Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.

What is Loopy Pro?Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.

Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.

Download on the App Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

Off-Topic discussion about Bitcoin and cryptocurrency.

1293032343549

Comments

  • @NeuM - Yes, I’m awake and aware. I’m not chasing dog coins or safemoon clones, or trying to sign people up to a Ponzi scheme (it's why I don't name names). Just opportunistically reacting to these strange events that we have now and looking into that weird space. I'm not risking serious money.

    I almost made a "but if Shiba Inu reaches 1¢..." joke, but I thought it might not go over.

    A few years back, an old flatmate and I used to place accumulator bets on the weekend football and I’ve never much been of a sports fan, but it kept things interesting.

    @Gavinski - AFAIK there has always been a crypto winter between bullruns (~2 years?). For long-term holds, the lowest possible buy-in makes sense, but it's so unpredictable that nobody really knows what the next winter baseline will be, or where the deepest valley will be, or if the historical ups and downs will start moving towards more stable middles. It's all guesswork. I'm guessing it'll dive below 20 at some point in the future (2 years from now?) but for all we know Bitcoin will hit above 200, then not settle for less than 50K. It's not been decided yet.

  • edited June 2021

    @colonel_mustard If that strategy works for you in long term then ok.. just beware of putting all your momeny into one bet .. i saw too much people ruined loosing everything just because they were betting on some project on uniswap or bsc witch got rug-pulled by developers of that project .. yesterday i saw some guy posting how he went from 100k into $300 in one week on such project..

    I don't have balls for such risk, but yes there are also potential of huge gains in short term.

    I'll say yes @dendy! Please do share those experienced traders' details with us :)

    For me, absolute masters of universe :-) For sure i forgot some, but those top league guys are very much interconnected so if you follow who they are following then you can find a LOT of good useful resources :)

    traders
    EmperorBTC
    trader1sz
    Ninjascalp
    AlgodTrading
    Pentosh1
    ByzGeneral
    devchart
    warobusiness
    sniperxbt
    coinmamba
    AltcoinPsycho

    I'm following lot more good traders, but those are the kind where i also learned a lot of stuff, they often share not just their sucessfull traders but also information which you can use to improve your own trading strategies. For free. Which is pure gold. Or pure Bitcoin i should say :)))

    on-chain analysts
    therationalroot
    WClementeIII
    woonomic
    mskvsk
    100trillionUSD

    other people with interesting content
    nic__carter
    Breedlove22
    danheld
    KoroushAK
    NeerajKA
    PrestonPysh
    BarrySilbert
    jimmysong
    aantonop
    coinbureau
    adam3us

    also good information sources
    DocumentingBTC
    cryptoquant_com
    glassnodealerts
    whale_alert

    @Gavinski
    Now back to bitcoin Dendy, I am still curious why you think it will dip much below 30 and most importantly why it will stay they're

    Oh that is misunderstanding, i don't think it STAY there. I believe there is possible short wick to area 22-28, but just very short one. Based on my observation, lot of people are waiting to buy the shit out of market in case this happens :-)

    Actually, this is exactly reason why i don't see this scenario likely :) Market usually doesn't do what most people is expecting / hoping for. But things are changing every day in market, so i'm trying to avoid having too strong opinions about mid term development (next weeks) . Who knows, maybe new wave of coordinated FUD appears with intention to push price even lower.

    Few reasons for my opinions. Please, take it as my totally amateur-like point of view, it is definitely not investment advice :-) I'm not even close to being really good and successful in analysis and trading in long term, so it's just my 5 cents ...

    Best thing anybody can do is to learn, understand things and make own opinions. Of course ideally based on facts, numbers and not based on some biased shouts out of darkness from people who really don't understand topic. If you want learn physics, learn from physicist not from some random guy who read one or two books popularising physic :-D

    Liquidity/exchange situation:

    • on most major exchanges there is very strong demand (waiting buy orders) in area of 33-35k
    • of course there are also substantial amount of sell orders above 37.5 - 38k

    This shows that for now ranging between 38k and 33k for some time is realistic scenario. In general, after huge pump up or dump down, market tends to move for some time in relatively narrow range. There we are now. There is not sure where we go from there in mid term future, so it's good to be mentally prepared for all options. I'm not going to sell anything, for me it's multi-year game, so i'm looking to price developments in next weeks and months more like on opportunity to buy more cheap than sell :) Definitely zero fear, Bitcoin is really NOT going to zero like some people would like for sure :-D

    Macro view:

    • during recent days , most of selling was from short term holders (people who bought this year), vast majority was selling in loss - on other side most of buyers were long time holders - wallets with no history of selling or just very little, or also completely new wallets. Clear example of distribution from weak hands and short term speculators, especially beginners, into strong arms of "hodlers"
    • there was some selling from miners, mostly Chinese ones - this is understandable, they need money for moving their operation out of China. In general miners started accumulate again.

    Media coverage:

    Week ago brutal FUD attack across all media, lot of negative news. ALWAYS when this happens, and it triggers weak hands panicking, after some time it stops and then after some period of "radio silence", positive news starts appearing again. This is what i see starting now.

    • alliance of US miners is forming which declares they will go after clean energy mining. There are controversial opinions in Bitcoin community on this, but in long term i tend to believe this is good think. It will significantly shut mounts of "carbon footprint" naysayers
    • Marathon, one of biggest US miners who was very criticised by community for kneeing before US goverment and censuring transactions from banned list (issues by US gov) decided to step away from this agreement and they will not censure anything anymore. For me this is BIG thing, extremely positive.
    • India releases official statement that they are NOT going to band bitcoin in any way, basically telling people one of main FUD fuels in recent days/weeks was misunderstanding :-)))
    • China miners are slowly moving their operation out of China - this is amazing, it kills 2 FUDS at once - FUD "china controlls bitcoin" and FUD "china bans bitcoin" (yeah, Bitcoin FUDers are ofter lacking elementary logic lol)

    Technicals:

    We are now in very common pattern after pump or dump. Price starts forming triangle like this, with top/bottom range narrowing it's values. After some times price breaks up or down out of this triangle, often it retests that line once from other side and when it fails break back, there starts stronger continuation trend in direction o breakout.

    For now it's absolutely unclear from pure technical analysis point of view where it will go, it's in middle. 10 traders will tel you 10 different opinions using their favourite technical analysis tools - but truth is, everybody is now waiting (which you can see on very low volume, those red/green vertical bars at bottom of price chart)


    Here what i mean. Everybody really knows the shit :-D including me

  • @colonel_mustard said:
    "but if Shiba Inu reaches 1¢..." joke, but I thought it might not go over.

    You won't believe, but there are people actually believing in this :lol:

  • Thanks for the list @dendy :)

    🐕 🔥🔥🔥 🚀🚀🚀

  • @colonel_mustard said:
    Thanks for the list @dendy :)

    🐕

    Here we are. Shiba Inu.

  • @colonel_mustard said:
    Thanks for the list @dendy :)

    🐕 🔥🔥🔥 🚀🚀🚀

    Yeah cheers Dendy!

  • I can see the possibility of bitcoin maybe hitting £50-100K at some point in the long term at the next halving but have a hard time believing that it will go to a million in the future which a lot of advocates believe.
    I get the possibility is there, but the reality doesn't quite seem to stack up....who would be buying in at that kind of level other than miners?
    Once it gets too expensive, doesn't speculative interest just shift to the altcoins keeping the bitcoin peak never that high?
    I'm not sure how people are imagining how the maths add up at that level, but I'm interested to know how they are seeing that play out.

    I feel like we'll get big spikes as before and then big dips..but my gut feeling is there will be other things on the horizon to speculate with and who knows what the next big thing will be in 10 years?

  • I get the possibility is there, but the reality doesn't quite seem to stack up....who would be buying in at that kind of level other than miners?

    You don't beed to buy whole bitcoin. Bitcoin is divided to 100.000.000 satoshis ... 1 satoshi is atm around 0.00036$

    There is currently lot of discussion that exchanges should display price in Satoshis/USD which would psychologically work better for people when buying kust small part.

    This is one of reasons why people are buying dog shit coons - they look "cheap"
    because price per coin is low - but they dob'r realize it's because rhey have total supply many orders magnitude bigger than Bitcoin, or even absolutely unlimited (Doge, Ethereum)

    I can see the possibility of bitcoin maybe hitting £50-100K at some point in the long term at the next halving but have a hard time believing that it will go to a million in the future which a lot of advocates believe.

    It's always about market cap. For example current market cap of Gold is around 10 trillions🤔, Bitcoin is around 680 billions, at it's price peak 64k it was 1.2 trillion. Do you believe it can flip market cap of gold in next 5 years ? Some do. That would give you price around $500k.

    Bobody knows. To be absolutely hones inhave also a bit issue to imagine such big numbers.On other side this is how absolute scarcity works. At the moment just about 2-3% of world population owns some Bitcoin. Is there roommfor growth ? For sure. What is limit ? Nobody knows. For sure if central banks will continue implementing they dystopic vision of future with CBDCs, i aee demand for alternative way for protectin money before goverments and banksters just growing in future...

  • You don't beed to buy whole bitcoin. Bitcoin is divided to 100.000.000 satoshis ... 1 satoshi is atm around 0.00036$

    I know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting. I know it's how artificial scarcity works, but it's also possible for other alternate scarcity models to be generated at any time to keep it from that kind of peaking.

    I'm sure it's technically possible, just that it might become a more of a stable coin until it reaches that level, leveling off much lower.

  • @Carnbot said:
    I can see the possibility of bitcoin maybe hitting £50-100K at some point in the long term at the next halving but have a hard time believing that it will go to a million in the future which a lot of advocates believe.
    I get the possibility is there, but the reality doesn't quite seem to stack up....who would be buying in at that kind of level other than miners?
    Once it gets too expensive, doesn't speculative interest just shift to the altcoins keeping the bitcoin peak never that high?
    I'm not sure how people are imagining how the maths add up at that level, but I'm interested to know how they are seeing that play out.

    I feel like we'll get big spikes as before and then big dips..but my gut feeling is there will be other things on the horizon to speculate with and who knows what the next big thing will be in 10 years?

    I do have a hard time imagining anybody choosing one bitcoin over $1M, but I've had a hard time accepting its 'value' at every level since £50, so I'd better keep quiet.

    The other week, Cathie Wood (one of the major 'public face' investors, if you're not familiar - I wasn't) was saying that it's going to reach half a million, and I found that interesting, that she'd lowball her peers. She doesn't know any more than you or me, but I found it interesting all the same.

    And you're quite right. Who knows what it will be ten years from now? Fresh water, perhaps, or oxygen. Extraterrestrial mineral rights could be a thing - perhaps not in ten years, but it's something that some of us might see play out. I'd totally bid 12 Satoshis for Sector 7-G on Rigel 9. I can imagine space mission crowdfunding being a more realistic thing. A share of the spoils for making it possible. We'll have to avoid the Kessler effect, somehow.

  • @colonel_mustard said:

    @Carnbot said:
    I can see the possibility of bitcoin maybe hitting £50-100K at some point in the long term at the next halving but have a hard time believing that it will go to a million in the future which a lot of advocates believe.
    I get the possibility is there, but the reality doesn't quite seem to stack up....who would be buying in at that kind of level other than miners?
    Once it gets too expensive, doesn't speculative interest just shift to the altcoins keeping the bitcoin peak never that high?
    I'm not sure how people are imagining how the maths add up at that level, but I'm interested to know how they are seeing that play out.

    I feel like we'll get big spikes as before and then big dips..but my gut feeling is there will be other things on the horizon to speculate with and who knows what the next big thing will be in 10 years?

    I do have a hard time imagining anybody choosing one bitcoin over $1M, but I've had a hard time accepting its 'value' at every level since £50, so I'd better keep quiet.

    The other week, Cathie Wood (one of the major 'public face' investors, if you're not familiar - I wasn't) was saying that it's going to reach half a million, and I found that interesting, that she'd lowball her peers. She doesn't know any more than you or me, but I found it interesting all the same.

    And you're quite right. Who knows what it will be ten years from now? Fresh water, perhaps, or oxygen. Extraterrestrial mineral rights could be a thing - perhaps not in ten years, but it's something that some of us might see play out. I'd totally bid 12 Satoshis for Sector 7-G on Rigel 9. I can imagine space mission crowdfunding being a more realistic thing. A share of the spoils for making it possible. We'll have to avoid the Kessler effect, somehow.

    Yeah, would you like to buy a house or 0.25 BTC? especially if it was still volatile, I can't see many people wanting hold on near that level. Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense..although I can see why the hope is there.

  • edited June 2021

    know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting.

    It depends for who... when in 1933 US government brutally robbed own citisens of all gold, price of troy ounce was $20. Today ? $1800. Makes it leass interesring investment ? Nope.

    For big hedge funds it just starts to be really interesting when market cap grows into something like few trillions - bigger market cap will bring automatically smaller volatility.

  • edited June 2021

    retail is stacking really hard.

    this killed me (the comment)

  • edited June 2021

    .

  • Yeah, those evil central banks, making chocolate bars smaller. 🙄

    the Fed made them do it, right? I'm guessing those are UK chocolates, so it must be a conspiracy by the Bank of England. Chocolate is too centralised you see.

  • Chocolate bars?

  • @ExAsperis99 said:
    Chocolate bars?

    Dendy deleted the post :)

    It was referring to the "shrinkflation" of chocolate bars, you know when the cost of the bar stays the same but the manufacturer reduces the weight of the chocolate inside.

    There's obviously no way to correlate that with fiat currency, since it's just companies trying to increase their profit margins, which they could do even on a gold standard. 🤷‍♂️

  • edited June 2021

    removed it exactly because i wanted to avoid that ☝️:)))

    back to innocent jokes..

  • @colonel_mustard said:

    @Carnbot said:
    I can see the possibility of bitcoin maybe hitting £50-100K at some point in the long term at the next halving but have a hard time believing that it will go to a million in the future which a lot of advocates believe.
    I get the possibility is there, but the reality doesn't quite seem to stack up....who would be buying in at that kind of level other than miners?
    Once it gets too expensive, doesn't speculative interest just shift to the altcoins keeping the bitcoin peak never that high?
    I'm not sure how people are imagining how the maths add up at that level, but I'm interested to know how they are seeing that play out.

    I feel like we'll get big spikes as before and then big dips..but my gut feeling is there will be other things on the horizon to speculate with and who knows what the next big thing will be in 10 years?

    I do have a hard time imagining anybody choosing one bitcoin over $1M, but I've had a hard time accepting its 'value' at every level since £50, so I'd better keep quiet.

    The other week, Cathie Wood (one of the major 'public face' investors, if you're not familiar - I wasn't) was saying that it's going to reach half a million, and I found that interesting, that she'd lowball her peers. She doesn't know any more than you or me, but I found it interesting all the same.

    And you're quite right. Who knows what it will be ten years from now? Fresh water, perhaps, or oxygen. Extraterrestrial mineral rights could be a thing - perhaps not in ten years, but it's something that some of us might see play out. I'd totally bid 12 Satoshis for Sector 7-G on Rigel 9. I can imagine space mission crowdfunding being a more realistic thing. A share of the spoils for making it possible. We'll have to avoid the Kessler effect, somehow.

    By the way, one IPO I’m eagerly looking forward to is SpaceX, whenever that happens. I think they could very easily become a multi trillion dollar company, especially once they start mining asteroids.

  • @NeuM
    By the way, one IPO I’m eagerly looking forward to is SpaceX, whenever that happens. I think they could very easily become a multi trillion dollar company, especially once they start mining asteroids.

    Yes !!

  • edited June 2021

    @dendy, whatever you do, don’t follow AnonSerpants… they went from $100,000 invested to $300 in a matter of WEEKS. Ouch.

  • @dendy said:

    know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting.

    It depends for who... when in 1933 US government brutally robbed own citisens of all gold, price of troy ounce was $20. Today ? $1800. Makes it leass interesring investment ? Nope.

    For big hedge funds it just starts to be really interesting when market cap grows into something like few trillions - bigger market cap will bring automatically smaller volatility.

    There was no government theft of gold in 1933 in the U.S.

    Using the phrase "brutally robbed" is factually incorrect.

    • The U.S. government robbed no one. In 1933, the U.S. government purchased all private reserves of gold at the market rate. Private ownership of gold was limited by executive order in 1933 in order to ensure that the Federal Reserve had an adequate gold supply (as required by the law of the time since the dollar was a gold-backed currency at that time). The government purchased the gold at the then-market price of $20 per ounce (that number is meaningless without adjusting for inflation). Adjusted for inflation that 1933 $20 is the equivalent of about $560 in 2021 dollars. The current price of gold is less than 4 times that. Compared to the stock market that is a pretty poor return on investment.
    • Since May 1933, the Down Jones Industrial Average stock market index has (using inflation adjusted values) has gone up by a factor of slightly more than 18....compared to gold whose value has not even quadrupled.

    So, yes, gold was a poor investment compared to simply investing in one of the industry-standard stock market indexes.

    One might question whether the forced sale was really necessary, but no theft occurred. Money invested in non-speculative stocks in 1933 has increased in value far more than money invested in gold.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting.

    It depends for who... when in 1933 US government brutally robbed own citisens of all gold, price of troy ounce was $20. Today ? $1800. Makes it leass interesring investment ? Nope.

    For big hedge funds it just starts to be really interesting when market cap grows into something like few trillions - bigger market cap will bring automatically smaller volatility.

    There was no government theft of gold in 1933 in the U.S.

    Using the phrase "brutally robbed" is factually incorrect.

    • The U.S. government robbed no one. In 1933, the U.S. government purchased all private reserves of gold at the market rate. Private ownership of gold was limited by executive order in 1933 in order to ensure that the Federal Reserve had an adequate gold supply (as required by the law of the time since the dollar was a gold-backed currency at that time). The government purchased the gold at the then-market price of $20 per ounce (that number is meaningless without adjusting for inflation). Adjusted for inflation that 1933 $20 is the equivalent of about $560 in 2021 dollars. The current price of gold is less than 4 times that. Compared to the stock market that is a pretty poor return on investment.
    • Since May 1933, the Down Jones Industrial Average stock market index has (using inflation adjusted values) has gone up by a factor of slightly more than 18....compared to gold whose value has not even quadrupled.

    So, yes, gold was a poor investment compared to simply investing in one of the industry-standard stock market indexes.

    One might question whether the forced sale was really necessary, but no theft occurred. Money invested in non-speculative stocks in 1933 has increased in value far more than money invested in gold.

    Haha. I don’t care what language anyone uses to try to wallpaper over the fact that the government at that time confiscated gold and made it illegal to own.

  • edited June 2021

    @NeuM said:
    @dendy, whatever you do, don’t follow AnonSerpants… they went from $100,000 invested to $300 in a matter of WEEKS. Ouch.

    Yeah noticed that guy. Pure clown, he was even blaming some trader who is just sharing trade ideas, and then other people posted few more posts of that guy which were clear... nice showcase of gambler who lost all money by his own fault

  • @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting.

    It depends for who... when in 1933 US government brutally robbed own citisens of all gold, price of troy ounce was $20. Today ? $1800. Makes it leass interesring investment ? Nope.

    For big hedge funds it just starts to be really interesting when market cap grows into something like few trillions - bigger market cap will bring automatically smaller volatility.

    There was no government theft of gold in 1933 in the U.S.

    Using the phrase "brutally robbed" is factually incorrect.

    • The U.S. government robbed no one. In 1933, the U.S. government purchased all private reserves of gold at the market rate. Private ownership of gold was limited by executive order in 1933 in order to ensure that the Federal Reserve had an adequate gold supply (as required by the law of the time since the dollar was a gold-backed currency at that time). The government purchased the gold at the then-market price of $20 per ounce (that number is meaningless without adjusting for inflation). Adjusted for inflation that 1933 $20 is the equivalent of about $560 in 2021 dollars. The current price of gold is less than 4 times that. Compared to the stock market that is a pretty poor return on investment.
    • Since May 1933, the Down Jones Industrial Average stock market index has (using inflation adjusted values) has gone up by a factor of slightly more than 18....compared to gold whose value has not even quadrupled.

    So, yes, gold was a poor investment compared to simply investing in one of the industry-standard stock market indexes.

    One might question whether the forced sale was really necessary, but no theft occurred. Money invested in non-speculative stocks in 1933 has increased in value far more than money invested in gold.

    Haha. I don’t care what language anyone uses to try to wallpaper over the fact that the government at that time confiscated gold and made it illegal to own.

    The government purchased the gold.

  • @dendy said:

    @NeuM said:
    @dendy, whatever you do, don’t follow AnonSerpants… they went from $100,000 invested to $300 in a matter of WEEKS. Ouch.

    Yeah noticed that guy. Pure clown, he was even blaming some trader who is just sharing trade ideas, and then other people posted few more posts of that guy.. clear gambler who lost all money by his own fault

    I think his next career move is Greeter at a Walmart.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting.

    It depends for who... when in 1933 US government brutally robbed own citisens of all gold, price of troy ounce was $20. Today ? $1800. Makes it leass interesring investment ? Nope.

    For big hedge funds it just starts to be really interesting when market cap grows into something like few trillions - bigger market cap will bring automatically smaller volatility.

    There was no government theft of gold in 1933 in the U.S.

    Using the phrase "brutally robbed" is factually incorrect.

    • The U.S. government robbed no one. In 1933, the U.S. government purchased all private reserves of gold at the market rate. Private ownership of gold was limited by executive order in 1933 in order to ensure that the Federal Reserve had an adequate gold supply (as required by the law of the time since the dollar was a gold-backed currency at that time). The government purchased the gold at the then-market price of $20 per ounce (that number is meaningless without adjusting for inflation). Adjusted for inflation that 1933 $20 is the equivalent of about $560 in 2021 dollars. The current price of gold is less than 4 times that. Compared to the stock market that is a pretty poor return on investment.
    • Since May 1933, the Down Jones Industrial Average stock market index has (using inflation adjusted values) has gone up by a factor of slightly more than 18....compared to gold whose value has not even quadrupled.

    So, yes, gold was a poor investment compared to simply investing in one of the industry-standard stock market indexes.

    One might question whether the forced sale was really necessary, but no theft occurred. Money invested in non-speculative stocks in 1933 has increased in value far more than money invested in gold.

    Haha. I don’t care what language anyone uses to try to wallpaper over the fact that the government at that time confiscated gold and made it illegal to own.

    The government purchased the gold.

    The US government confiscated the gold. It was a clear constitutional violation of individual property rights.

  • @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting.

    It depends for who... when in 1933 US government brutally robbed own citisens of all gold, price of troy ounce was $20. Today ? $1800. Makes it leass interesring investment ? Nope.

    For big hedge funds it just starts to be really interesting when market cap grows into something like few trillions - bigger market cap will bring automatically smaller volatility.

    There was no government theft of gold in 1933 in the U.S.

    Using the phrase "brutally robbed" is factually incorrect.

    • The U.S. government robbed no one. In 1933, the U.S. government purchased all private reserves of gold at the market rate. Private ownership of gold was limited by executive order in 1933 in order to ensure that the Federal Reserve had an adequate gold supply (as required by the law of the time since the dollar was a gold-backed currency at that time). The government purchased the gold at the then-market price of $20 per ounce (that number is meaningless without adjusting for inflation). Adjusted for inflation that 1933 $20 is the equivalent of about $560 in 2021 dollars. The current price of gold is less than 4 times that. Compared to the stock market that is a pretty poor return on investment.
    • Since May 1933, the Down Jones Industrial Average stock market index has (using inflation adjusted values) has gone up by a factor of slightly more than 18....compared to gold whose value has not even quadrupled.

    So, yes, gold was a poor investment compared to simply investing in one of the industry-standard stock market indexes.

    One might question whether the forced sale was really necessary, but no theft occurred. Money invested in non-speculative stocks in 1933 has increased in value far more than money invested in gold.

    Haha. I don’t care what language anyone uses to try to wallpaper over the fact that the government at that time confiscated gold and made it illegal to own.

    Buying something at market rate is not the same as "robbed" (which was the emotive term dendy used).

    Yes it was a forced purchase, but that's because one of the big drawbacks of the Gold Standard is that the central bank can physically run out of gold (which was also a danger in 1971 and one of the reasons Bretton Woods unravelled). The forced purchase was necessary to maintain the dollar-gold peg in the midst of the Great Depression.

  • @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting.

    It depends for who... when in 1933 US government brutally robbed own citisens of all gold, price of troy ounce was $20. Today ? $1800. Makes it leass interesring investment ? Nope.

    For big hedge funds it just starts to be really interesting when market cap grows into something like few trillions - bigger market cap will bring automatically smaller volatility.

    There was no government theft of gold in 1933 in the U.S.

    Using the phrase "brutally robbed" is factually incorrect.

    • The U.S. government robbed no one. In 1933, the U.S. government purchased all private reserves of gold at the market rate. Private ownership of gold was limited by executive order in 1933 in order to ensure that the Federal Reserve had an adequate gold supply (as required by the law of the time since the dollar was a gold-backed currency at that time). The government purchased the gold at the then-market price of $20 per ounce (that number is meaningless without adjusting for inflation). Adjusted for inflation that 1933 $20 is the equivalent of about $560 in 2021 dollars. The current price of gold is less than 4 times that. Compared to the stock market that is a pretty poor return on investment.
    • Since May 1933, the Down Jones Industrial Average stock market index has (using inflation adjusted values) has gone up by a factor of slightly more than 18....compared to gold whose value has not even quadrupled.

    So, yes, gold was a poor investment compared to simply investing in one of the industry-standard stock market indexes.

    One might question whether the forced sale was really necessary, but no theft occurred. Money invested in non-speculative stocks in 1933 has increased in value far more than money invested in gold.

    Haha. I don’t care what language anyone uses to try to wallpaper over the fact that the government at that time confiscated gold and made it illegal to own.

    The government purchased the gold.

    The US government confiscated the gold. It was a clear constitutional violation of individual property rights.

    In times of emergency individual rights are often deemed less important than trying to safeguard the nation. The same could be said of the draft in times of war.

    I understand that you have an absolutist position on this, but reality is seldom black and white. Ugly compromises are part and parcel of life, doubly so when you are in the midst of a crisis.

  • @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @NeuM said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @dendy said:

    know but once you're spending large amounts of money on tiny portions of something (which it's already getting to at the last peak) then suddenly other investments start looking more interesting.

    It depends for who... when in 1933 US government brutally robbed own citisens of all gold, price of troy ounce was $20. Today ? $1800. Makes it leass interesring investment ? Nope.

    For big hedge funds it just starts to be really interesting when market cap grows into something like few trillions - bigger market cap will bring automatically smaller volatility.

    There was no government theft of gold in 1933 in the U.S.

    Using the phrase "brutally robbed" is factually incorrect.

    • The U.S. government robbed no one. In 1933, the U.S. government purchased all private reserves of gold at the market rate. Private ownership of gold was limited by executive order in 1933 in order to ensure that the Federal Reserve had an adequate gold supply (as required by the law of the time since the dollar was a gold-backed currency at that time). The government purchased the gold at the then-market price of $20 per ounce (that number is meaningless without adjusting for inflation). Adjusted for inflation that 1933 $20 is the equivalent of about $560 in 2021 dollars. The current price of gold is less than 4 times that. Compared to the stock market that is a pretty poor return on investment.
    • Since May 1933, the Down Jones Industrial Average stock market index has (using inflation adjusted values) has gone up by a factor of slightly more than 18....compared to gold whose value has not even quadrupled.

    So, yes, gold was a poor investment compared to simply investing in one of the industry-standard stock market indexes.

    One might question whether the forced sale was really necessary, but no theft occurred. Money invested in non-speculative stocks in 1933 has increased in value far more than money invested in gold.

    Haha. I don’t care what language anyone uses to try to wallpaper over the fact that the government at that time confiscated gold and made it illegal to own.

    The government purchased the gold.

    The US government confiscated the gold. It was a clear constitutional violation of individual property rights.

    Clear? If it was a clear violation of the constitution, there would have been some sort of supreme court case during the 40 or so years after the executive order that issued it.

    I find it ridiculous hyperbole to talk about something being a "clear constitutional violation" just because a small number of people thinks so. That is not what "clear" means. You may FEEL that it violates your interpretation of the constitution -- by no standard was it a "clear violation" of anyone's constitutional rights.

This discussion has been closed.