Chat Forum
It is currently Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:55 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2214 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 ... 56  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Bowens wrote:
Do you ask your wife the crypo expert before you write these posts?


I don't have a wife? That said, I've been trading cryptocurrencies for more than 4 years.

<globusmode>In May 2014, the front page of our largest national newspaper (Sunday Times) business section i.e. the big story was an article about me and BTC trading</globusmode>

The point is that cryptocurrencies are already here and not going anywhere and sooner or later yourself (Bimbo, SON, etc) will be asking for the price of an item in sats :lol:


I know it goes with the territory in this particular and peculiar case (that of blockchain, bitcoin, and cryptocurrencies), but I can't recall when I've ever discussed something with someone where there has been such a category gulf. You are simply talking about something completely different from me.

You seem as far from geting my point as ever. That seems to be the most terrifying thing about this phenomenon.


Let me try.

Your concern is that a large number of uneducated (in terms of financial instruments) people are investing money in what appears at face value to be, excuse the pun, ether. They're doing this in a very unregulated market where devious financial intellects can manipulate and 'scam' them to the extent that they can lose a serious portion of their living money (i.e. beyond their savings). You clearly accept that the broader technology has value but would prefer tighter regulatory oversight to protect the aforesaid adopters.


That's a small part of it. There have been some terrible booms and busts in regulated markets. This appears to go way past that, and is global. It's getting a bit concerning that central banks are not making more definitive and coordinated statements on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 7:39 am
Posts: 2558
bimboman wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Bowens wrote:
Do you ask your wife the crypo expert before you write these posts?


I don't have a wife? That said, I've been trading cryptocurrencies for more than 4 years.

<globusmode>In May 2014, the front page of our largest national newspaper (Sunday Times) business section i.e. the big story was an article about me and BTC trading</globusmode>

The point is that cryptocurrencies are already here and not going anywhere and sooner or later yourself (Bimbo, SON, etc) will be asking for the price of an item in sats :lol:


I know it goes with the territory in this particular and peculiar case (that of blockchain, bitcoin, and cryptocurrencies), but I can't recall when I've ever discussed something with someone where there has been such a category gulf. You are simply talking about something completely different from me.

You seem as far from geting my point as ever. That seems to be the most terrifying thing about this phenomenon.


Let me try.

Your concern is that a large number of uneducated (in terms of financial instruments) people are investing money in what appears at face value to be, excuse the pun, ether. They're doing this in a very unregulated market where devious financial intellects can manipulate and 'scam' them to the extent that they can lose a serious portion of their living money (i.e. beyond their savings). You clearly accept that the broader technology has value but would prefer tighter regulatory oversight to protect the aforesaid adopters.



Well I'd rather they didn't lose savings they can afford as well.

You do know it's being manipulated don't you ?

What isn't being manipulated?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
Quote:
Just for clarity what is being manipulated and by whom? As a follow-up, why do you think that people can't make a decision as to what to do with the money they have (in most cases) earned?


Large holders of Bitcoin and the exchanges they effectively own are supporting price levels , they're also making large amounts trading between "exchanges" using delays on cashing punters money in and out to profit from those time delays and price differences (this is being coordinated within the exchange owners and large "investors" );

Yes of course people can get their own cash out and use it as firewood if they like however, the rise of Bitcoin has been accompanied globally by a massive marketing campaign which is demonstrating tremendous dishonesty regarding what Bitcoin is and that it had various values which cannot all be true.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
Quote:
What isn't being manipulated?


Eh?, what is the point of that question ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:

I don't have a wife? That said, I've been trading cryptocurrencies for more than 4 years.

<globusmode>In May 2014, the front page of our largest national newspaper (Sunday Times) business section i.e. the big story was an article about me and BTC trading</globusmode>

The point is that cryptocurrencies are already here and not going anywhere and sooner or later yourself (Bimbo, SON, etc) will be asking for the price of an item in sats :lol:


I know it goes with the territory in this particular and peculiar case (that of blockchain, bitcoin, and cryptocurrencies), but I can't recall when I've ever discussed something with someone where there has been such a category gulf. You are simply talking about something completely different from me.

You seem as far from geting my point as ever. That seems to be the most terrifying thing about this phenomenon.


Let me try.

Your concern is that a large number of uneducated (in terms of financial instruments) people are investing money in what appears at face value to be, excuse the pun, ether. They're doing this in a very unregulated market where devious financial intellects can manipulate and 'scam' them to the extent that they can lose a serious portion of their living money (i.e. beyond their savings). You clearly accept that the broader technology has value but would prefer tighter regulatory oversight to protect the aforesaid adopters.


That's a small part of it. There have been some terrible booms and busts in regulated markets. This appears to go way past that, and is global. It's getting a bit concerning that central banks are not making more definitive and coordinated statements on it.


There have been mutterings and national bank statements but I'd agree it hasn't been co-ordinated. Isn't this because some have realised the potential and need for change and are chasing their own versions of the technology?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
[/
quote]

Just for clarity what is being manipulated and by whom? As a follow-up, why do you think that people can't make a decision as to what to do with the money they have (in most cases) earned?[/quote]

Please, no one except extreme libertarian fruitcakes thinks that (and I suspect a ponzi schemer would even get thrown off Peter Theil's Seasted nation).

I just searched for a little primer, and this isn't too bad:

https://www.ft.com/content/7c0152b4-0af ... 00779fd2ac

Who would have thought 20 years in the City doing those boring regulatory online quizes would have turned me into such a killjoy. But there you go.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3350
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:

That's a small part of it. There have been some terrible booms and busts in regulated markets. This appears to go way past that, and is global. It's getting a bit concerning that central banks are not making more definitive and coordinated statements on it.


There have been mutterings and national bank statements but I'd agree it hasn't been co-ordinated. Isn't this because some have realised the potential and need for change and are chasing their own versions of the technology?

The EU's position on it, as far as I'm aware, is that they are going to wait and see, since they view the innovations that will come from the blockchain revolution - and it is a revolution - as having the potential to be extremely valuable. Which is a sound position. That said, the extreme market manipulation is pretty obvious to anyone who's watching closely. I still feel that there will be a handful of survivors which do great things, and I hope I've picked one or two of them, but I have withdrawn my initial investment (which was not all that much) and put it into a property desposit. Now I just have to hope that I can get the rest of the finance together before the deposit term expires.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
bimboman wrote:
Quote:
Just for clarity what is being manipulated and by whom? As a follow-up, why do you think that people can't make a decision as to what to do with the money they have (in most cases) earned?


Large holders of Bitcoin and the exchanges they effectively own are supporting price levels , they're also making large amounts trading between "exchanges" using delays on cashing punters money in and out to profit from those time delays and price differences (this is being coordinated within the exchange owners and large "investors" );

Yes of course people can get their own cash out and use it as firewood if they like however, the rise of Bitcoin has been accompanied globally by a massive marketing campaign which is demonstrating tremendous dishonesty regarding what Bitcoin is and that it had various values which cannot all be true.


In 5 years (apart from one occasion), I have never waited longer than a few minutes to move crypto between exchanges.

Here is an example yesterday between Luno, a South African exchange and Bitstamp.

Transaction: https://blockchain.info/tx/dfaab952cc43 ... a358161bf6

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:

I don't have a wife? That said, I've been trading cryptocurrencies for more than 4 years.

<globusmode>In May 2014, the front page of our largest national newspaper (Sunday Times) business section i.e. the big story was an article about me and BTC trading</globusmode>

The point is that cryptocurrencies are already here and not going anywhere and sooner or later yourself (Bimbo, SON, etc) will be asking for the price of an item in sats :lol:


I know it goes with the territory in this particular and peculiar case (that of blockchain, bitcoin, and cryptocurrencies), but I can't recall when I've ever discussed something with someone where there has been such a category gulf. You are simply talking about something completely different from me.

You seem as far from geting my point as ever. That seems to be the most terrifying thing about this phenomenon.


Let me try.

Your concern is that a large number of uneducated (in terms of financial instruments) people are investing money in what appears at face value to be, excuse the pun, ether. They're doing this in a very unregulated market where devious financial intellects can manipulate and 'scam' them to the extent that they can lose a serious portion of their living money (i.e. beyond their savings). You clearly accept that the broader technology has value but would prefer tighter regulatory oversight to protect the aforesaid adopters.


That's a small part of it. There have been some terrible booms and busts in regulated markets. This appears to go way past that, and is global. It's getting a bit concerning that central banks are not making more definitive and coordinated statements on it.


There have been mutterings and national bank statements but I'd agree it hasn't been co-ordinated. Isn't this because some have realised the potential and need for change and are chasing their own versions of the technology?


In the battle between conspiracy and cockup always choose cockup.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
2 minutes is about a life time in finacial trading in mature markets, where 100's of seconds are worth millions of investments. That 2 minutes if you control the weight of movement allows,for enourmous front running.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_Boys


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
Seneca of the Night wrote:



Please, no one except extreme libertarian fruitcakes thinks that (and I suspect a ponzi schemer would even get thrown off Peter Theil's Seasted nation).

I just searched for a little primer, and this isn't too bad:

https://www.ft.com/content/7c0152b4-0af ... 00779fd2ac

Who would have thought 20 years in the City doing those boring regulatory online quizes would have turned me into such a killjoy. But there you go.


Love to read that but it's behind a paywall. But even considering financial regulation, the world driven by information has changed and financial institutions just simply can't move at the required pace. Most boredies on here live in the first world and don't experience things like migrant labour needing to send money back home NOW or even how banks rob the uneducated poor in countries like South Africa.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
Quote:


Why financial regulation is both difficult and essential
MARTIN WOLF Add to myFT

Read next
Allow the young to embrace an imperfect new year

Share on Twitter (opens new window)
Share on Facebook (opens new window)
Share on LinkedIn (opens new window)
Save Save to myFT
Martin Wolf

APRIL 15, 2008
Nice try; no cigar. That was my reaction to the attempt of the banking community to forestall additional regulation, by recommending “a suite of best practices to be embraced voluntarily”. It was also the reaction of the policymakers meeting in Washington over the weekend. More regulation is on its way. After frightening politicians and policymakers so badly, even the most optimistic banker must realise this. The question is whether the additional regulation will do any good.

In an interim report on “market best practices”, the Institute for International Finance, an association of bankers, offers devastating self-criticism.* Here then are some of the weaknesses it identifies: “deteriorating lending standards by certain originators of credit”; a “decline of underwriting standards”; an “excessive reliance on poorly understood, poorly performing and less than adequate ratings of structured products”; and “difficulties in identifying where exposures reside”. Would you buy a voluntary code from people who describe their own mistakes in this brutal manner? I thought not. There are two powerful additional reasons for not doing so.

First, in such a fiercely competitive business, a voluntary code is almost certainly not worth the paper it is written on. When they can get away with behaving irresponsibly, some will do so. This puts strong pressure on others. That is what Chuck Prince, former chief executive officer of Citigroup, meant when he told the FT that “as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance”. So, as Willem Buiter of the London School of Economics remarks: “Self-regulation stands in relation to regulation the way self-importance stands in relation to importance.”

Second, the industry has form. The IIF itself was founded in 1983 in response to the developing country debt crisis. At that time, big parts of the west’s banking system were in effect bankrupt. Now, many upsets later, we have reached the “subprime crisis”. The IIF was created not only to represent the industry, but to improve its performance. It is clear that this has not worked.

Do not just take my word for it. Last month, Carmen Reinhart of the University of Maryland and Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard published an extraordinary paper on the long history of financial crises.** The chart shows that the incidence of banking crises (measured by the proportion of countries affected) has been as high since 1980 as in any period since 1800; that the incidence of crises is correlated with liberalisation of capital flows; and that there was, until 2007, a decline in the incidence of crises in the 2000s.

Yet why, I ask, should this industry have apparently failed to improve its standards of performance over the past century? After all, almost every other industry has done so. Consider how confident we are that the food we buy will not poison us. Yet adulterated food was once a threat.

Consider, by those standards, the failures of the banking industry, as admitted by the IIF itself. Its purely operational performance is now impressive. But competition does not work well in finance. The “product” of the financial industry is promises for an uncertain future, marketed as dreams that can readily become nightmares. Customers are readily swept away by exaggerated promises, irrational beliefs, misplaced trust and sheer skulduggery. So, too, are practitioners: basing risk management on limited data and inadequate models is a good example. Emotions count wherever uncertainties loom.

Boeing would not survive if the aircraft it built fell out of the sky. Yet in the financial industry, huge blunders are also almost always made in common. If everybody is in the dance nobody is to blame and, in any case, governments, horrified by the consequences of a collapsing financial system, will come to the rescue.

Until last August, I comforted myself with the thought that many of the crises of the past quarter-century occurred in relatively backward financial systems, even if institutions of the first world played a part in “seducing minors”. So things might, I hoped, be getting better.

That is no longer a plausible view. Once the US itself ran a large current account deficit the concomitant accumulations of internal debt generated huge losses, as the excellent new Global Financial Stability Report from the International Monetary Fund points out. The one good thing is that estimated losses of close to $1,000bn are widely distributed (see charts). That makes today’s situation less transparent, sadly. But it also means that the pain is more widely, and so much more safely, shared.

What then is to be done now? Interestingly, there is substantial convergence on the substance between the IIF and the authorities, as shown in a devastatingly critical recent report from the Financial Stability Forum on “enhancing market and institutional resilience”.*** Both agree, for example, that structures of compensation matter, as both I and others have argued. Both agree, too, that risk management was appalling.


The agenda laid out in the official report is lengthy. It includes: strengthening prudential oversight of capital, liquidity and risk management; enhancing transparency; changing the role and uses of credit ratings; strengthening the authorities’ responsiveness to risk; and improving arrangements for dealing with stress. But, it should go without saying, policymakers also believe regulation must be tougher. Given the damage done and the extent of the safety net provided, no alternative exists.

Yet I am not that optimistic about regulation either. Regulators are doomed to close the stable doors behind financial institutions that always find new and more exciting ways of losing money. It is, for this reason, crucial that the institutions, and unsecured creditors, feel some pain: the burned child fears the fire; singeing is less effective. Yet the fire must never burn too far, since that might destroy the entire economy.

If regulation is to be effective, it must cover all relevant institutions and the entire balance sheet, in all significant countries; it must focus on capital, liquidity and transparency; and, not least, it must make finance less pro-cyclical. Will it ever work perfectly? Certainly not. It is impossible and probably even undesirable to create a crisis-free financial system. Crises will always be with us. But we can surely do far better than we have been doing. In any case, we are doomed to try.

*www.iif.com;
** ‘This time is different: a panoramic view of eight centuries of financial crises’, Working Paper 13882, March 2008, http://www.nber.org
*** http://www.bis.org


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Quote:


Why financial regulation is both difficult and essential
MARTIN WOLF Add to myFT

Read next
Allow the young to embrace an imperfect new year

Share on Twitter (opens new window)
Share on Facebook (opens new window)
Share on LinkedIn (opens new window)
Save Save to myFT
Martin Wolf

APRIL 15, 2008
Nice try; no cigar. That was my reaction to the attempt of the banking community to forestall additional regulation, by recommending “a suite of best practices to be embraced voluntarily”. It was also the reaction of the policymakers meeting in Washington over the weekend. More regulation is on its way. After frightening politicians and policymakers so badly, even the most optimistic banker must realise this. The question is whether the additional regulation will do any good.

In an interim report on “market best practices”, the Institute for International Finance, an association of bankers, offers devastating self-criticism.* Here then are some of the weaknesses it identifies: “deteriorating lending standards by certain originators of credit”; a “decline of underwriting standards”; an “excessive reliance on poorly understood, poorly performing and less than adequate ratings of structured products”; and “difficulties in identifying where exposures reside”. Would you buy a voluntary code from people who describe their own mistakes in this brutal manner? I thought not. There are two powerful additional reasons for not doing so.

First, in such a fiercely competitive business, a voluntary code is almost certainly not worth the paper it is written on. When they can get away with behaving irresponsibly, some will do so. This puts strong pressure on others. That is what Chuck Prince, former chief executive officer of Citigroup, meant when he told the FT that “as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance”. So, as Willem Buiter of the London School of Economics remarks: “Self-regulation stands in relation to regulation the way self-importance stands in relation to importance.”

Second, the industry has form. The IIF itself was founded in 1983 in response to the developing country debt crisis. At that time, big parts of the west’s banking system were in effect bankrupt. Now, many upsets later, we have reached the “subprime crisis”. The IIF was created not only to represent the industry, but to improve its performance. It is clear that this has not worked.

Do not just take my word for it. Last month, Carmen Reinhart of the University of Maryland and Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard published an extraordinary paper on the long history of financial crises.** The chart shows that the incidence of banking crises (measured by the proportion of countries affected) has been as high since 1980 as in any period since 1800; that the incidence of crises is correlated with liberalisation of capital flows; and that there was, until 2007, a decline in the incidence of crises in the 2000s.

Yet why, I ask, should this industry have apparently failed to improve its standards of performance over the past century? After all, almost every other industry has done so. Consider how confident we are that the food we buy will not poison us. Yet adulterated food was once a threat.

Consider, by those standards, the failures of the banking industry, as admitted by the IIF itself. Its purely operational performance is now impressive. But competition does not work well in finance. The “product” of the financial industry is promises for an uncertain future, marketed as dreams that can readily become nightmares. Customers are readily swept away by exaggerated promises, irrational beliefs, misplaced trust and sheer skulduggery. So, too, are practitioners: basing risk management on limited data and inadequate models is a good example. Emotions count wherever uncertainties loom.

Boeing would not survive if the aircraft it built fell out of the sky. Yet in the financial industry, huge blunders are also almost always made in common. If everybody is in the dance nobody is to blame and, in any case, governments, horrified by the consequences of a collapsing financial system, will come to the rescue.

Until last August, I comforted myself with the thought that many of the crises of the past quarter-century occurred in relatively backward financial systems, even if institutions of the first world played a part in “seducing minors”. So things might, I hoped, be getting better.

That is no longer a plausible view. Once the US itself ran a large current account deficit the concomitant accumulations of internal debt generated huge losses, as the excellent new Global Financial Stability Report from the International Monetary Fund points out. The one good thing is that estimated losses of close to $1,000bn are widely distributed (see charts). That makes today’s situation less transparent, sadly. But it also means that the pain is more widely, and so much more safely, shared.

What then is to be done now? Interestingly, there is substantial convergence on the substance between the IIF and the authorities, as shown in a devastatingly critical recent report from the Financial Stability Forum on “enhancing market and institutional resilience”.*** Both agree, for example, that structures of compensation matter, as both I and others have argued. Both agree, too, that risk management was appalling.


The agenda laid out in the official report is lengthy. It includes: strengthening prudential oversight of capital, liquidity and risk management; enhancing transparency; changing the role and uses of credit ratings; strengthening the authorities’ responsiveness to risk; and improving arrangements for dealing with stress. But, it should go without saying, policymakers also believe regulation must be tougher. Given the damage done and the extent of the safety net provided, no alternative exists.

Yet I am not that optimistic about regulation either. Regulators are doomed to close the stable doors behind financial institutions that always find new and more exciting ways of losing money. It is, for this reason, crucial that the institutions, and unsecured creditors, feel some pain: the burned child fears the fire; singeing is less effective. Yet the fire must never burn too far, since that might destroy the entire economy.

If regulation is to be effective, it must cover all relevant institutions and the entire balance sheet, in all significant countries; it must focus on capital, liquidity and transparency; and, not least, it must make finance less pro-cyclical. Will it ever work perfectly? Certainly not. It is impossible and probably even undesirable to create a crisis-free financial system. Crises will always be with us. But we can surely do far better than we have been doing. In any case, we are doomed to try.

*www.iif.com;
** ‘This time is different: a panoramic view of eight centuries of financial crises’, Working Paper 13882, March 2008, http://www.nber.org
*** http://www.bis.org


Cheers. Why not let people be their own 'bankers' for day to day transactions? I mean we pretty much are. We login, monitor our bank accounts and make payments as and when we need to or can.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3350
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:



Please, no one except extreme libertarian fruitcakes thinks that (and I suspect a ponzi schemer would even get thrown off Peter Theil's Seasted nation).

I just searched for a little primer, and this isn't too bad:

https://www.ft.com/content/7c0152b4-0af ... 00779fd2ac

Who would have thought 20 years in the City doing those boring regulatory online quizes would have turned me into such a killjoy. But there you go.


Love to read that but it's behind a paywall. But even considering financial regulation, the world driven by information has changed and financial institutions just simply can't move at the required pace. Most boredies on here live in the first world and don't experience things like migrant labour needing to send money back home NOW or even how banks rob the uneducated poor in countries like South Africa.



There may be a crypto currency which will be useful for poor migrant labour eventually, but Bitcoin really isn't it right now is it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3350
bimboman wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:



Please, no one except extreme libertarian fruitcakes thinks that (and I suspect a ponzi schemer would even get thrown off Peter Theil's Seasted nation).

I just searched for a little primer, and this isn't too bad:

https://www.ft.com/content/7c0152b4-0af ... 00779fd2ac

Who would have thought 20 years in the City doing those boring regulatory online quizes would have turned me into such a killjoy. But there you go.


Love to read that but it's behind a paywall. But even considering financial regulation, the world driven by information has changed and financial institutions just simply can't move at the required pace. Most boredies on here live in the first world and don't experience things like migrant labour needing to send money back home NOW or even how banks rob the uneducated poor in countries like South Africa.



There may be a crypto currency which will be useful for poor migrant labour eventually, but Bitcoin really isn't it right now is it.


OmiseGo is an attempt to facilitate remittances inside nations, from urban to rural areas, much like certain SMS based programs currently do in Africa, for instance. 'Is'. I should say might be...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


It's actually one of the most amazing things for me that crypto has done. It's brought technical analysis of markets into the more general public. I have people who I would never have thought wanting to discuss candles, volume, Bollinger Band squeezes, RSI, MACD and Ichimoku Clouds and showing a genuine interest in these and other trading strategies and signals.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
bimboman wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:



Please, no one except extreme libertarian fruitcakes thinks that (and I suspect a ponzi schemer would even get thrown off Peter Theil's Seasted nation).

I just searched for a little primer, and this isn't too bad:

https://www.ft.com/content/7c0152b4-0af ... 00779fd2ac

Who would have thought 20 years in the City doing those boring regulatory online quizes would have turned me into such a killjoy. But there you go.


Love to read that but it's behind a paywall. But even considering financial regulation, the world driven by information has changed and financial institutions just simply can't move at the required pace. Most boredies on here live in the first world and don't experience things like migrant labour needing to send money back home NOW or even how banks rob the uneducated poor in countries like South Africa.



There may be a crypto currency which will be useful for poor migrant labour eventually, but Bitcoin really isn't it right now is it.


No it isn't but we're long past just concentrating on Bitcoin.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3350
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.

Well, it's what everyone with a pension trusts someone else to do on their behalves... I'd rather do it myself. Thus democratization of speculation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


Plebs have always been able to do that though. From the sides of wharfs and grain markets in Roman times to the day traders of the 90s, through the bucket shops and penny stocks, and the B-Market listings and forex speculation that has always gone on. It's just very very risky, and most (nearly all) blow up.

Have you read the classic trading books by Jack Schwager? Definitely worth more than a look. One of the key takeaways from that is the importance of rules and coaches. I recall a BBC show from about 15 years back on hedge funds, and an interview with Michael Hintz. He said "do not do this without adult supervision."

Even then, Neiderhoffer blew up. And many do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
sorCrer wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


It's actually one of the most amazing things for me that crypto has done. It's brought technical analysis of markets into the more general public. I have people who I would never have thought wanting to discuss candles, volume, Bollinger Band squeezes, RSI, MACD and Ichimoku Clouds and showing a genuine interest in these and other trading strategies and signals.



Sorry, that's mostly the fake marketing and presentation that I object to most.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.


A pension? Something like 6% of South African's save enough for retirement. :(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
sorCrer wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


It's actually one of the most amazing things for me that crypto has done. It's brought technical analysis of markets into the more general public. I have people who I would never have thought wanting to discuss candles, volume, Bollinger Band squeezes, RSI, MACD and Ichimoku Clouds and showing a genuine interest in these and other trading strategies and signals.


That happens in every bubble you eejit. It's the signs of one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3350
Seneca of the Night wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


Plebs have always been able to do that though. From the sides of wharfs and grain markets in Roman times to the day traders of the 90s, through the bucket shops and penny stocks, and the B-Market listings and forex speculation that has always gone on. It's just very very risky, and most (nearly all) blow up.

Have you read the classic trading books by Jack Schwager? Definitely worth more than a look. One of the key takeaways from that is the importance of rules and coaches. I recall a BBC show from about 15 years back on hedge funds, and an interview with Michael Hintz. He said "do not do this without adult supervision."

Even then, Neiderhoffer blew up. And many do.

Yep. I see that. I personally have found it quite exhilarating, and to a certain extent empowering, but I do accept that it's risky. At the same time, you could make the same arguments about voting rights (and of course many did for centuries, and some are starting to again). I guess it's no secret that I have certain intellectual conceits, and it may bite me in the bum (although technically it can't now), but I don't see any reason to believe my ability to make predictions about what an imagined future may require, and bet on them, would be worse than a professional trader's. Hubris, perhaps, but I have, as I said, found it empowering.


Last edited by pontifex on Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
bimboman wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


It's actually one of the most amazing things for me that crypto has done. It's brought technical analysis of markets into the more general public. I have people who I would never have thought wanting to discuss candles, volume, Bollinger Band squeezes, RSI, MACD and Ichimoku Clouds and showing a genuine interest in these and other trading strategies and signals.



Sorry, that's mostly the fake marketing and presentation that I object to most.


Ripple just employed a Facebook Comms guy. The snake oil is strong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
pontifex wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.

Well, it's what everyone with a pension trusts someone else to do on their behalves... I'd rather do it myself. Thus democratization of speculation.



I manage my own SIPP.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
pontifex wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


Plebs have always been able to do that though. From the sides of wharfs and grain markets in Roman times to the day traders of the 90s, through the bucket shops and penny stocks, and the B-Market listings and forex speculation that has always gone on. It's just very very risky, and most (nearly all) blow up.

Have you read the classic trading books by Jack Schwager? Definitely worth more than a look. One of the key takeaways from that is the importance of rules and coaches. I recall a BBC show from about 15 years back on hedge funds, and an interview with Michael Hintz. He said "do not do this without adult supervision."

Even then, Neiderhoffer blew up. And many do.

Yep. I see that. I personally have found it quite exhilarating, and to a certain extent empowering, but I do accept that it's risky. At the same time, you could make the same arguments about voting rights (and of course many did for centuries, and some are starting to again).


Write some rules, find a buddy, don't make a trade without double approval.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:07 pm
Posts: 6910
pontifex wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.

Well, it's what everyone with a pension trusts someone else to do on their behalves... I'd rather do it myself. Thus democratization of speculation.


Really? You can open an IB account in 10 minutes and have it. I'm not sure what the point of this liberation is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


It's actually one of the most amazing things for me that crypto has done. It's brought technical analysis of markets into the more general public. I have people who I would never have thought wanting to discuss candles, volume, Bollinger Band squeezes, RSI, MACD and Ichimoku Clouds and showing a genuine interest in these and other trading strategies and signals.


That happens in every bubble you eejit. It's the signs of one.


These skills if learnt and understood are those applied in classical markets. Maybe after the 'crash' we'll end up with a generation of stock brokers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
sorCrer wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.


A pension? Something like 6% of South African's save enough for retirement. :(



Great, putting their small and even more valuable savings into a crypto currency seems even more wasteful.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3350
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.

Well, it's what everyone with a pension trusts someone else to do on their behalves... I'd rather do it myself. Thus democratization of speculation.



I manage my own SIPP.

You're a trader. I'm becoming one too, in my own small way, and I find it empowering.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
Rumham wrote:
pontifex wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.

Well, it's what everyone with a pension trusts someone else to do on their behalves... I'd rather do it myself. Thus democratization of speculation.


Really? You can open an IB account in 10 minutes and have it. I'm not sure what the point of this liberation is.


Well, you'd have to do KYC but you could. Except from my experience getting money in and out of it isn't that quick?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 52342
Seneca of the Night wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


Plebs have always been able to do that though. From the sides of wharfs and grain markets in Roman times to the day traders of the 90s, through the bucket shops and penny stocks, and the B-Market listings and forex speculation that has always gone on. It's just very very risky, and most (nearly all) blow up.

Have you read the classic trading books by Jack Schwager? Definitely worth more than a look. One of the key takeaways from that is the importance of rules and coaches. I recall a BBC show from about 15 years back on hedge funds, and an interview with Michael Hintz. He said "do not do this without adult supervision."

Even then, Neiderhoffer blew up. And many do.


Hintz..... Bloody stole every good idea he had.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


The super rich have been able to do that for the past decade or two no doubt, but we live in strange times. It is actually very difficult to maintain a fortune over more than about three generations. Particularly once the idiot grandchildren really get hold of it. Bismark used to spend a lot of time thinking about this and it's written up in a couple of interesting books by Barton Biggs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:07 pm
Posts: 6910
pontifex wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.

Well, it's what everyone with a pension trusts someone else to do on their behalves... I'd rather do it myself. Thus democratization of speculation.



I manage my own SIPP.

You're a trader. I'm becoming one too, in my own small way, and I find it empowering.


Christ almighty man, get a grip. The avenues to speculating on your own were opened years ago. This crypto fad has certainly been profitable to early adopters but it is nonsense at it's core. You can go take some cash and invest in a myriad of ways without having to be a financial wizard.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10016
bimboman wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.


A pension? Something like 6% of South African's save enough for retirement. :(



Great, putting their small and even more valuable savings into a crypto currency seems even more wasteful.


No they won't be. I'm just sadly pointing out how rare pensions etc are in SA. Investmenting in our rural communities is basically done through stokvel's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stokvel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


It's actually one of the most amazing things for me that crypto has done. It's brought technical analysis of markets into the more general public. I have people who I would never have thought wanting to discuss candles, volume, Bollinger Band squeezes, RSI, MACD and Ichimoku Clouds and showing a genuine interest in these and other trading strategies and signals.


That happens in every bubble you eejit. It's the signs of one.


These skills if learnt and understood are those applied in classical markets. Maybe after the 'crash' we'll end up with a generation of stock brokers.


The Icelandics went back to their fishing boats.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33287
bimboman wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).


Plebs have always been able to do that though. From the sides of wharfs and grain markets in Roman times to the day traders of the 90s, through the bucket shops and penny stocks, and the B-Market listings and forex speculation that has always gone on. It's just very very risky, and most (nearly all) blow up.

Have you read the classic trading books by Jack Schwager? Definitely worth more than a look. One of the key takeaways from that is the importance of rules and coaches. I recall a BBC show from about 15 years back on hedge funds, and an interview with Michael Hintz. He said "do not do this without adult supervision."

Even then, Neiderhoffer blew up. And many do.


Hintz..... Bloody stole every good idea he had.


Aussies. Can't trust em.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:07 pm
Posts: 6910
sorCrer wrote:
Rumham wrote:
pontifex wrote:
bimboman wrote:
pontifex wrote:
I think there's something to my brainfart the other day about the democratization of speculation afforded by crypto. Why shouldn't the plebs also be able to play liar's poker (albeit on steroids) if they understand the risks? It was genuinely bizarre to sit for a few days watching my 'wealth' accumulate without any intervention by me, and I realised that that's essentially what the superrich do (obviously with the difference that their starting investments are much larger, and the incremental gains proportionally lower).



It's what everyone with a pension does. It isn't the preserve of the super rich at all.

Well, it's what everyone with a pension trusts someone else to do on their behalves... I'd rather do it myself. Thus democratization of speculation.


Really? You can open an IB account in 10 minutes and have it. I'm not sure what the point of this liberation is.


Well, you'd have to do KYC but you could. Except from my experience getting money in and out of it isn't that quick?


You make an application to open an account, they accept it. Then you are on your own. Why are you so hung up on KYC and speed of getting money in and out?

They even have bitcoin futures on there now..,


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2214 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 ... 56  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Achahoish, Bing [Bot], CrazyIslander, free_safety, frillage, Google Adsense [Bot], holbob, inactionman, Jeff the Bear, Joost, LandOTurk, Masterji, Mullet 2, Nieghorn, pigaaaa, plastic frog, Raggs, redderneck, SaintK, swissguy, Uthikoloshe, Yourmother, ZappaMan, zt1903 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group