45k more aurcana shares went though, managed to even hit the absolute low of the day.
Ryan Richardson
Bought vangold @ 0.21. perfect time to be buying. I can only see minimal downside potential from here. very asymmetrical play, i havent been able to find anything with a similar risk:reward profile. Their property is incredible and I really like their CEO.
I was hoping klondike would dump a bit so i could pick up some more, but its holding pretty strong.
>Bitcoin is not a good/service. There is no value in and of itself. You can't measure how valuable it is against goods and services. This is the interesting part to me. The aggregate value of your money/currency should probably be a function of: >the total circulating supply + >some factor related to the non-circulating supply + >some factor of its industrial demand. I would hazard that this should be equal to something like the total utility of the use of money against 1) barter and/or 2) a factor of the value of your next best currency.
VGLD is another good one, picked up a lot at about 24-25 cents, yeah its down a bit off that, but I still think its solid. 21 is an absolute steal man good buy
Bitcoin is another form of a fiat ponzi scheme that will eventually go to zero just like the dollar because paper and internet money are backed by zero intrinsic tangible value.
I just came across this while looking at my UUUU and actually priding myself for having a decent player this week among my other mining stocks. Took a quick glance at their 10k and see pic related.
Their assets/liabilities ratio gap is pretty wide in terms of having liquid cash. They have some prospects in terms of land (maybe Pan Man can dive further into this) to go along with this. With all that spare room they have, to go along with their $296m MC, it could possibly be a dark horse play for uranium.
I know with everyone fawning over the UUUU meme (hell, I'm playing it admittedly) mostly because it's an American company, UEC is Canadian and I'm not sure about their future with uranium or nuclear energy. And their quarterly earnings seem to fall a point or two each quarter. Not exactly sure what to make of it. Here's the link to their 10k for anyone that has better eyes than I do.
The indirect exchange system addresses these difficulties. In the indirect exchange system you 'sell' your good not for a good that you need directly, but for another good which you can then 'sell' for the good that you need. This interim 'good' becomes the medium of exchange(money).
For this to work, the medium of exchange must, like all the goods we wish to exchange it for, be a commodity with qualities that ensure there is constant demand. The reason being is simple - if we are to exchange goods for another good(the medium of exchange) rather than the good we want directly, we must be confident that the good which is now acting as a medium of exchange will have sufficient 'demand' from someone else who possesses the goods we want to 'buy' in exchange for the good which is now acting as the medium of exchange.
For example: if a farmer wants to exchange some wheat for say, some furniture from an artisan, there must be an artisan willing to exchange their furniture for the wheat in return. But the artisan doesn't want wheat in exchange for their furniture- however there are wide array of goods in the economy that the artisan WOULD want in exchange for the furniture.
This is where the indirect exchange system comes in. The two parties, who both have goods they wish to exchange between each other, can now use a 'medium of exchange' to complete the exchange.
There are SEVERAL uranium tickers /smg/ has been ignoring. Hell, CCJ only popped up here because it fucking mooned today. Rule of thumb; /smg/ may offer decent advice a lot of the time if you can tell the difference between it and a shitpost, but there's always more to be found. URNM did better than UEC today, and STLD did better than X and CLF.
Blake Baker
The artisan doesn’t want the wheat in exchange for his furniture, so therefore they cant barter with wheat. The artisan also isn’t confident that he can exchange the wheat in turn for the goods he wants In the future, so the parties cant use wheat as the medium of exchange. The artisan would however be willing to exchange his furniture for a certain quantity of copper – a commodity which he both has immediate need for AND is confident we will be able to use as a medium of exchange for goods he will need in the future.
The farmer is also able to exchange his wheat for copper, as there is a miner who wants to exchange his copper directly for wheat, and the farmer is confident he will be able to use the copper as a medium of exchange for goods he will need in the future, in this case, the artisans furniture. Thus, the medium of exchange is born, and copper acts as the ‘Money’ which the farmer uses to ‘buy’ the artisans furniture.
We see displayed here one key characteristic of the means of exchange, and that is that is that it is able to act as a ‘store of value’. For a good to act as a ‘store of value’ it means that it can essentially retain ‘purchasing power’, meaning people can be confident that the same quantity of the medium of exchange can reliably be exchanged for the same quantity of other goods throughout the economy. We can now use exchange ratios(prices), to tell us how what quantity of a certain good we can get in exchange for a certain quantity of money. For prices to be stable, and ultimately then for economies to be stable, then it is essential that money to be the best store of value possible. The free market will determine which commodity best serves as a means of exchange, as it is in everyone’s interest to exchange and store their value as effectively as possible.
I have a very large position in SBSW. Can you tell me more about this one?
Hunter Clark
Something is a store of value if and only if: 1). There is value in and of itself to store, and 2). Stored value is reliably retained over time.
As Bitcoin doesn't have much history, it doesn't satisfy 2).
However, Bitcoin HODLers may argue that Bitcoin is a speculative store of value. It can only be the case if it at least satisfies 1).
However, Bitcoin does not satisfy 1) either.
Bitcoin's supposed utility is as: a). a medium of exchange, and b). a speculative store of value.
b) is what is debated against in this argument.
For a), a medium of exchange has value in and of itself only if it is a good with its own value & utility other than as a medium.
Medium of exchange was invented as a lingua franca of barter of goods for goods, i.e. a universal good with its own value & utility other than as a medium of exchange, and that value & utility can be measured against other goods.
Bitcoin's only supposed utility is a) and b), and no other.
Therefore, Bitcoin suffers the very problem why fiat money fails as a store of value: there is no value in and of itself to store.
the same argument destroys gold since the value was previously retained throughout history but was abandoned in the last 50 years causing the value to fluctuate
same with silver
there is no store of value that meets your criteria.
QED >anonsuckingcock.jpeg
Bentley Cox
The only uranium company I’m comfortable holding right now is CCJ. They’re big and they make a lot of money and if uranium prices really take off and demand picks up they’re going to capture most of the upside. These small companies just seem like the typical small-cap pump and dump type business that happens frequently on here and other online forums. I’ve actually looked at energy fuels and I like it, but I think it’s way too early to be going that far down the quality chain.
Jose Howard
So I have about 20k that I want to drop into physical, as all I have currently is 50 oz of silver maples. I've been trying to follow all the usual financial youtubers to keep aware of the goings on, but the more I watch what is happening, the more convinced I am that we might have a major deflationary event that lasts at least a week or more before congress gets their shit together and does anything, and even then, I assume it will take a while for people to start putting money back I to the market if we get MMT. My question is, should I wait for the event to occur to buy physical when everything dumps, and sell my miners at break even or a small profit now and re-buy during the event? I know that getting your hands on physical was a pain in the ass in March for lots of people, but was that true here in Canada as well?
Ryder Cruz
Through much due process over the course of human history, the laws of supply and demand have deducted that Gold and Silver are the most efficient means of exchange.
We can now clearly see what ‘Money’ truly is, and what it cant be.
'Fiat Money', issued by governments, and ultimately backed by nothing but the commodities in which they are manufactured(in most quantities now, nothing, as they are digital) - are worthless and cannot function as a successful means of exchange over the long term. They certainly cannot be a long term 'store of value', as they are not a commodity, there is no 'value' to store, and there is no reasonable expectation that the fiat money can retain purchasing power over the long term.
'Crypto currency', like bitcoin, despite the common consensus, is ultimately no different from fiat in that it likewise is not a commodity and therefore has no 'value' to store. Despite its superiority in a digital, 'decentralised' sense, it is even inferior as a means of exchange, as it is slow, expenses and difficult to exchange(relative to other mediums).
