Typically when a bubble bursts on a ponzi fraudulent or wholly irrational scheme the price, once it starts tumbling, returns to zero. It does not reflate.
That supposes that everyone acknowledges that it was irrational at the point of that crash. If there are still believers...and then add people making a lot of money pumping it.
Not in the whole history of finance and economics has a bag of hot air acted this way. Once the price collapse starts, it doesn't stop until the game is over. But for this 'bag of hot air', this time is different.
Very few bubbles burst only once. As I said, for a bag of hot air to collapse completely, everyone must be convinced it's a bag of hot air. What history are you referring to in this context?
Hi Wolfie
As I have explained before when Shortie raised this question, it does not have to follow an existing pattern.
A bubble is simply something whose price expanded very greatly and very suddenly.
I am sure that the dot.com bubble did not replicate the tulip bubble exactly. But that does not mean that it was not a bubble.
Brendan
What makes a bag of hot air, a bag of hot air?
Let's not deflect yet again, please point to the historical events you were referring to.
If on the other hand it is argued that bitcoin is still a bubble waiting to burst, is there any other bubble in the history of bubbles that has shown such price diversification and still not be classified as having burst?
Is there any other bubble in the history of bubbles that has seen price volatility of 80%+ downward, but subsequently increase 400%+ upward again?
If there isn't, then we are not looking at a typical bubble and by reason it therefore cannot be determined as a bubble in the traditional sense. So if its not a typical traditional bubble, what type of bubble is it?
But out of courtesy to you, the historical events I was referring to is the entire global financial and economic history. Lets go with the tried and tested tulipmania if you care, or Anglo shares, Enron, or other...take your pick
When the tulip bubble burst in 1637, did it ever inflate again?So Tulips are now worth nothing? Did their price ever go to zero after that bubble burst?
As I said, for a bag of hot air to collapse completely, everyone must be convinced it's a bag of hot air.
So Tulips are now worth nothing? Did their price ever go to zero after that bubble burst?
Thus heralding a price collapse to zero (or next to zero).
Enron and Anglo never had any value other and were always worth zero?
Isn't this 'process' taking a hell of a long time with Bitcoin? We've had bubbles in 2011, 2013 (multiple), 2016, 2017 and I guess right now.
Why would you even say that? Of course they had value.
So why did you mention them?
As I said, for a bag of hot air to collapse completely, everyone must be convinced it's a bag of hot air. What history are you referring to in this context?
You ask to mention some events, so I obliged? You then inferred that I implied Anglo, Enron, never had any value. I never said any such thing.
Not in the whole history of finance and economics has a bag of hot air acted this way. Once the price collapse starts, it doesn't stop until the game is over. But for this 'bag of hot air', this time is different.
I'm not sure that I did. Otherwise, I was just posing a question.I think you're reading a lot more into what I said again.
What events were you referring to?
So let's try and stick to your history of bags of hot air
The entire financial and economic history of the world.
Am I missing something? I take a "bag of hot air" as a euphemism for something that is inherently worthless.
Whilst this does not float my boat (no more than frog's legs) I have to accept that there appears to be a demand for that kinda thing, albeit the supply of btc lookalikes is in the thousands.tecate said:As it stands, it (your btc digital entry) has designed in scarcity. It's immutable, borderless and unconfiscatable. It can be transacted peer to peer anywhere in the world.
I'm not sure that I did. Otherwise, I was just posing a question.
When the tulip bubble burst in 1637, did it ever inflate again?
Ok, accepting for the moment that the bitcoin bubble hasnt burst. Is there any other bubble in the history of bubbles that has seen price volatility of 80%+ downward, but subsequently increase 400%+ upward again?
If there isn't, then we are not looking at a typical bubble and by reason it therefore cannot be determined as a bubble in the traditional sense. So if its not a typical traditional bubble, what type of bubble is it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?