Thursday, October 31, 2024

The last person into a speculative frenzy such as bitcoin never gets out before it’s too late

December 23, 2017 by  
Filed under Choosing Lingerie

Comments Off

<!– –>



A customer enters the offices of La Maison du Bitcoin bank in Paris, France.

A few nights ago I got a phone call from the mother of one of my son’s friends. She is a child psychologist, and her husband works in IT for a major bank.

She had been discussing cryptocurrencies with her husband, and they decided it might be a good idea to consult with me before taking a flier on one or two of the lesser known cryptos that had not yet rallied as much as bitcoin, bitcoin cash, litecoin or ethereum.

I expressed my long-held concerns about this “asset class” and suggested that if they decided to invest (speculate) in the one or two they were exploring that they should do it with money they could afford to lose.

I looked at the two they were thinking of getting into, took $5,000 and decided that, what the hell, I probably should take a swing myself, knowing a few people personally who have made a fortune in bitcoin.

The two currencies I examined were priced in the pennies. I thought if I bought one of the least expensive offerings, I could control 50,000 coins. If it were simply to rise to $100 per coin, I’d gross $5 million. A king’s ransom for a few days’, weeks’, months’ or even a year’s work.

Then I thought a little more. Having failed to make a Rip Van Winklevoss billion, as I slept through bitcoin’s 10-year rally, I surmised that such a purchase on my part would absolutely mark a top in the cryptocurrency craze.

I’ve seen this movie before. At the height of the internet bubble, some of my colleagues and I were trying to decide if we should remain as business journalists on cable television, or join some of our colleagues in start-up dot.com ventures that focused on web-delivered business news.

Thankfully, many of us were bound to contracts and couldn’t simply leave our posts to join the young and restless.

One of our colleagues, from another service, had joined a start-up business site and was worth $9 million the very first day that dotcom went public.

When he left a couple years later, that $9 million was worth about $100,000. In the interim, we had kept our jobs, gotten raises and bonuses and, most important, had dodged a bullet that all but killed those who ran to make their instant fortunes.

As I write this, bitcoin has gone through its fifth 30-plus-percent correction this year. While prices remain fluid, the main cryptocurrency has lost as much as 45 percent of its value this week alone.

In the “old days” we’d call that a crash.

The key question, now that we know that litecoin’s founder dumped his whole stash; now that futures have made the price of bitcoin move in more than one direction; and now that the margin buyer has entered the market, is whether the bubble has burst, or if this is just the big pause that refreshes.

Certainly, the underlying blockchain technology is not only disruptive to financial systems, but also likely a transformational technology that will radically alter the speed, efficiency, cost and transparency around all manner of financial transactions.

But will cryptocurrencies themselves be a required component of this new functionality? The Federal Reserve and the Treasury can borrow the technology to create “digital dollars,” which have all the attendant prerequisites to be considered legal tender.

As yet, bitcoin and other cryptos lack the three defining characteristics of money: a unit of account; a medium of exchange, and a storehouse of value.

Cryptocurrency enthusiasts argued that bitcoin and the like, at the very least, represented the latter, calling bitcoin “millennial gold.”

Even that barbarous relic has had its share of speculative episodes, the most memorable in the 1970s and early ’80s and then again in the mid-2000s.

Nothing goes up forever. Trees don’t grow to the sky, as they say on Wall Street. And the last person into a speculative frenzy never gets out before it’s too late.

Happily, I followed my own advice and didn’t play this late in the game. I’m certainly more than a little miffed that I didn’t follow the lead of one of my friends who bought bitcoin at $300.

However, I’m also happy that I didn’t follow another friend who got to the party just as the punch bowl was taken away.



Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Trump’s ambassador to the Netherlands just got caught lying about the Dutch

December 23, 2017 by  
Filed under Choosing Lingerie

Comments Off

A Dutch journalist just asked new U.S. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra why he said there are “no go” areas in the Netherlands, where radical Muslims are setting cars and politicians on fire.

Hoekstra denied it, and called the claim “fake news.”

The report cut to a video clip of Hoekstra at a 2015 conference hosted by the David Horowitz Freedom Center saying: “The Islamic movement has now gotten to a point where they have put Europe into chaos. Chaos in the Netherlands, there are cars being burned, there are politicians that are being burned.”

“And yes, there are no-go zones in the Netherlands,” he added in the clip.

Then things got extremely weird.

When the reporter pressed, Hoekstra denied using the term “fake news,” which he’d uttered moments before.

“I didn’t call that fake news,” he said. “I didn’t use the words today. I don’t think I did.”

Hoekstra was being interviewed by reporter Wouter Zwart for current affairs program Nieuwsuur. The interview is not playing well in the Netherlands. (One sample headline: “The new Trump Ambassador to the Netherlands, Pete Hoekstra, lies about his own lies.”)

But the former congressman was always going to be a tough sell for one of Europe’s most liberal countries.

Though Hoekstra was born in the Netherlands, his family emigrated to Michigan when we was a toddler. He served as a Republican congressman for a decade and a half, eventually chairing the House Intelligence Committee.

In that time, he adopted several positions that are at odds with core Dutch values. Hoekstra is opposed to same-sex marriage and gay rights. In Congress, he voted repeatedly to limit women’s rights to abortion. He supports the death penalty and has argued passionately that refugees are a threat to European security.

Hoekstra has given several talks at the anti-Islam American Freedom Alliance, which has also hosted Dutch far-right leader Geert Wilders. In 2015, Hoekstra blamed a “secret jihad” for the “chaos” in the Netherlands.

After Trump announced Hoekstra’s appointment, Dutch newspaper de Volkskrant observed that Trump “put a Dutchman in the Netherlands — but it is a Dutchman from the Netherlands of the ’50s.”

Of the appointment, liberal politician Sophie in ’t Veld said: “We are looking forward with interest to cooperating with Mr. Hoekstra. We will certainly remind him his roots lie in a country that values tolerance, equality and inclusion. … We expect the representative of our friend and ally the United States to fully and wholly respect our values and to show that respect in all his acts and words.”

Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated where Hoekstra made his remarks.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS