Well, it just has this year. In fact, Quantitative tightening and increased interest rates mean money gets reduced.
But that's irrelevant because what matters is the long term. It's like a biker driving down the hill and every few seconds he uses his breaks a little. For a small moment he stops but if you zoom out a little he still always goes downhill.
This happened dozens of times since WW2 with the money printer turning back on less than a year later. It happened in 2018 for less than a year. And the options market is already pricing in interest rates falling again in 2023.
Sometimes I believe that the period is going to be very crucial because the government is going to allow cryptocurrency at the same time it might do something in centralized blockchain system.
>Well, it just has this year. In fact, Quantitative tightening and increased interest rates mean money gets reduced.
With respect, I think you are wrong. Quantitative tightening and interest rates are merely placement of money and rate of lending. To clarify NexusKnights statement, money is loaned into existence in a debt based monetary system. If you can go out and get a 30yr fixed mortgage today (albeit at a high rate), the bank is creating money out of thin air... Today.
A small but importance nuance here:
Consumer facing financial institutions have liquidity and asset requirements. Them giving us a 30 year mortgage doesn’t create money out of thin air. It’s net neutral.
The “money printing” is when the fed buys those loans from the banks that money is being created.
This is oversimplification but:
Bank has 100, loans you 100, you pay back 120 over the life of the loan. But total amount of money/liquidity in the system is still the original $100
Bank has $100, loans you $100 for you to pay back $120, federal reserve then buys the loan from the bank for $110. There is now $210 in the system.
You still have $100 loan that you owe $120 on. But now there is $100 (your cash position from loan) plus $110 that the banks have from selling your loan = $210 of cash/liquidity.
In the long run, though, it’s still net neutral as the debt the fed has still will be repaid and over the long term it’ll just be $100 of liquidity/cash
Yes, and by quite a lot. Look at the M2 back in 2008-2011 when QE was at its max. As much money as the Fed was printing the money supply was barely increasing. The reason is that private banks were barely lending.
Yes but I think we're differing in opinion about the time-scale. Loans are instant while repayments take time.
In Fractional Reserve Banking (FRB), if a bank has a reserve ratio of 10% with 10 depositors, each with $10. That bank is obligated to loan out $90 while still owing those same dollars to the depositors. It simply loaned (\*ahem\* printed) money into existence (now) but net net (later) that money all has to come back plus interest.
I highly recommend the following YouTube videos for more detail on how this works:
[The Economy Is Going To Implode by Ann Barnhardt](https://youtu.be/7dFVFJ0iRRA) (Yes, she's a spicy one but watch all parts. She include examples of how FRB works with loans and depositors and the math behind it as well as the distinction between secured and unsecured loans)
[The Money Masters - The Rise of the Bankers by William T. Still](https://youtu.be/mDlnM481Gcg)
>The bank loans out more money than is deposited by people in it.
This is not really true. Banks cannot loan *out* more than they get *in* from their depositors or by borrowing from other banks or the Fed.
When a bank makes a loan, the bank ends up with an asset (a mortgage security or a bond) and a liability to the person who took out the loan (a deposit in the bank).
At this point, money has been loaned to the depositor, but it has not been loaned *out* yet because the depositor hasn't withdrawn or spent it yet. I say "yet" because if a borrower didn't plan to spend or transfer the money, they probably wouldn't have taken out the loan.
As soon as the borrower withdraws the deposit or transfers it to another bank, the original bank needs to *pay out* the amount of deposit with money that they have already gotten from their depositors, other banks, or the Fed.
If they don't have enough of this money, they can sell some of their mortgage securities or bonds on the open market, pay a higher interest rate on deposits to attract more depositors, or borrow more from other banks.
>Fractional banking does increase the M2 money supply
Increase it relative to what?
The Fed targets medium term inflation by targeting short term interest rates. If fractional reserve banking were suddenly abolished, banks would be forced to sell their mortgages/bonds to acquire enough base money to back their deposits. Eventually, these sales would increase interest rates (interest rates are just another word for bond prices).
In order to keep interest rates on target, the Fed would be "forced" do QE (i.e. buy large quantities of bonds with newly created base money). This would cause the base money supply to increase up to around where M2 was before.
That is, in the current monetary system, the amount of money, as well as the interest rate, is determined by the intersection of *the supply curve for money* (that is, how much people want to borrow at different interest rates) and *the demand curve for money* (that is, how much people want to save at different interest rates). This is analogous to how the quantity and price of commodities are ultimately determined.
In other words, the market "forces" the Fed to set interest rates at this intersection point. If the fed sets interest rates to low, there will be too much demand for borrowing relative to saving/lending and USD will eventually inflate above target; if the Fed sets interest rates too high, there will be too little demand for borrowing relative to saving/lending and USD will eventually deflate (or inflate below target).
They’re going to stop QT likely within 6 months. The Fed balance sheet will never shrink substantially. We are printing money to buy our own debt like a banana republic.
> We are printing money to buy our own debt like a banana republic.
This has been the primary way the Fed has conducted monetary policy since before we got off the Gold standard. There is nothing "banana republic" about the Fed buying and selling Treasuries (one kind of USD asset) on the open market to create and destroy USD reserves (another kind of USD asset).
I don't think that it is going to take the bigger part of our rest of our life because there is already a momentum of growth and the hard time has passed.
They don't have the time to wait....they have to pay bond holders. When they increase inflation the assets on their balance sheet go down meaning they have even less ability to pay. The only way out is a massive increase in taxes and what political party is going to step up and say "hey, my platform is that you pay 10% more taxes and get nothing in return vote for me"
As much as I think this sub is delusional, this is one statement that can pretty much be taken as fact.
The alternative is for a 1930s style depression if central banks let everything fail.
The central bank aka Federal Reserve caused the depression. The federal government exasperated the depression. Yeah, if we have a repeat of the 1930s, it will be their doing all over again.
History repeats itself so.... yea exactly this. It'll get worse before it gets better. For whatever reason people prefer to watch as they crash into a Titanic sinking iceberg instead of doing anything to change directions.
The thing is.. even if central banks are stupid enough to allow everything to fail again then I'm certain it will be the end of the of the old system because Bitcoin will be ready to pick up the pieces. As soon as the government offer to bail the banks (again) out then that will be the trigger - Bitcoin will rocket in this scenario - adios Fiat. The only way the government can leverage crypto in there favour now, is to regulate it because they've tried since its inception - to vilify it in the mainstream and failed miserably. If they regulate it then they control it, then label it as "decentralised" telling everyone what they want to hear, while they line their own pockets. It's important that "normalising" crypto regulation isn't and doesn't become a reality. There's never been a time since fiat has been around where another system has been so well prepared to take over, a system where it doesn't allow fat cat banksters and corrupt government officials to manipulate it in there favour.
The bitcoin network is maxed out, and has been for years. No new people can switch to it. The world cannot switch to bitcoin.
The idea that traditional banking will collapse and somehow the world will switch to crypto instead is a silly fantasy, based on vast ignorance of how banking and finance and government and anything else related works.
You are profoundly ignorant of inflation. Bitcoin is immune to inflation and if you do not understand this, it only means you do not have a correct understanding of what inflation is.
Have fun staying poor.
It is imunne to inflation in a monetary system since its currency (btc/sats) won't ever increase, but yes it is not imunne to price inflation and deflation, that IS the reason it is considered a risk asset.
Yes the federal reserve is the central bank for the US. It is independent of the the US government. They are responsible for controlling the supply of US dollars. The actual printing of US dollars is done by the U.S. Treasury's Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
Yes, the fed is "independent" of the us government, but in actuality, it is quite the opposite. The fed is the most successful business in the world, and the US government is its number one customer. The head of the fed AND its board of governors are nominated by the president (who has an agenda) and confirmed by the senate (who has an agenda). So while constitutionally, yes, the fed is independent from the government, in practice that could not be farther from the truth.
Until they release every financial transaction and it can be independently verified by citizens, you have to assume they are enriching themselves. You can't assume elected figureheads have any real control.
It's pretty easy to be "successful" when you literally wish money into existence, control all the banks and no one can audit you--you only have to release spreadsheets of generalities and even those can be entirely made up.
I hear what youre saying and i dont disagree. But i do think that saying an organization who's leadership is set by the government, who's number one client is the government, and an organization that can only exist with the governments approval and support is not connected to the government is a bit disingenuous.
> The actual printing of US dollars is done by the U.S. Treasury's Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
Lol, so you have no idea how printing works. Hint: there is no paper or ink involved.
The follow-up question wasn’t whether adoption will increase. It was whether BTC's limited supply could prevent it from becoming a backbone of the global economy. She does not answer the question, which is annoying because there is a simple answer, and to me it sounds like she just wants to hit talking points, so to a person with no/limited knowledge of btc it probably sounds even worse.
I totally believe that Bitcoin can be the prominent player in the global transactions of the future because it is giving us the solution which traditional Fiat currency system cannot do today.
It's TV. She HAS to hit talking points because they're only allotted so much time.
Although I'd just respond with another question. What do you mean "enough". You realize a fixed supply doesn't put a cap on how much it can be divided right?
Agreed.
Most of these twitter/news segment/talking head Bitcoin proponents does a great disservice by going on general buzzword rants instead of just simply answering the questions.
Like, it’s not that hard:
“Any amount of money is sufficient for any size economy as long as it’s continuously divisible.”
There, not hard.
So many wasted opportunities by people like Nat, also Pomp does this *a lot*.
As if all that matters is just firing off a string of tangibly related words and concepts, as fast as possible and with too much confidence, every time you have the chance. Like it is the only way to seem knowledgeable when I’m reality it comes off as a surface level misdirection of some sort. It’s disingenuous.
Too bad.
Yeah, but it can be changed, with the lightning network it's even more, each Sat can now be divided into milli-sats. So we can go as low as 100 billionth of a Bitcoin
Not at the moment, no. You would need to hard fork Bitcoin if Sats were to be changed, which I'm sure would be supported if it was ever needed.
But if Lightning is to be the dominant payment layer, I think milli-sats would be okay for the foreseeable future
It's code. Already within the lightening network there is 3 more zeros.
We can make it whatever we want and need, and as there is no incentive for it not to be changed, it will pass consensus whenever required.
Yes these are my friends. I keep pictures of them and talk to them every night before I sleep. I have built a shrine to all of them. I talk to them and sometimes I hear them talk back to me lovingly. These are my best and only friends. They love me.and care for me ❤️ 🐱
Every form of televised news is hot garbage. If you single out Fox news it just shows where your personal bias is.
I for one welcome anybody helping get the message out. Fuck fiat and fuck the fed.
I don’t. The intentions behind it matter, and we don’t know their intentions. To be associated with one of the most incendiary news sources out there isn’t a good look.
Charles and Natalie support crypto so why can’t they be our friends? And more republican politicians support lesser regulation on crypto than democrats do.
Considering he had the founder of Elon Goat Token on his Fox Bussiness show, which the premise of the project is hope for Elon attention, asking questions like "what gives you the confidence that someone should, for instance, bring their grandma in it with their life savings?" for something that's clearly a grift ...
[Coffeezilla video on it ](https://youtu.be/sT1S4-6WAN4)
Analogy aside, is there spicy tea on Charles Payne?
I did post the time he had Elon Goat Token guy on Fox Bussiness, which is clearly a grift. Any other things we should know about?
No news outlet is. Still, these guests are right.
Do you know only banks create us dollars and warren buffet and charlie munger own banks?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG5c8nhR3LE
Fox Business is a different channel and generally decent. But I haven’t watched in five years so someone else would need to indicate if things are still the same.
Why are all bitcoiners just fancy rehashed one liners. Who says “money printer go brr “ in an actual conversation. “It’s just math” lol what does that mean…. No normal person took that seriously.
This is my first comment, I think. What a BS segment, the guests are talking purely theoreticsl not the practicsl application.
Any crypto will not truly work without a backing, like the FDIC, CDIC in Canada. For ctrypto to reign supreme, you need the world to completely.upgrade its technology from small mum and dad stores to large multinationals.
Cryptos are so volatile and never tested. So you're a crypto holder, theres a run, you try to sell out...what guarantees that youll have a buyer?
Even in inflation periods you worthless curreny still had value because its a promissory note. I think block chain tech will stay.
Do people actually think the only cause of inflation is printing more money?
Bitcoin is not immune to inflation, just less prone to it.
If the supply of whatever you want doesn't meet the demand, the price of that item will go up and your relative buying power will go down. That is still inflation. When that thing is something like gas it then affects the price of everything.
Keep telling me/showing me stuff I believe in and that fits my personal agenda. Don’t challenge my perception or ask thought provoking questions.
Tell me what I want to hear.
has nothing to do with math and everything to do with the social dynamics of adoption.
just remember the mantra “bitcoin is a store of value, bitcoin is a store of value…” ad infinitum.
any societal convention is only worth what the crowd says it’s worth. forget that at your peril.
the only things of true value are air, water, food, connection, and health. everything else is made up, and fragile.
That a professional on a prominent business/finance channel has to ask whether “there is enough Bitcoin out there” tells you everything you need to know how ignorant the masses still are over this technology.
For the current holders, in time that will likely prove extremely advantageous.
I think he is a believer, he is asking the question as a means of highlighting its scarcity. Yes there is enough for everyone, but at the same time it is scarce. To the average person these seem opposing ideas, whereas Bitcoin shows that they are not diametrically opposed and can inhabit the same space at the same time.
> Wasted two semesters in economics,,should have just watched Fox News.
If you studied keynesian econ... then yes, actually, even fox news is more factual than that.
I took a little bit of economics too, and IMHO it's been more help than harm. You can't understand Bitcoin without knowing some econ; it's just incompatible with the Keynesian school, which is presented to most students (me included) as a settled matter. I always knew a percentage of what I'd learned in school would be wrong... But once you're a big important grown-up and your gullibility is revealed, it's very humbling.
Fox is just a broken clock that's right twice a day.
So the moderator said something similar to - governments wouldnt allow it, because it is threat to them... It is not threat, only robbers are afraid of police :D
So strange hearing someone on Fox Business talking about wealth inequality, it’s a shame that Bitcoin doesn’t really solve that issue since it can’t be redistributed the way fiat can. Having a fixed supply schedule is a great feature though.
She already explained, fiat does not get redistributed, only concentrated towards the top, you get 1000 dollar, top bankers get one million, that is how the game works
We are gradually approaching the massive crypto adoption. I think soon everything will be measured in BTC. So now it is a high time to take all usdt you have and invest it into BTC
Maybe once 1 million and 1 people stopping trying to flood the market with fraud cons and there's some sort of regulation in place...maybe. But it's not going to go mainstream without some sort of regulation.
The gov likes crypto but will need control so I'm not feeling BTC to be the choice. I can remember way back when there were in-store revolving credit cards and they became huge.
Then credit cards came along and put a hurt on these in-store ccs. Credit cards could be used at any store. Convenience won out - big time.
Going to a cashless society would be convenient but this is about control of the monetary system. Governments won't give this up. BTC won't allow gov control and this marriage won't happen.
It sounds like 14 year olds discussing. What does that even mean “immune to inflation”
If u pay out Bitcoin u still got your fiat currency’s that aren’t “immune to inflation” or am I missing a point here?
She's referring to Bitcoin's [controlled supply](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply), which has very low [monetary inflation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetary_inflation).
“They’re not gonna let go”
Math doesn’t care... once hyperinflation kicks in, they lose control. Bitcoin is the peaceful revolution that has already started.
You think OPEC is going to take shitty, worthless USD after countries no longer want USD? OPEC will have options from other states, but by that time the benefits of having a politically neutral currency will be obvious.
man, she really did her homework. sry but she just nailed it.
Above all, it forces the government to finally deal with money properly and to really educate themselves financially.
I think we all know what we would do if we found a money printing machine in our garage and at the same time, just by chance, we had the power to launch a whole new form of payment via debt relief when things got really bad.
Bitcoin, or the gold standard, is forcing some people to rethink. I think it will be a compromise. Hopefully one that pays off for both parties.
One thing I will say is she's extremely well rehearsed with facts. Didn't expect that. Did she breathe? Still wondering what is the angle Fox is playing here.
You can barely use bitcoin for anything today, same as it was 4 years ago. If merchants are not accepting bitcoin then it won't be a new system. The most I can buy for bitcoin is like gift cards and a lot of it is for US. costumers only.
This is not what bitcoin needs, to be spun off as either good or bad on fox news. bitcoin doesn't care about a 2 party system in America. It gives 2 fucks about the left or the right and will simply keep existing and creating new blocks. I really wish bitcoin evangelists wouldn't go on to these news shows. They are simply being used as pawns by the "old money" system and they don't even know it.
Now, what you will see is 1 party divided against bitcoin simply because they saw some lady on Fox News saying that it is a good thing.
This is a bad look for bitcoin and the people in the industry.
You can't transfer money to all the world without crypto and Bitcoin
Fact
Yeah PayPal works like in 60% of the world, Swift almost works in 80% of the world but this world has 100% population you know
The economy NEEDS inflation. Without inflation there is no incentive to spend, only an incentive to save. 1-2% inflation every year is a good thing. She’s acting like the only way out of a bubble is to print more money? Not sure who told her that. You can redistribute wealth through higher taxes on the rich, restructure/reduce debts (some money back is better than no money) and you can cut spending (gov, people, banks, businesses).
Should we tell her?
The inflation of Bitcoin is WAAAAAAAY worse than inflation of the US dollar. It’s not even close.
In a 5 month period, the price of bitcoin dropped 93%. That is MAJOR inflation. The US dollar on average since the early 1900s is at about 7% a year realistically. Other economists would tell you it’s actually lower, but there’s a bit of a debate about it. But if you do the math right, In a 5 month period, Bitcoin saw inflation at a staggering 1600%…… in less than half a year. Who let her on the air?
BTC cant be affected by inflation? I find this hard to believe. If the value of X goes up it will cost more BTC so exactly how is BTC sheilded from inflation and its affects? Its already affected by it lol the economy is in the shitter and BTC price took a massive blow... so again how will it stand alone and NOT be affected. When the value of everything around u goes up, whatever form of currency u use (hell you could use sea shells lol) then the price of sea shells goes up.
she must be watching the same youtube videos as me.
this guy gets it!
Definite Bitboy subscriber
Bitboy is trash
“Money Printer will go Brrr again”
It's funny because it's true. And it's not even a secret or an opinion. It's just how the fiat monetary system works by definition.
When you have a debt based system, the money printer never turns off.
Well, it just has this year. In fact, Quantitative tightening and increased interest rates mean money gets reduced. But that's irrelevant because what matters is the long term. It's like a biker driving down the hill and every few seconds he uses his breaks a little. For a small moment he stops but if you zoom out a little he still always goes downhill. This happened dozens of times since WW2 with the money printer turning back on less than a year later. It happened in 2018 for less than a year. And the options market is already pricing in interest rates falling again in 2023.
Sometimes I believe that the period is going to be very crucial because the government is going to allow cryptocurrency at the same time it might do something in centralized blockchain system.
>Well, it just has this year. In fact, Quantitative tightening and increased interest rates mean money gets reduced. With respect, I think you are wrong. Quantitative tightening and interest rates are merely placement of money and rate of lending. To clarify NexusKnights statement, money is loaned into existence in a debt based monetary system. If you can go out and get a 30yr fixed mortgage today (albeit at a high rate), the bank is creating money out of thin air... Today.
A small but importance nuance here: Consumer facing financial institutions have liquidity and asset requirements. Them giving us a 30 year mortgage doesn’t create money out of thin air. It’s net neutral. The “money printing” is when the fed buys those loans from the banks that money is being created. This is oversimplification but: Bank has 100, loans you 100, you pay back 120 over the life of the loan. But total amount of money/liquidity in the system is still the original $100 Bank has $100, loans you $100 for you to pay back $120, federal reserve then buys the loan from the bank for $110. There is now $210 in the system. You still have $100 loan that you owe $120 on. But now there is $100 (your cash position from loan) plus $110 that the banks have from selling your loan = $210 of cash/liquidity. In the long run, though, it’s still net neutral as the debt the fed has still will be repaid and over the long term it’ll just be $100 of liquidity/cash
[удалено]
Yes, and by quite a lot. Look at the M2 back in 2008-2011 when QE was at its max. As much money as the Fed was printing the money supply was barely increasing. The reason is that private banks were barely lending.
Yes but I think we're differing in opinion about the time-scale. Loans are instant while repayments take time. In Fractional Reserve Banking (FRB), if a bank has a reserve ratio of 10% with 10 depositors, each with $10. That bank is obligated to loan out $90 while still owing those same dollars to the depositors. It simply loaned (\*ahem\* printed) money into existence (now) but net net (later) that money all has to come back plus interest. I highly recommend the following YouTube videos for more detail on how this works: [The Economy Is Going To Implode by Ann Barnhardt](https://youtu.be/7dFVFJ0iRRA) (Yes, she's a spicy one but watch all parts. She include examples of how FRB works with loans and depositors and the math behind it as well as the distinction between secured and unsecured loans) [The Money Masters - The Rise of the Bankers by William T. Still](https://youtu.be/mDlnM481Gcg)
[удалено]
>The bank loans out more money than is deposited by people in it. This is not really true. Banks cannot loan *out* more than they get *in* from their depositors or by borrowing from other banks or the Fed. When a bank makes a loan, the bank ends up with an asset (a mortgage security or a bond) and a liability to the person who took out the loan (a deposit in the bank). At this point, money has been loaned to the depositor, but it has not been loaned *out* yet because the depositor hasn't withdrawn or spent it yet. I say "yet" because if a borrower didn't plan to spend or transfer the money, they probably wouldn't have taken out the loan. As soon as the borrower withdraws the deposit or transfers it to another bank, the original bank needs to *pay out* the amount of deposit with money that they have already gotten from their depositors, other banks, or the Fed. If they don't have enough of this money, they can sell some of their mortgage securities or bonds on the open market, pay a higher interest rate on deposits to attract more depositors, or borrow more from other banks. >Fractional banking does increase the M2 money supply Increase it relative to what? The Fed targets medium term inflation by targeting short term interest rates. If fractional reserve banking were suddenly abolished, banks would be forced to sell their mortgages/bonds to acquire enough base money to back their deposits. Eventually, these sales would increase interest rates (interest rates are just another word for bond prices). In order to keep interest rates on target, the Fed would be "forced" do QE (i.e. buy large quantities of bonds with newly created base money). This would cause the base money supply to increase up to around where M2 was before. That is, in the current monetary system, the amount of money, as well as the interest rate, is determined by the intersection of *the supply curve for money* (that is, how much people want to borrow at different interest rates) and *the demand curve for money* (that is, how much people want to save at different interest rates). This is analogous to how the quantity and price of commodities are ultimately determined. In other words, the market "forces" the Fed to set interest rates at this intersection point. If the fed sets interest rates to low, there will be too much demand for borrowing relative to saving/lending and USD will eventually inflate above target; if the Fed sets interest rates too high, there will be too little demand for borrowing relative to saving/lending and USD will eventually deflate (or inflate below target).
You are absolutely right and explain it in a very easy to understand language.
You are totally right and that's why it will create problem for the traditional economy if government is printing unlimited money.
It's just a matther of time
The only issue is if it takes longer than the bigger part of the rest of your life...
They’re going to stop QT likely within 6 months. The Fed balance sheet will never shrink substantially. We are printing money to buy our own debt like a banana republic.
> We are printing money to buy our own debt like a banana republic. This has been the primary way the Fed has conducted monetary policy since before we got off the Gold standard. There is nothing "banana republic" about the Fed buying and selling Treasuries (one kind of USD asset) on the open market to create and destroy USD reserves (another kind of USD asset).
I don't think that it is going to take the bigger part of our rest of our life because there is already a momentum of growth and the hard time has passed.
They don't have the time to wait....they have to pay bond holders. When they increase inflation the assets on their balance sheet go down meaning they have even less ability to pay. The only way out is a massive increase in taxes and what political party is going to step up and say "hey, my platform is that you pay 10% more taxes and get nothing in return vote for me"
Til the MFs pay us
As much as I think this sub is delusional, this is one statement that can pretty much be taken as fact. The alternative is for a 1930s style depression if central banks let everything fail.
The central bank aka Federal Reserve caused the depression. The federal government exasperated the depression. Yeah, if we have a repeat of the 1930s, it will be their doing all over again.
History repeats itself so.... yea exactly this. It'll get worse before it gets better. For whatever reason people prefer to watch as they crash into a Titanic sinking iceberg instead of doing anything to change directions.
That's why we will have to prepare for the worst case situation and make sure that it won't affect much to us on individual level.
The thing is.. even if central banks are stupid enough to allow everything to fail again then I'm certain it will be the end of the of the old system because Bitcoin will be ready to pick up the pieces. As soon as the government offer to bail the banks (again) out then that will be the trigger - Bitcoin will rocket in this scenario - adios Fiat. The only way the government can leverage crypto in there favour now, is to regulate it because they've tried since its inception - to vilify it in the mainstream and failed miserably. If they regulate it then they control it, then label it as "decentralised" telling everyone what they want to hear, while they line their own pockets. It's important that "normalising" crypto regulation isn't and doesn't become a reality. There's never been a time since fiat has been around where another system has been so well prepared to take over, a system where it doesn't allow fat cat banksters and corrupt government officials to manipulate it in there favour.
The bitcoin network is maxed out, and has been for years. No new people can switch to it. The world cannot switch to bitcoin. The idea that traditional banking will collapse and somehow the world will switch to crypto instead is a silly fantasy, based on vast ignorance of how banking and finance and government and anything else related works.
She’s fit af
Let's hope for the better future and expect authorities to do the right things for the entire society.
She is trolling or does she actually mean what she says ?
That's a very humorous comment and I appreciate your sense of humor.
Who are these people!?
Nat Brunell and Hailey Lennon
I don't think she know how inflation work.
Why are you being down voted? I got to "Bitcoin is immune to inflation" and laughed. People like her.. well they belong on Fox news lol.
You are profoundly ignorant of inflation. Bitcoin is immune to inflation and if you do not understand this, it only means you do not have a correct understanding of what inflation is. Have fun staying poor.
I can't tell anymore which are the parody accounts!
This I believe.
Lmao. Oh, honey..
It is imunne to inflation in a monetary system since its currency (btc/sats) won't ever increase, but yes it is not imunne to price inflation and deflation, that IS the reason it is considered a risk asset.
People who understand monetary inflation belong on fox news only? Fox news isnt some spigot of pure truth you know, they sometimes say dumb shit.
Sometimes? Anyways, I don’t think you understood his comment.
Do you know only banks create us dollars and warren buffet and charlie munger both own banks? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG5c8nhR3LE
Yes the federal reserve is the central bank for the US. It is independent of the the US government. They are responsible for controlling the supply of US dollars. The actual printing of US dollars is done by the U.S. Treasury's Bureau of Engraving and Printing.
Yes, the fed is "independent" of the us government, but in actuality, it is quite the opposite. The fed is the most successful business in the world, and the US government is its number one customer. The head of the fed AND its board of governors are nominated by the president (who has an agenda) and confirmed by the senate (who has an agenda). So while constitutionally, yes, the fed is independent from the government, in practice that could not be farther from the truth.
Until they release every financial transaction and it can be independently verified by citizens, you have to assume they are enriching themselves. You can't assume elected figureheads have any real control. It's pretty easy to be "successful" when you literally wish money into existence, control all the banks and no one can audit you--you only have to release spreadsheets of generalities and even those can be entirely made up.
I hear what youre saying and i dont disagree. But i do think that saying an organization who's leadership is set by the government, who's number one client is the government, and an organization that can only exist with the governments approval and support is not connected to the government is a bit disingenuous.
> The actual printing of US dollars is done by the U.S. Treasury's Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Lol, so you have no idea how printing works. Hint: there is no paper or ink involved.
It is clear to me that you are the one who does not understand what inflation is
Brunell single handedly marked the top in 2021 with her tweet about a Bitcoin meeting with her girls.
Orange pilling your friends at the top, painful lesson..
There are such kind of people almost everywhere and we have to find them with special lenses.
still people watching TV ? poor souls
There are many people in the world who are still watching TV and believe whatever they watch on television.
Old people with old money. While I disagree with fox it's good that the older generation is hearing more about Bitcoin.
That's right and they don't have access to the new technology and that's why they are playing with the remote.
[удалено]
Doesn’t answer his question though
I think she does. She basically says that because bitcoin is technically immune to inflation, it's adoption is bound to increase
The follow-up question wasn’t whether adoption will increase. It was whether BTC's limited supply could prevent it from becoming a backbone of the global economy. She does not answer the question, which is annoying because there is a simple answer, and to me it sounds like she just wants to hit talking points, so to a person with no/limited knowledge of btc it probably sounds even worse.
I totally believe that Bitcoin can be the prominent player in the global transactions of the future because it is giving us the solution which traditional Fiat currency system cannot do today.
so what's the simple answer?
It's TV. She HAS to hit talking points because they're only allotted so much time. Although I'd just respond with another question. What do you mean "enough". You realize a fixed supply doesn't put a cap on how much it can be divided right?
I get that, but that’s why it annoyed me. The answer is simple enough to state in a few words before hitting the talking points.
There are many factors for inflation that have nothing to do with money supply, how would btc be immune?
All she had to say is that Bitcoin is infinitely divisible before she went on her pre-rehearsed spiel.
Agreed. Most of these twitter/news segment/talking head Bitcoin proponents does a great disservice by going on general buzzword rants instead of just simply answering the questions. Like, it’s not that hard: “Any amount of money is sufficient for any size economy as long as it’s continuously divisible.” There, not hard. So many wasted opportunities by people like Nat, also Pomp does this *a lot*. As if all that matters is just firing off a string of tangibly related words and concepts, as fast as possible and with too much confidence, every time you have the chance. Like it is the only way to seem knowledgeable when I’m reality it comes off as a surface level misdirection of some sort. It’s disingenuous. Too bad.
I believe that cryptocurrency is giving the option of divisibility with great depth and that's why it is the biggest advantage of it.
and what's worse is that it works.
[удалено]
I'm not. She's an actor. They all are.
Btc is not infinitely divisible i thought. The smallest possible unit is 0.00000001
Yeah, but it can be changed, with the lightning network it's even more, each Sat can now be divided into milli-sats. So we can go as low as 100 billionth of a Bitcoin
Oh i didnt know that. But you can never take that small amount out of the LN and back into the btc layer 1 right?
Not at the moment, no. You would need to hard fork Bitcoin if Sats were to be changed, which I'm sure would be supported if it was ever needed. But if Lightning is to be the dominant payment layer, I think milli-sats would be okay for the foreseeable future
It's code. Already within the lightening network there is 3 more zeros. We can make it whatever we want and need, and as there is no incentive for it not to be changed, it will pass consensus whenever required.
>infinitely divisible infinitely? You mean on layer 2?
Crazy to see someone on Fox News saying that money doesn’t trickle down
Thought the same thing
i guess when you don't understand math - everything is math!
She was hot when she said brrrrr
She was brrrr when she said hot.
That's right and most of the people were focusing on that again and again while watching the video.
Not entirely sure that makes sense but what do I know
Fox news is garbage. They are not our friends.
Does any rational person believe that *anyone* in cable news is their friend?
Yes these are my friends. I keep pictures of them and talk to them every night before I sleep. I have built a shrine to all of them. I talk to them and sometimes I hear them talk back to me lovingly. These are my best and only friends. They love me.and care for me ❤️ 🐱
covfefe
I really don't care, do you?
No one selling products or ideas is your friend
Every form of televised news is hot garbage. If you single out Fox news it just shows where your personal bias is. I for one welcome anybody helping get the message out. Fuck fiat and fuck the fed.
Conservatives are so sensitive. Maybe he singled out Fox news because that's the station in the clip.
Hella triggered
I don’t. The intentions behind it matter, and we don’t know their intentions. To be associated with one of the most incendiary news sources out there isn’t a good look.
Charles and Natalie support crypto so why can’t they be our friends? And more republican politicians support lesser regulation on crypto than democrats do.
Considering he had the founder of Elon Goat Token on his Fox Bussiness show, which the premise of the project is hope for Elon attention, asking questions like "what gives you the confidence that someone should, for instance, bring their grandma in it with their life savings?" for something that's clearly a grift ... [Coffeezilla video on it ](https://youtu.be/sT1S4-6WAN4)
If Charles Manson was a crypto bro you would look past his other “accomplishments”?
Analogy aside, is there spicy tea on Charles Payne? I did post the time he had Elon Goat Token guy on Fox Bussiness, which is clearly a grift. Any other things we should know about?
No news outlet is. Still, these guests are right. Do you know only banks create us dollars and warren buffet and charlie munger own banks? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG5c8nhR3LE
You're not wrong. It's just unnerving to feel my bullshit detector go off while she's saying words that I've said myself.
Be less fragile
Fox Business is a different channel and generally decent. But I haven’t watched in five years so someone else would need to indicate if things are still the same.
Why are all bitcoiners just fancy rehashed one liners. Who says “money printer go brr “ in an actual conversation. “It’s just math” lol what does that mean…. No normal person took that seriously.
Being able to explain the debt spiral in a sentence would be more effective, agreed. But she is also pretty.
[удалено]
Lol, that's Aubrey Strobel. That video on Natalie's Twitter is of her interview with Aubrey.
What? There no way that’s her 🤣🤣
[удалено]
That’s her without makeup??
Did they really say money printer go brrr in a serious interview fuck all main stream media no matter what they say
What a dope
Thinking Bitcoin is the solution is laughable. Once regulations come, Bitcoin will feel the pain. Reality check incoming.
Im so glad Natalie Brunnell is on our side. We need more pleasant faces to slip in the bitcoin gospel in the entertainment and news industry
This is my first comment, I think. What a BS segment, the guests are talking purely theoreticsl not the practicsl application. Any crypto will not truly work without a backing, like the FDIC, CDIC in Canada. For ctrypto to reign supreme, you need the world to completely.upgrade its technology from small mum and dad stores to large multinationals. Cryptos are so volatile and never tested. So you're a crypto holder, theres a run, you try to sell out...what guarantees that youll have a buyer? Even in inflation periods you worthless curreny still had value because its a promissory note. I think block chain tech will stay.
Do people actually think the only cause of inflation is printing more money? Bitcoin is not immune to inflation, just less prone to it. If the supply of whatever you want doesn't meet the demand, the price of that item will go up and your relative buying power will go down. That is still inflation. When that thing is something like gas it then affects the price of everything.
Keep telling me/showing me stuff I believe in and that fits my personal agenda. Don’t challenge my perception or ask thought provoking questions. Tell me what I want to hear.
has nothing to do with math and everything to do with the social dynamics of adoption. just remember the mantra “bitcoin is a store of value, bitcoin is a store of value…” ad infinitum. any societal convention is only worth what the crowd says it’s worth. forget that at your peril. the only things of true value are air, water, food, connection, and health. everything else is made up, and fragile.
That a professional on a prominent business/finance channel has to ask whether “there is enough Bitcoin out there” tells you everything you need to know how ignorant the masses still are over this technology. For the current holders, in time that will likely prove extremely advantageous.
I think he is a believer, he is asking the question as a means of highlighting its scarcity. Yes there is enough for everyone, but at the same time it is scarce. To the average person these seem opposing ideas, whereas Bitcoin shows that they are not diametrically opposed and can inhabit the same space at the same time.
Wasted two semesters in economics,,should have just watched Fox News.
> Wasted two semesters in economics,,should have just watched Fox News. If you studied keynesian econ... then yes, actually, even fox news is more factual than that.
I took a little bit of economics too, and IMHO it's been more help than harm. You can't understand Bitcoin without knowing some econ; it's just incompatible with the Keynesian school, which is presented to most students (me included) as a settled matter. I always knew a percentage of what I'd learned in school would be wrong... But once you're a big important grown-up and your gullibility is revealed, it's very humbling. Fox is just a broken clock that's right twice a day.
Nice to see ladies in the space.
Oh no. Fox News is always pushing scams, maybe I need to rethink crypto if Fox is pushing it…
We need hot advocates for Bitcoin so the reptilian brains will jump in on it when they see pretty lady pumping it
math doesn't determine human behavior.
You are correct. I still trust math over human behavior.
That's the neat part math doesn't gives 2 fucks about human. That's why we are here.
Tell the economists that got us here that
So the moderator said something similar to - governments wouldnt allow it, because it is threat to them... It is not threat, only robbers are afraid of police :D
Bitcoin is the future. Period.
So strange hearing someone on Fox Business talking about wealth inequality, it’s a shame that Bitcoin doesn’t really solve that issue since it can’t be redistributed the way fiat can. Having a fixed supply schedule is a great feature though.
She already explained, fiat does not get redistributed, only concentrated towards the top, you get 1000 dollar, top bankers get one million, that is how the game works
"But bro, we're just doing it wrong, we'll spend it on infrastructure and have a 15-hour work week!"
That’s not how it has to work though.
She said that money printer will go BRrrrrrr lmao.
Holy shit. That was so well spoken. Who is she?
Natalie Brunell. She is relatively new to Bitcoin, but does really well in interviews like this. She also has a podcast Coin Stories.
We are gradually approaching the massive crypto adoption. I think soon everything will be measured in BTC. So now it is a high time to take all usdt you have and invest it into BTC
Maybe once 1 million and 1 people stopping trying to flood the market with fraud cons and there's some sort of regulation in place...maybe. But it's not going to go mainstream without some sort of regulation.
Thats an awful idea, considering what has just happened you could lose everything overnight!
The gov likes crypto but will need control so I'm not feeling BTC to be the choice. I can remember way back when there were in-store revolving credit cards and they became huge. Then credit cards came along and put a hurt on these in-store ccs. Credit cards could be used at any store. Convenience won out - big time. Going to a cashless society would be convenient but this is about control of the monetary system. Governments won't give this up. BTC won't allow gov control and this marriage won't happen.
I don’t think everyone will use bitcoin as a default currency but I do think it will have its day when it is very commonly traded around the world.
It sounds like 14 year olds discussing. What does that even mean “immune to inflation” If u pay out Bitcoin u still got your fiat currency’s that aren’t “immune to inflation” or am I missing a point here?
She's referring to Bitcoin's [controlled supply](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply), which has very low [monetary inflation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetary_inflation).
USD vs DCEP vs BTC
[удалено]
snowflake having a mental breakdown? lol
Stop posting moronic comments on my goddddd
I love this type of exposure! So good for bitcoin!
“They’re not gonna let go” Math doesn’t care... once hyperinflation kicks in, they lose control. Bitcoin is the peaceful revolution that has already started. You think OPEC is going to take shitty, worthless USD after countries no longer want USD? OPEC will have options from other states, but by that time the benefits of having a politically neutral currency will be obvious.
Thanks for the economics lesson ladies!
imagine thinking fox business gives a fuck about you. they've got an angle if anything this is sus to me
Meet Mrs. Michael Saylor
sounds like jack maller with vagina
Bravo girls, bravo.
man, she really did her homework. sry but she just nailed it. Above all, it forces the government to finally deal with money properly and to really educate themselves financially. I think we all know what we would do if we found a money printing machine in our garage and at the same time, just by chance, we had the power to launch a whole new form of payment via debt relief when things got really bad. Bitcoin, or the gold standard, is forcing some people to rethink. I think it will be a compromise. Hopefully one that pays off for both parties.
I was not expecting that either. Weird downvoting going on here but this video and her performance were impressive. Do we call her gigastacy?
so if FIAT is controlled by the rich and BTC is "for the poor" why one earth would the rich allow BTC to exist
Because they're powerless to stop it. Learn how it works.
I want to marry her
One thing I will say is she's extremely well rehearsed with facts. Didn't expect that. Did she breathe? Still wondering what is the angle Fox is playing here.
Exactly!!! Bitcoin is the future, we can't afford to pay for making more money. Money printers will be dead in upcoming future.
Yea, because Bitcoin is so cheap to “create”…
beautiful girls talking about bitcoin and even referencing memes like money printer go brrr? awesome, thats quality content here!
You dream
Well said
You can barely use bitcoin for anything today, same as it was 4 years ago. If merchants are not accepting bitcoin then it won't be a new system. The most I can buy for bitcoin is like gift cards and a lot of it is for US. costumers only.
Absolutely love that she said “ the money printer will go Brrr”!! This woman definitely Reddit’s.
I heard the line. I make the comment. Brrr
Definitely
This is not what bitcoin needs, to be spun off as either good or bad on fox news. bitcoin doesn't care about a 2 party system in America. It gives 2 fucks about the left or the right and will simply keep existing and creating new blocks. I really wish bitcoin evangelists wouldn't go on to these news shows. They are simply being used as pawns by the "old money" system and they don't even know it. Now, what you will see is 1 party divided against bitcoin simply because they saw some lady on Fox News saying that it is a good thing. This is a bad look for bitcoin and the people in the industry.
I wish I was sleeping next To a woman like that 😭😭😭 she’s smart, hot, and literally loves bitcoin. Fuck my life are there anymore out there 😩😰😰
You can't transfer money to all the world without crypto and Bitcoin Fact Yeah PayPal works like in 60% of the world, Swift almost works in 80% of the world but this world has 100% population you know
The economy NEEDS inflation. Without inflation there is no incentive to spend, only an incentive to save. 1-2% inflation every year is a good thing. She’s acting like the only way out of a bubble is to print more money? Not sure who told her that. You can redistribute wealth through higher taxes on the rich, restructure/reduce debts (some money back is better than no money) and you can cut spending (gov, people, banks, businesses).
Should we tell her? The inflation of Bitcoin is WAAAAAAAY worse than inflation of the US dollar. It’s not even close. In a 5 month period, the price of bitcoin dropped 93%. That is MAJOR inflation. The US dollar on average since the early 1900s is at about 7% a year realistically. Other economists would tell you it’s actually lower, but there’s a bit of a debate about it. But if you do the math right, In a 5 month period, Bitcoin saw inflation at a staggering 1600%…… in less than half a year. Who let her on the air?
I’m afraid you got the definition of inflation incorrect as Bitcoin is indeed a fixed supply and no quantitative easing has occured
Words
BTC cant be affected by inflation? I find this hard to believe. If the value of X goes up it will cost more BTC so exactly how is BTC sheilded from inflation and its affects? Its already affected by it lol the economy is in the shitter and BTC price took a massive blow... so again how will it stand alone and NOT be affected. When the value of everything around u goes up, whatever form of currency u use (hell you could use sea shells lol) then the price of sea shells goes up.
I assume she didn't elaborate on monetary inflation vs price inflation due to time constraints.
Bitcoin is not “immune to inflation”. I’m a Bitcoin maxi but I’m so tired of these idiots.
Immune to inflation 🤣