This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Saxo Bank CEO: Bitcoin Faces Serious Challenges (Needs Link To Real Assets)
Authored by Lars Seier Christenson, CEO Saxo Bank; via his TradingFloor.com blog,
When I saw Bitcoin trading at close to one thousand dollars, I wanted to kick myself! I should have seen it coming, a limited supply and a lot of hype and demand — it looks obvious in hindsight, as many things do.
And I can't excuse myself by claiming not to have been fully aware of Bitcoin, when it was trading far below ten dollars. My well-known libertarian leanings meant that a number of like-minded friends encouraged me to get involved in this new, non-statist, unregulated experiment. Shame on me, for not listening. I hope at least they made a lot of money.
The main reason, however, I did not get involved was longer-term concerns about the viability of Bitcoin, and in my view, those concerns still remain.
Bitcoin has been in the news a lot lately — and not all of it positive, such as the recent arrest of a Bitcoin trader in New York on money laundering charges.
I think Bitcoin has made a mistake by keeping its owners anonymous, although some users — including some highly undesirable ones — are embracing it for that very reason. This offers authorities an excellent excuse to ban it whenever, and wherever they wish. And this could easily be an unfair ban under false pretences simply because the authorities don't like the competition. China and Russia are just the first to react, I fear.
Due to the nature of its structure, banning Bitcoin will of course not eradicate it. But what it will do is make it impossible for law-abiding individuals and businesses to use it — and thereby render it practically useless anyway. So the false sense of security the, admittedly, irrepressible network provides Bitcoin will really not count for much, if there is a concerted move to restrict the Bitcoin market. I think therefore that it may well be advisable to accept and embrace some degree of regulation, although it will be counter-intuitive to many fans, if only to prevent an even worse reaction from governments that are not pleased to see their money printing monopoly challenged.
Of course, for early buyers wiser than me, the huge price rally has been terrific, but it also carries some negative consequences. I think the elevated price and huge volatility — it has swung from a high of USD 1,242 in late November to around USD 500 in hours — will make it more difficult to gain acceptance among serious businesses.
So I think Bitcoin will face serious challenges in the long run, although I believe such digital currencies could have a place in the economy in more well thought-through structures with values better linked to real assets. There is no doubt that many central banks have made a mess of things with their own fiat money without linkage to reality, and it is entirely conceivable that the private sector could also in the area of currencies do a better job than public sector institutions. It does in pretty much every other area under the sun, so why not here?
Anything in the financial space that can be regulated will be regulated. Get used to it! This will also apply to digital currencies. But regulation could be their ticket to real acceptance and success — and should therefore not be seen only as a negative.
Bitcoin is still a very small part of the economic system and will not pose a serious threat to more established models any time soon. But if it does one day and it overcomes regulatory issues, it will be embraced.
Bitcoin is increasingly used by migrant workers to transfer money back home, and is therefore beginning to serve really genuine purposes, not just ideological ones, which is promising to see.
The extreme volatility and opaque ownership structure definitely poses a risk to all users of Bitcoin. And I believe there will be new and better models developing over time. It is rare that the first mover wins and takes all, and given the weaknesses mentioned above, I believe there is a lot of room for improvements.
There are at least 80 known similar initiatives out there, and of course most of them will fail. But I know personally of a couple of projects in the design phase that in my view are better constructions, and will be able to obtain rapid distribution, making them real competitors to Bitcoin. When they launch, I promise myself that I will be less cautious and also that readers of this blog will get to know about it at an early stage, so watch this space!
Saxo Bank does not currently offer trading in Bitcoin due to the concerns listed here. But we are reviewing the digital currency space on an ongoing basis, so we may revise this at a later stage.
»
- 12600 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
cracked me up hard
Now that there is some funny stuff!
fixed
...oh they probably are linked. In secret deals with the Chinese government for land, agriculture, mines, power dams, lumber, etc, etc, etc.
Petro dollar.
"Ready to wage war for a tank of juice."
If the Dollar was still linked solidly to gold there would be no need for Bitcoin.
The NSA and the NWO bankster cabal would politely disagree.
What a concept....lets link it to silver.....you know, like our $ used to be......
hehe, doesn't USD have the same problem..... no link to any assets? Interesting that the whole idea of bitcoin or other crypto currency is going to force TPTB to explain in detail why we shouldn't use them, while at the same time arguing why the USD or any other fiat is different....the irony!!!!
No, actually it doesn't have the same problems. USG has the power to steal the wealth of businesses and citizens, and if that isn't enough they can go plunder the rest of the world. Bitcoin cannot do the same.
Got Nukes?
the universe is powered by irony
I would argue that the USD is linked to the government's ability to appropriate or confiscate the physical resources and economic production of the U.S. through taxation. That's quite a big pile of assets it's linked to.
ackward silence ensues
The NWO banksters with their long-held dream of a totally electronic, fully trackable, cashless society are the gaping-jawed angler fish, and bitcoin is just the little luminous lure that they dangle in front of their greedy mouth as they patiently wait to suck in the innocent and the unwary.
Yeah... it's one big conspiracay man!!
Need any KY Jelly?
FYI Fonestar, every post of yours now gets an automatic downvote from me.
It's not just your ignorance on Bitcoin fonestar can't stand it's your bitch-ass give up and surrender attitudes.
It is you who have surrendered, Foneystar.
I bet the NSA/NWO cabal just LOVE useful idiots like you.
I down vote him because he's an asshole, and that he doesn't know wtf he is talking about half the time either.
I bet your SSN went through 4000 computers today. I also bet 10 BTC that you didn't buy anything with gold or silver, and that the last 20 transactions where you purchased goods you used dollars.
Red herring much, tmosley?
Whether my Social (In)Security Number passed through 4 or 4000 or 0 computers today is irrelevant to the discussion. Even if it did do so, it was not tracking my every purchase and financial transaction, as the use of bitcoin (and credit and debit cards) would and does allow.
Furthermore, I use dollars because the US government not only FORCES us to do so under legal tender laws, but actually punishes us if we stray from doing so, as you well know and would acknowledge if you had any semblance of honesty about you.
It is interesting if sad, though, to see you riding the "Get Rich Quick with Bitcoin!" bandwagon driven by Foneystar here.
Actually, it is extremely relevent. You are already under the complete and total control of the NWO. The NWO has existed for DECADES. If anything, bitcoin is an agent of the NEW NWO, one that seeks to return power to the people.
I use dollars too. But I'd rather use bitcoins, and DO use them where I can. I have had more than one bitcion transaction in the past 30 days. It's NICE. But you would rather give your money to Janet Yellen, I guess.
I never said you would get rich quick with bitcoin, just as I never said they would get rich quick with silver. I said everyone should learn how to use it. It might just save your anus from having gold bars shoved up in one day. You may get richEVENTUALLY by understanding the fundamentals, but fundamentals aren't worth much short term in a market dominated by the insane on every level from top to bottom.
You admitted before that you only hate bitcoin because it hurt your feelings. You really should take five minutes to examine the ramifications of that.
The fiat experiment is by definition a conspiracy. If bitcoin isn't in on it, it will be.
Bitcoin - Bit-chez.
BITCOIN!!
BITCON!!
the "real asset" seems to be the internet itself
which "should" be(actually is) public property.
It should be public property, but it's not according to the NSA...
can information be property?
or is the hardware alone "property"?
.
there two questions ongoing.
No, information can not be property: that's why patent-law & copyright-law are information-terrorism sponsored by the state.
Why do you think the Internet is public property. Someone is paying the bills for the servers, routers, and other machines that make the Internet function.
as you say and the satellites, wires, poles, and
those productions, developments and maintenance
going back in time and forward; that is the "public".
payments in what basic unit as defined exactly how,
by whom and to what coherent standard?
to me, a problem i call "public".
here, an interesting link on the topic. ...
.
One American City Enjoys a Hyperfast Internet -- Any Surprise Corporations Don't Control It?
It’s time for high-speed internet access for all.
http://www.alternet.org/media/one-american-city-enjoys-internet-hundreds...
.
Nope, none of that is public right now.
Which part, the fibre paid for by corporations that own the material, or the land-owners who let the wires run THROUGH their property?
How is that "public" property?
Two Florida men charged with money laundering for selling BitcoinsTwo Florida men are in trouble with the law after being arrested last week for agreeing to sell thousands of dollars’ worth of Bitcoins to undercover agents.
Criminal charges were announced on Thursday against 30-year-old Michell Abner Espinoza of Miami Beach and Pascal Reid, 29, a Canadian citizen who was living in the town of Miramar when he was apprehended last week.
According to two arrest affidavits out of the Miami Beach Police Department, both men had independently sold hundreds of dollars’ worth of the digital cryptocurrency to undercover officers since last December, but were only taken into custody on Thursday, February 6 after they each agreed to make in-person transactions involving the transfer of thousands of dollars’ worth of Bitcoin.
Both men have each been charged with one count apiece of operating an unlicensed money service business, laundering between $300 and $20,000 and laundering currency valued at more than $20,000.
“I’d expect many more state cases like this one because it will act to strangle the lifeblood of the online dark markets”
http://rt.com/usa/bitcoin-florida-laundering-arrest-431/
money laundering three hundred bucks is crime?
what the hell is the purpose of the State Lotto then?
Lotteries are a tax on the mathematically challenged
Better a tax be voluntary where some get a giant payoff for participating, than a non-voluntary tax for which you will pay far more than a ticket's price and perhaps get nothing in return but a state-sponsored beating.
That certainly harms action with localbitcoins but regardless it isn't really true: bitcoin isn't currency or money, it's nonsense & has no value at all. It's up to someone else IF they want to trade cash for bitcoin later. They may find it's worth nothing to even do so & the chart speaks for itself in this manner.
Re-selling bitcoins is no less legal than re-selling collector stamps or playing cards or pictures on a USB stick - which is fully legal.
Silly but legal.
Trading actual money for bits is something to be laughed at for its absurdity at any price, certainly laughed HARD at for those paying more than 300 each, like those who paid 1200 each btc.
But jail is not a good replacement for well-earned mockery.
I don't recall bitcoin asking Saxo Bank to opine on the situation.
Can anyone list some of the alternatives to Bitcoin?
Tulips
Fla swampland
Nigerian email scams
Euro bonds
T bonds
Tsla
Nflx
Amzn
Iwm
There's a bunch of these crypto-currencies out there and more seem to be popping up sort of like Tulips.
Here's a trading link that shows a list of these and their values:
https://coinex.pw/mining/pools
However, if you want to invest just remember I have a nice Toll Bridge for sale located just outside of Phoenix, AZ on a busy freeway. You'll be a millionaire in no time, guaranteed!!!
Gold. Barter. Face to face meetings.
Anything that requires I be on the grid: rejected, not just bitcoin.
"I think Bitcoin has made a mistake by keeping its owners anonymous."
Bitcoin is not anonymous, it's encrypted (Cryptocurrency). This is from bitcoin.org.
https://bitcoin.org/en/you-need-to-know
"Some effort is required to protect your privacy with Bitcoin. All Bitcoin transactions are stored publicly and permanently on the network, which means anyone can see the balance and transactions of any Bitcoin address. However, the identity of the user behind an address remains unknown until information is revealed during a purchase or in other circumstances. This is one reason why Bitcoin addresses should only be used once. Always remember that it is your responsibility to adopt good practices in order to protect your privacy."
"i'm carrying a load of...sorghum...Mr. Coast Guard Guy."
"Do i have a manifest for said cargo? Why....uhhhhh....uhhh, yeah! got it right here!"
(produces crumpled document that says "sorghum" verified by "Tommy, Lee and Jones of Andora Entrprises.)
Coast Guard guy: "okay...everything looks in order here. make sure those fire extinguishers are up to date!"
"yes sir. thank you very much. have a nice day!"
Oxymoron of the day: libertarian banksters who think pseudoanonymous cryptocurrencies should be open and who didn't embrace BTC because it hasn't been regulated yet...
Hard to call yourself Libertarian if you don't hold up to the principles of Libertarianism. That sort of just makes you another stooge.
There are multiple oxymorons in the post above:
- Have you heard of any libertarian banksters? No, they're parasites sucking society's blood, privatizing profits and socializing losses.
- Have you heard of a libertarian crying out for more .gov regulation? I haven't...
Enlighten us or GTFO!
edit: I didn't take a critical stance on bitcon in my post, just pointed out the obvious hypocrisy of Saxo's CEO.
USD linked to 700 trillion in derivatives...................KABOOM
Bitcoin needs to be linked to 11 aircraft carrier battle groups.
that would make a strong point.
You could create a gold based bitcoin type of currency. Who would hold the gold? Where would it be held?
There is not enough gold out there to do this. Unless you want your currency held by China and the central banks.
I appreciate the concern of folks who don't "get it", but really? Bankster coin? Or chachink coin?
They will understand eventually , when they are trading in their life's bullion savings for a few thousand satoshi , the fiat:btc price will soon be irrelevant.
OK, you're also Fonuel L. Jackstar.
How about that.
Life-savings indeed, for mere BITS. May as well be magicbeans, Jack.
No thanks. You keep smokin' them drugs.
Plenty of gold, no such thing as too little. It's just a matter of how much goods are bought with just one ounce, any proxy currency in the middle is set to a price reflecting that, even if it's 2 million per oz.
Bitcoin would make a poor proxy for this. It lacks the security of GPG/ PGP & has massive overhead where none is needed.
"There is no doubt that many central banks have made a mess of things with their own fiat money without linkage to reality, and it is entirely conceivable that the private sector could also in the area of currencies do a better job than public sector institutions."
Yeah, like Bankster banks.
The financial scene overflows with Kettles calling the FED black
The dollar isn't linked to real assets, why should bitcoin be?
USD is backed by a gun , BTC is backed by math , gold is backed by shinyness - make your choice ...
cryptogenic bullion wtf?? is that the new bio gold??
With apologies to the Atlanta Rhythm Section:
Imaginary money
Serves your every need
When others say, "oh keep away", feed your greed:
Endless profits guaranteed!
Imaginary money,
Imaginary money,
You're mine
In my mind, umm-umm-umm
ED
My well-known libertarian leanings meant that a number of like-minded friends encouraged me to get involved in this new, non-statist, unregulated experiment. Shame on me, for not listening. I hope at least they made a lot of money.
Shame on you for not being stupid? BitCoin is the "Chia pet" of finance.
The main reason, however, I did not get involved was longer-term concerns about the viability of Bitcoin, and in my view, those concerns still remain.
Media of exchange represent "promises to complete trade". BitCoin represents wasted electrical energy.
I think Bitcoin has made a mistake by keeping its owners anonymous, although some users — including some highly undesirable ones — are embracing it for that very reason.
While most traders would prefer to be anonymous, the fact that the media of exchange represents trading promises makes that impossible. You can't make anonymous trading promises and expect the marketplace to back your trades if you DEFAULT. However once a trading promise is certified, those certificates (money) circulate in simple bartar and are totally anonymous.
Due to the nature of its structure, banning Bitcoin will of course not eradicate it.
If BitCoin should be banned, government run lotteries should be banned as well. Actually, I think caveat emptor should take care of the former. A government enema should take care of the latter.
the huge price rally has been terrific, but it also carries some negative consequences.
Some negative consequences? A properly managed MOE exhibits zero INFLATION at all times everywhere. BitCoin is like the line when betting on a sporting event.
So I think Bitcoin will face serious challenges in the long run, although I believe such digital currencies could have a place in the economy in more well thought-through structures with values better linked to real assets.
If a digital currency could be created that represents trader's promises to complete trades and resists counterfeiting, it would be superior to our current paper and credit card MOE circulation.
Anything in the financial space that can be regulated will be regulated.
Management of any MOE implies regulation. Proper regulation of any MOE means observing the relation INFLATION = DEFAULT - INTEREST. It also means free certification of all trading promises at all times everywhere with INTEREST collections constantly equaling DEFAULT experience. This is different than the subjective regulation we have of our industries and the stock market. That regulation is just a sham. Proper MOE management would be robotic.
The extreme volatility and opaque ownership structure definitely poses a risk to all users of Bitcoin.
No more than the risk of purchasers of government run lotteries. They fall into exactly the same category of nonsense.
But I know personally of a couple of projects in the design phase that in my view are better constructions, and will be able to obtain rapid distribution, making them real competitors to Bitcoin.
The real competitor is a properly managed MOE. Anything else cannot compete because it can't guarantee zero INFLATION at all times everywhere. And nothing can do better than that.
But we are reviewing the digital currency space on an ongoing basis, so we may revise this at a later stage.
Unless you get a clue about what money is, your review is pointless.
Todd Marshall
Plantersville, TX
Hello, mate. What if you stopped pigeon-holing BTC in the MOE role for a sec and approached it as a virtual commodity? Or in the words of Satoshi Nakamoto:
As a thought experiment, imagine there was a base metal as scarce as gold but with the following properties:
- boring grey in colour
- not a good conductor of electricity
- not particularly strong, but not ductile or easily malleable either
- not useful for any practical or ornamental purpose
and one special, magical property:
- can be transported over a communications channel
If it somehow acquired any value at all for whatever reason, then anyone wanting to transfer wealth over a long distance could buy some, transmit it, and have the recipient sell it.
Maybe it could get an initial value circularly as you’ve suggested, by people foreseeing its potential usefulness for exchange. (I would definitely want some) Maybe collectors, any random reason could spark it.
"So I think Bitcoin will face serious challenges in the long run, although I believe such digital currencies could have a place in the economy in more well thought-through structures with values better linked to real assets."...
I also think Bitcoin will face serious challenges in the (short and long run) along with all other e-commerce markets and business without law(s) which govern and protect the privacy and security both of the individual and the businesses interests on the internet, which means new rules and better more enhanced security services that are already out there but are not being mandated or used both domestically and internationally by commerical service providers.
I called the apex at $1200 or so but could find a way to short this donkey.
Hey Fonestupid, will you lend me your 2 shitcoins for a few months so that I may sell them for $600 today and buy them back at $6 in a few months?
Let's hook this up monkeyboy!
So agressive, did you get raped by a BTC? You should really settle down and take it easy. If you want to talk about it, I don't want to hear it, but there are therapists out there.
hmmm, Great Butthurt I sense in you.
"... Needs links to real assets."
Mmm.... like gold? That was just precious. These guys don't even know how stupid they sound.
News tomorrow: Bitcoin got hacked.
The next day: US Government and international partners launch a regulated cryptocurrency.
The gubbement watchin' out for it's real customers?
"Bitcoin is at best a service. It is not money."
So I'm holding and spending some service? Try again. At worst Bitcoin is the money; at best it is the protocol that is going to change everything about the way we share data.
no, at best bitcoin is a service to provide money / assets but it may not do so.
At worst it is pixie dust and nothing will be given for it. Maybe a handful of magic beans.
Saxo Bank; late to the party again.
Funny how a banker is claiming something needs to be tied to something real. EVERYTHING THESE BANKING FUCKS DEAL IN IS SO FAR FROM REALITY how about our stock exchange?? or the S and P?? or the price of gold?? or the dollar?? Priceless. And all these nay sayers on here are siding with the banker. Am I on zerohedge or CNBC?????? WTF
Which of the following is real:
(a) COMEX price of gold in dollars (or anything else)
(b) Local coin-shop price for gold
(c) BTC quoted price
(d) S&P index fund price
(e) NFLX quoted price
(f) FB quoted price
(g) DJIA index fund price
Of the list, I'd say only (b) is real BEFORE you buy it; all the rest are MADE real when you buy it. That being said, you could still make a case that all of them are unreal until you "sign on the dotted line". A lot of our current market chaos is due to people manipulating prices up and down with paper promises; even more is due to sheer lies, theft and chicanery. But if you (justifiably) say that the S&P, DJIA and all the rest are made real by your purchase, what is the difference between bemoaning the lack of reality of BTC and the lack of reality in the S&P? Seems to me that's what this discussion is really about; ALL of them can be said to be fake, until you exchange your fiat for one and the deal is solidified.
We are not on the side of the bankers; but their lies do not make BTC real, either. {Edit: typo "but" = "buy"
Same as they tried to convince us that our money in the bank is in the bank's vault. LOL
bu..bu... full faith and credit... odds evah in our favah... they promised!!
"Tied to real assets" might be the biggest banker con game of all. Bankers have custody of the "real assets", can lie about how much "real assets" are in custody, and since there's no redeemability, nobody can audit said "real assets".
Redeemable in real assets is the only way to have any honesty, but even that isn't foolproof. Custodian can still issue more currency than real assets support, on the assumption everbody won't want to redeem their currency at the same time.
So neither "backed by" nor "redeemable" are fraudproof, and bankers are quintisential fraudsters.
The only fraudproof thing is no currency, just use the real assets themselves as currency, and that's what America's founders intended right in the constitution, declaring only physical gold and silver as money in America.
By the way, they didn't give the new federal government any authority in the constitution to print paper currency, just mint gold and silver coiins. (No, the clause about not questioning federal debt did NOT confer authority to print paper currency.)
In the 230 years since then we've gone thru several paper currencies, each one became worthless eventually, or retained value but was removed from circulation because it was redeemable and the "real assets" were gone (i.e. gold and silver certificates).
The latest paper currency, Federal Reserve Notes, never were redeemable domestically, only internationally, and that ended in 1971 when the Fed and US Treasury realized they were running out of gold to do international redemptions with.
Bitcoin is the next logical step beyond non-redeemable un-backed paper currency. A make-believe currency that isn't even on paper, just numbers on a ledger sheet (or in a computer). Just a score on a scoreboard, nothing more.
Banks are the scorekeepers for make-believe US dollars. Blockchain is the scorekeeper for make-believe bitcoin. That's the only fundamental difference.
Ok, that and the fact that bitcoin isn't the government-sanctioned currency for the country, and isn't controlled by the bankers. Two reasons it will be outlawed eventually.
Functionality of bitcoin isn't the issue. Ease of use isn't the issue.
Outside control of bankers and govt is the issue, why it will be outlawed.
Mark to fantasy - yeah our money is linked to something real like ink in books.
You could/should say about the US Dollar. The US Dollar represents Debt that is backed up by more Debt. Debt is a Asset, only in the USA.
Bitcoin is linked to other Currencies. As they fall in value, Bitcoins increase in value. It's a hedge against Fiat Currencies.
The "backed by debt" argument is complete bullshit. The debt is merely an offsetting bookeeping entry, just to keep the books in balance. Beyond that it's totally meaningless.
Debt is not assets. Booking debt as assets is absolute fraud, but bankers had accounting laws changed to allow this fraud.
Federal Reserve Notes have absolutely no backing at all. Debt is not an asset, so debt cannot back a currency. Saying it does is outright fraud.
Bitcoin is not linked to other currencies. It's not linked to anything. It's a free-floating make-believe commodity, just a score on a blockchain scoreboard.
Bottom line, bitcoin is a multi-player computer game. But so is the "US dollar" now.
BTC has gold backing right now. I will sell one ounce of gold to any takers for 3 BTC
Fuck yeah, let's do this.
Hmmm, amagimetals.com currently selling Au at 1.9 BTC per ounce.
Deal of the century! Especially for those who paid 1200 per BTC. :-) Well, better later than never to get tangibles... and better to do it now before BTC hits 102 again but stays there next time. I'm reasonably certain you wouldn't do 3 btc= 1 oz .9999 fine gold then. If you'd like, of course, feel free.
Yeah, the USD backed by a buncha fucking IOU's???? Are you fucking kidding me????? And now they want us to buy into that as a retirement model??? This is a fucking fantasy land fairy tale nightmare right??? Nope, they want to bash BTC because its not backed by enough debt, LOL
No. the USD is backed by its convertability into oil...
Or put in another way, the USD is backed by depleted Uranium...
things change dopehead..
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/21/china-crudeoil-idUSL4N0J62M120...
USD was backed by bombs as last gasp.. slow slide now
That doesnt mean anything. So is BTC, I can convert BTC into anything just like the dollar, that doesnt mean that it is backed by anything real, if the desire for the fucking paper goes to shit. How much oil can you buy if everyone panics and the paper is worthless?? If this thing tanks, the panic hits, after a couple of weeks you would see signs saying "no cash, barter only" at the gas stations. Go then and explain to the gas station owner that your dollar has convertability to oil and therefore gas. He will give you lead for an opinion.
What is your point? Do you understand what "backed by it's convertability to dollars" means? You appear to.
BTW, currencies rarely if ever die in "panics".... Quit reading the doomer porn, yes, the dollar will die, but it will take longer than many here will think...
I think you fail to understand:
depleted uranium > lead
The assets are the massive computer arrays and energy to dycrypt Bitcoin. Totally backable and measurable. Always a known quantity.
Yes, but that is not intrinsic value. Once you have mined the coin, the energy is gone and not stored in the coin.
[quote]
(Needs Link To Real Assets)[/quote]
Hmm, kinda like the "real assets" that FRNs are linked to? (Naw!)
Our notes are linked to real assets, the conscription of Americans, Is your freedom worth anything?
Anybody that thinks we can escape our obligations is fooling themselves.
those who changed citizenship & left forever have indeed escaped.
Bullish for doge
timbaarrRRRRRR