to dump it and not accept it for payment any more. Even Overstock, which was bitcoins greatest ally is rethinking it since it has lost money on btc. The total transaction volume is in decline. There just aren't enough libertarians to prop it up anymore.
>>1183955
yeah if anyone could inject malicious code into a bitcoin client download they could take ownership of the wallets in the future with relative ease.
and these downloads are usually digitally signed but often with not strong enough cryptography. some assemblies are still signed with md5. md5 can have a collision attack in hours with serious hashing power.
>>1183949
Your solution, in the real world, is more expensive, even if you don't believe it.
I didn't forgot what I said, I just replied to the safe as it bitcoin is safe, protocol I'm mixing many topics, in investment terms, I still believe is better than many other options right now, but as I said agree, just want to clarify, for people who is reading, bitcoin as a protocol is safe.
>Wrooooong. It is AS secure. Cryptography doesnt have different levels of security. Either it is secure or it isnt.
Incorrect, implementations, layers, and many other topcis are taking into account when it comes to security, also some people would say that a system that can be bruteforced in 10.000 years is not safe, to be fair, he is right, but good enough for me.
>>1183958
Where did the libertarians go?
>>1183967
my issue is with _today_ it looks like 10000 years in 5 years it can go down to 1 year with a technological leap or a vulnerability discovered in the sha256 that greatly reduces the hashpower requirement for proof of work and collision attacks both.
>>1183967
>Your solution, in the real world, is more expensive, even if you don't believe it
No its not. Youre an idiot.
>in investment terms, I still believe is better than many other options right now
Not at all. Keeping your money in Bitcoin is stupid. It is worse than keeping it in USD even though USD is gauranteed a small percentage of inflation every year. It is even worse than investing in gold which is volatile and unpredictable because at least the gold market isnt capable of collapsing overnight. No, the "safe" bet would be a vangaurd index fund or other comparible low risk investments.
>that a system that can be bruteforced in 10.000 years is not safe, to be fair, he is right, but good enough for me
You do realize that bitcoin operates on Sha-2 just like most other companies and government agencies, right? I'm going to assume you arent this ignorant
>>1183967
Also wants to add
Anyone, right now, anywhere using any system, is much much more vulnerable that he will ever realize, so since everything is relative, let's at least use same standards
I will give credits, and apologize like I said I would (>>1183966) just by the comment he just made, he looks like at least knows concepts regarding what he is talking about, so I'm quite sure, he can agree with me, after all, absolute security in this topics is not even used as you (>>1183949) did
As my good old security teacher used to say:
"The only secure computer on the planet is one:
-Disconnected from any form of network
-Disk encryption, and password protected login and bios.
-Powered off
-Inside of a vault, fire and water proof, with his keys destroyed
-buried
And still, I'm not sure."
>>1183969
BTFO
>>1183990
The whole point is that "extra secure" is usually superfluous. The levels of cryptography that exist today are plenty secure for every application. Bitcoins whole "we are more secure because we use the same cryptography that banks and governments do!" is dumb. It is AS secure.
>>1183989
>You do realize that bitcoin operates
It was an obv exageration, and then again, I'm saying, if it is good enough, for people to connect with the bank in insecure networks, with insecure computers, it is good enough for it it is purpose, right now, and then again, if we discuss about how btc can be better, of course, for me like if goes to hell in 10 years, and yes, it quite possible that something better appears, but RIGHT NOW I rather have 5 btc than X euros in my bank account sleeping.
>No its not. Youre an idiot.
Go ahead, prove me wrong. Explain me why in some parts of the world it is not a better alternative, eliminating infrastructure human lavor, corruption etc.
>>1183999
The kind of security that bitcoin provide as a alternative, don't rely in the cryptography, but in eliminating one attack vector.
>>1184005
> but RIGHT NOW I rather have 5 btc than X euros in my bank account sleeping.
So? You only hold it because you think you can sell it later for more. You still have bills to pay right? You cant pay those bills in bitcoin right? Ok then. I'll save you the suspense. Bitcoin is not going to be worth more later. All the other bitcoin bagholders have the same thought as you.
>go ahead, prove me wrong
Bitcoin, which has 6 billion dollar marketcap is using 100 times more resources than google which has a 500 billon dollar marketcap and this disparity is getting worse the more time goes by. Nuff said?
>>1184017
>Bitcoin, which has 6 billion dollar marketcap is using 100 times more resources than google
yes, it's using all of that to secure the network. that's a good thing
>>1184029
Thats a fucking horrible thing. A tiny fraction of that could secure the network. Its an enormous waste of electricity and resources. Bitcoin is the least efficient network ever created.
>>1184017
>So?
It is money that I don't need, it is something that I not only like as a client, but also develop on top of it.
I'm not a bagholder, and I won't sell if it goes up, this is not a pump and dump for me...
>Bitcoin, which has 6 billion dollar...
Again comparing two different animals
>>1184036
>>1184017
I'm Honduras, give me a solution to my problem, most cost-effective and secure, covering everything, not superficial solutions, give me a white paper that shows me, a government with not a proper network built, corruption generalized among political and government spectrum, how can I solve all of my solutions, as cost effective and secure as factom provides.
>>1184036
>Again comparing two different animals
I wasnt the one who first compared these animals. I'm just saying that the amount of electricity and resources expended to secure a mere $6 bilion in assets is astronomically inefficient. Which leads back to my orginal point that honduras should have just bolstered security on a central database instead of opting for an overblown decentralized solution. Makes no sense.
>>1184042
> a government with not a proper network built
Thats a pretty big assumption, Sparky.
>>1184042
I'm Honduras, give me a solution to my problem, covering everything, not superficial solutions, give me a white paper that shows me how me, a government, (with not a proper network built, corruption generalized among political and government spectrum) a better full solution, more cost effective and secure as factom provides.
*******************
>>1184046
If the national government net (human included) is flawed/corrupted/unexistant/non-functional it is not an assumption, it is a fact.
>>1184050
>/unexistant/non-functional
Yikes. Thats still a pretty big assumption you make there, Sparky. I am going to go out on a limb here and state that you know jack shit about the inner fuctionings of the Honduran government. Just a hunch lmao. To assume they don't have a proper network is comical to me. Are you always in the habit of talking out of your ass? No, I get it, you took a course on Central American studies in school and now you are a bonafide expert? Hahahahah
>>1184043
There are different solutions, nothing else, you know that the solutions to make it more efficient are being currently positively tested and will be implemented soon(tm)
and a 3rd factor of authentication won't ever be as convinient as a 12345 passord but, nothing to be comapred specially when you take into account, is something completely new, let it fail, the concept itself can be polished and it is worth.
>>1184059
And you are absolutely right, I'm just doing it for the shake of the debate, but I'm quite sure that is an appropriate solution in some specific cases for emerging countries, I'm not an expert (tho worked creating solutions for international enterprises, kinda related, and the concept of decentralization is poetry, I know, I'm a fanboy), but the truth is, their previous system wasn't working.
I didn't take such course (kinda ironic that you base your point on me making assumptions just to make one in the next sentence tho)
bitcoin is likely going to go up as the banking crisis starts to really escalate in europe. so will usd, yen, chf probably too. gold too. us stocks especially.
>>1184069
And I'm off for now.. god, I don't know how someone could read my conversation with the formating/grammar I'm writing.
>>1184069
>I didn't take such course
No shit. The other guy was right. Bitcoin debates are stupid because you guys change goalposts to defend decentralization. First you appeal to authority and say "bitcoin is cool, look the honduras government is going for a decentralized solution" then in the same argument you shit all over honduras for being corrupt and non-functional. You cant have it both ways. Either honduras is forward thinking and brilliant, being so tech savvy to recognize and impliment such a perfect solution, or they are corrupt and behind the times, not having a proper network and too inept to overcome the corruption inside their ranks.
>>1184073
Naw. Bitcoin rarely goes up during a crisis.
could you please discuss the merits of shitcoins in some other thread that would welcome your walls of text? There's a black hole in this thread now.
>>1184047
>I'm Honduras
that actually explains a lot about your bitcoin fancy
