[00:00:01] Speaker A: Welcome to Crypto Talk Radio, the podcast for everyday investors like you. Visit us on the
[email protected] and now here's your host, Leister.
[00:00:13] Speaker B: Thank you for that, Bailey. And welcome, everybody out there in Crypto Talk radio,
[email protected]. we got a slim episode today. I'm currently waiting on food about to show up, and I'm gonna. I'm getting close to needing to pay attention to stuff that I didn't want to. I had some student loans, and I don't know if you guys were paying attention to this or not.
Obviously, Joe Biden lost his plea to waive student loan debt, and I wasn't. Apparently, I was approved for that. Ironically, I was approved for it, but of course, it got shot down in the courts. It's fine. So then Biden did an end run, and he said, you know, you can. If you go into forbearance, you don't have any interest. So I took advantage of that. Deep, deep, deep. We're talking my taxpayer money, so I'm entitled. It wasn't that I don't want to pay them back. It's. I don't think there should be interest on those loans, primarily because at least. At least two. Actually. There's. There's three different schools, if I recall. I think it's. And one school I went to like three times, but there's like two different schools, minimum, that were just blatant.
I don't want to call them scams because I can't prove that, but they were not. They were not in the best interest of the student.
So I got a degree, but I got the degree from a school that didn't need any federal student debt.
So the ones that. The ones where there's created federal student debt, they didn't give me a certificate. They gave me credit transfer credit, which I did use, but not all the credit was valuable because that's a scam, transfer credit. But the one school that, you know, I did that one, and then, boom, they gave me the degree. Didn't need any loans for that school.
So it's not that I don't want to pay them back. It was fine. I didn't want to pay them back when they wanted me to pay them back. So I put them in forbearance because I didn't want to pay them until I was ready to pay them. Then I got to thinking, you know what happens if you die and you'll pay it back.
And in my case, nobody else will be settled with the debt, so that's kind of cool. And I was like so maybe I should buy some additional time and just never do it because I've got three years of forbearance. Anyway, let's talk cryptocurrency. We got a couple of points and then I'm going to talk jeremy foreignesk.com and we are going to zoom out to the month chart starting with Ethereum since Ethereum is where my focus has been as I've been telling you for a while and if you knew, welcome. But if you've been listening for a while, you told me you heard Leister tell you that Ethereum was always the center of the hub spoke design. I'll tell you why here in a second. But as I look at it over the past 24 hours, a lower 2900, a high of 31 just shy of 31 and 40, currently trending about the 3100 mark with an upward trend that seems like it won't stop and we expect to go even somewhat higher. I will remind you to temper your expectations because of course Ethereum's all time high is somewhere in the neighborhood of 4800, so we still got a ways to go. That said, the current run that we see on Ethereum is what I've been hoping to see for some time. Hopefully we can get even more upward trend past the all time high because I've said that Ethereum by now should be five figures if we're going off actual numbers. What do I mean when I say actual numbers? Well, to answer that question, why don't we flip over to Bitcoin? Because Bitcoin, although it's also in an upward trend, a low of 116 grand, a high of just shy of 120 grand, just shy of it currently trending at the 117 grand mark as I record this and it's not having the same upward trend as Ethereum, do you know what that tells me? It tells me what I said to be the truth, which is that Ethereum is always been the key and that Bitcoin's recent pump, although it is valid and legitimate opportunity for profit, is nowhere near as sustained as Ethereum in the same time period for the same reasons. It's also possible that people are selling Bitcoin to get into Ethereum. That's very plausible. We have to acknowledge though that Bitcoin we expect that it should blast past 120,000 mark because remember, Bitcoin's all time high if I recall, is just shy of 123 grand. I might be off on that one, but I seem to think 123 grand was like the all time high and it didn't last.
Some of that was testing, some of that was just artificial.
If people are truly selling their Bitcoin to get into Ethereum, you got to wonder about that. Some people were wondering what happens if Ethereum starts to surpass. And I don't think because of the supply that it really can. But some people were saying what if it surpasses Bitcoin in price value? The only way that could feasibly happen, and we'll speculate, let's spitball that. The only way that could feasibly happen is A it is the one that is adopted by a lot of these large players that are currently adopting Bitcoin. B, a lot of the smart contracts continue to be used above and beyond many of the other alts as well as the layer twos3 regulatory oversight. Ethereum has been by and large the one left alone. The reason I don't think that Ethereum is going to surpass Bitcoin has to do with proof of stake. I don't, I don't buy the argument that proof of stake is superior to proof of work for multiple reasons. I won't get into here, but this is my stance and I want you to hold me to it. I'm making. See that's how I am different from everybody else.
I make these statements and sometimes I'm definitive, sometimes I'm not. But I ask you to hold me to my statements. I, to see if I get it wrong. If I get it right, you come back in my credit. But from what I can tell, in my opinion, I'm looking at it and I see it's pretty darn straightforward. That Ethereum has always been the key in order to get to those higher levels that we expect. It doesn't mean that Bitcoin's not going to climb. Simply I say my argument is that Ethereum is going to need to go on major runs before we see the serious runs of Bitcoin. Now that we've already hit this level and it seems like it's struggling to get past certain thresholds. But we did briefly break out of the range that I did an episode about a little while ago, you know, the 100 to 110 mark we did break out of, that one did go a little bit up. It just, it didn't sustain. And here we are at 100 and just shy of 118 grand. It is going Back up now, but it's not the strong upward trend that we see on the Ethereum side. So as other YouTubers tell you that bitcoin is always the key and we'll talk about Da Vinci, Jeremy and something he said about that business.
Just remember your uncle Leister has always maintained I'm leaning more towards Ethereum. Not to dismiss Bitcoin, but I think that Ethereum is simply going to be one where you it's going to absorb a lot of the market cap that we see broad across the industry. I just feel that's going to be the case because it happened already before and we've not hit the all time high at this point. If I recall it and Solana are like the only two that have not hit their previous all time high. Well, how can you explain that? We can only explain that by aggressive suppression. I also want to look at some of the other ones that are paired with Ethereum, like bone that's in the crapper. Well, how can that be? Because bones all time highs like three bucks and yet it's got nowhere close to it. Yet SHIB maintains its stability at the upper levels. Things don't really make sense. And that's why when I see things don't make sense like this, it tells me that we got a ways to go up.
And so I'm not as skeptical as some other people, but I'm also not as strong on bitcoin like those same people. Not to dismiss it simply I'm not as strong on it.
The problem I think with bitcoin at this point is it's too popular.
And this goes to again something I'll talk about with DaVinci Germany, but I think it's too popular. When it gets too popular there starts to be this narrative around what we should be doing with it. And they might want to try to lock a. What lock away a lot of the access points to it or over regulate because of its popularity. If you already have it, then they want to increase things like reporting and tax reporting and all that stuff because they're trying to own it, they're trying to control it. Can they control it? No, it's decentralized. I'm saying that they can put all sorts of barriers at onerous use because remember you're not going to get cash out of that business if you can't get access to a central exchange or a bank. So they can regulate the hell out of it to make it a pain to transact with it. And I suspect that some of these alts are trying to do as much they can to stay away from that and be the standout. Like bitcoin cash. Some of them were coming out saying, see, we told you bitcoin's already compromised. We're not compromised. We kept to the. We kept to the truth. Bitcoin sv. We kept to the vision. They're saying that bitcoin itself is compromised. Its price looks good because it's a trap. They want to trap you in it, then they want to control it, then you're stuck. Then there's nothing you can do. And it might be subject to the whims of these ups and downs. I can't say any of that's true or false or otherwise. I am suggesting that it is kind of ironic that bitcoin is getting the most of the attention, but none of it doesn't seem to be flowing consistently to all the other ones out there. Meanwhile, when Ethereum runs up, the vast majority of everything else runs. And so I always look at Ethereum as my flag. It tells me where things are truly going, not the artificial that we see on some of the other stuff.
So I'm. I am doing a little tinfoil to say that I think that there is still going to be some government crunch. Some people were saying, yeah, but Trump said no CBDCs. I know what he said. Unfortunately, he was. He's only one man. His executive order has to be codified. It's referred to as in written into law in order to actually be enforceable. Other than that, it's just him ranting. Speaking of the lack of said, the House rejects the rule package, even though Trump's pushing for what he's trying to push for. And this goes to the genius act and some of all these other ones where there are some in government who are still pushing for this idea of CDBCs. And despite Trump saying, We don't want CBDCs, it's not going to happen. We're banning that. It doesn't matter. Because he's one man. You got to codify it. That's what some of these laws were trying to do, is to literally limit the ability to put CBDCs, to limit all the surveillance and everything that was being proposed.
Meanwhile, you got banks that are launching stablecoins. And the idea is that as they can rush to get this stuff out of there because there's no regulatory oversight on it at this point, that if you want to try to get fiat out of any of them, you're going to run into that brick wall that I just talked about because they're going to force you to use their stuff in order to get through. And then, of course, they already know who you are if you have an account. The point is they can track every single thing, every single thing you do. It's going to be duly noted to the irs. So when you crack a million dollars and all that, they're going to duly note to the IRS, the IRS is going to want to take 50 of it. You have to understand the world that's being proposed. Regardless of Gary Gensler being gone, you still have people in Congress itself that are trying to limit your ability to freely transact this stuff in the United States. Meanwhile, in Dubai and other places, they're just freely going forward with all sorts of stuff to embrace it without overly restricting it. So the vote was stalled. It's a huge. There's a lot of pissed off people, including Trump himself. And they're going to go out of another vote and go second round. I think it's going to have some more problems going through. I could be wrong. They're trying to bulk it in with defense spending, which has nothing to do with it. That's part of the problem. And they know what they're doing. They're doing it because they're looking at the sticker shock of a thing, when the sticker shock has nothing to do with the crackdown of cryptocurrency. So you're not going to get the regulatory oversight that's going to sustain institutional support of crypto and buying into it. This might. I'm not trying to tinfoil you. This might cause a little bit of hesitancy on a lot of institutions where they might pull back some of their money. I can't say they will, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did, is the point. So it's something to keep an eye on is what's going to happen with our Congress and the incompetence of said.
Now, I said it won't be a long episode. We're going to wrap up by responding to an inquiry. The inquiry was very simple. What the hell is wrong with Da Vinci Jeremy and what is he talking about, if you didn't know? Da Vinci Jeremy took a hiatus from online. He's not on YouTube or hasn't been last I checked. So he took a hiatus. I don't know if there's something personal going on or what the deal is, but he was not doing any recording. He wasn't on Mr. M's. I didn't see him at all.
But before he Left. He did an episode with Mr. M and he put out. He was having a conversation and he put out some statements that I think confused some people. And I thought I would take an opportunity to try to translate what it was he was trying to say, then provide my thoughts on what he was trying to say, what he was implying. He was in. He was in response to some people who are sticker shocked at bitcoin's price. There's some people, I actually saw this on some comments who say bitcoin's too expensive, right? It's too expensive, it's too high. And Jeremy was saying, no, you should buy the top of bitcoin.
And people are like, what the hell's wrong with you? Why would you tell people to buy the top of any cryptocurrency?
This is where he started responding in a way that confused people.
What he's saying or has said in his video is that there is no such thing as a top for bitcoin. He's of the opinion that its value is. It's. It's only at the beginning phases of its true value and that its value is going to continue to increase and appreciate over time. Now, we know he was one of the ones in the early phases, as with Mr. Segala, who I interviewed, and a couple of others, where they were at the early phases of bitcoin when it was hard to buy it, and the guy with the pizza and all that stuff where they were given the tokens. And we see now that some of these early people that were received junk, tons of tokens now have billions of dollars worth of tokens that they're moving after so long. So we know that there's some legitimacy to the IDE idea that the value is going to appreciate over the long span. We understand that it's strongly probable that bitcoin's price really does not have a ceiling that we can identify or predict.
The flaw I think, of that assessment is it makes the assumption about market cap and how market cap must work. And global money, there's only so much global money, there's quite a bit of it. But global money is shared amongst asset classes. Since it's shared, there's only so much in the pie. So in order to sustain the idea that bitcoin is going to have an infinite ceiling, you have to support the narrative that all of this money that's sitting in these other asset classes will flow towards bitcoin. Will it? I don't know.
Somebody else, I think it was binance stuff, even made the argument that remember that gold could be discovered on some other planet. Gold could be anywhere else. So it's not an inf. It's not a finite supply. It's an infinite supply, essentially, as far as we know.
He's not wrong either.
The one constant I think of gold in my personal assessment is people already own it at high numbers. So if we look at bitcoin, the number of people that hold bitcoin is very slim. It's not significant like we might think it should be. It's a very small percentage. We hear it on the news all the time. But there really isn't a lot of people who hold bitcoin. There are a lot of people who hold. Who hold gold. There are quite a few people that hold silver. You hold silver if you hold coins, believe it or not. So these metals are kind of more diverse than bitcoin could ever dream of being. The theory that bitcoin is going to surpass gold, silver and other precious metals in terms of who holds it, it sounds good. And there may come a time in the future when such is the case. I would speculate that won't happen in our lifespans. This is my opinion all the matter. And it assumes a government that's willing to embrace it. I'm talking United States, but also international.
I'm. When I say embrace it, I'm not talking like El Salvador. We're just going to stack. I'm talking embrace it, fully embrace it of what it is, which is not only is it part of our reserve, we don't care what you do with it. We're going to allow banks to transact with it. We're not going to force the kyc stupidity. We're not going to use it to try to trace terrorist activity. We're not going to treat it like a criminal token like Kamala Harris did. When I say embrace it, I mean you're not treating it like criminal currency. You're not treating people who transact it like criminals. You're not worried about how they buy it. You're not worried about how they sell it. You're not worried about what they do with it. If you get to that point, maybe there's a case. I don't think they're going to get to that point, in my opinion. But then he made another comment where apparently somebody was talking to him about, yeah, but if it's a million, it's gonna be too expensive.
And he was saying it won't matter.
This threw people off it really, because they're. They're focused on the price, they're focused on the price today. They're focused on price potential, they're focused on price appreciation, they're focused on accessibility.
And I wanted to help translate what he's trying to say. Okay.
He is talking about a world where you're transacting with the bitcoin itself and the value of the bitcoin itself is decoupled from its fiat equivalent value.
So he's talking about this narrative that later bitcoin will be of so much value to somebody as a store of value that the fiat equivalency won't matter.
That if you're sitting on half a bitcoin, let's say, which is a lot of money, if you're sitting on half a Bitcoin, 50,000 bucks, okay, that at some point, because it's not readily available anywhere else, you would be able to use all or some of that bitcoin to do routine transactions of some kind, even if it's something like a vehicle. He gave the analogy of a mansion where at some point somebody might say, I'm willing to let my mansion go if you're willing to give me one bitcoin.
The reason that I understand where he's coming from, he's coming from a world of scarcity, where the value of said is so significant that it makes logical sense, as was the case during the gold rush. The reason I think it's flawed is that if you look at gold now, and I'm only picking on gold, if you look at gold now, with the exception of those countries that are impoverished, we're not seeing this rush towards precious metals.
Those that are going to precious metals are already decently established enough to be able to afford it because they're still attributing it to fiat equivalency.
The reason they're all being attributed to fiat equivalency and likely will continue to do so is because ultimately bills have to be paid.
I will say, and I want you to hold me on this, I will say that you will never have a world where your utility company will accept cryptocurrency of any kind, regardless of its fiat value in lieu of fiat. There's too much in the house of cards you have. They have to pay their salaries for their employees. The reason they have to pay salaries to the employees is that the employees have to have a place to live. They have to have food to eat.
They have to pay utility companies those utility cut and so on, right?
Buildings, property taxes, we talk about, yeah, you can. This government said you can Pay your property tax for crypto. You're not paying with crypto. They're taking the crypto through a third party who's converting it to Fiat. It's not the same as what Jeremy's trying to say. Jeremy's trying to say that there's a world where there will no longer be an equivalency. The fiat Fiat such that the price of it in fiat won't matter anymore because it has an intrinsic value. And I'm saying I understand why he thinks that's a reality and it might very well happen. It won't happen in our lifespans, I guarantee you. No, it's not possible because everything is so intertwined to Fiat. And I talked about debt instruments and loans and asset backed securities and there's so many different things. Bonds are tied to fiat equivalencies, stocks are tied to fiat equivalencies, all of these are tied to fiat equivalency. At some level. You're never going to unravel that. And when you talk about paying people, it's not, it's not practical to pay people off of something you don't own. Right. You got to have something to pay those people. Those people are going to be expecting to receive that payment in a form that allows them to pay their bills. And paying your bills has to be calculated with Fiat because it's always been that way since the beginning.
You're never going to, we're talking centuries now. You're never going to get away from centuries of a design for how currency worked.
Even when it was a promissory note where we said we promised we got this much gold sitting in a vault somewhere.
Even when it was the promissory note based something, there was not this blind rush towards that. It was all that we could do because we didn't want the gold to get out of control. Those that did the gold rush and cashed out got theirs. It came and went. We didn't have another gold rush. We're not stacking and stockpiling gold. Gold didn't skyrocket to millions of dollars due to the at least proposed scarcity at the time. None of that happened. It hit to a point and now it trades kind of sideways. That's what I think is going to happen to bitcoin. We just don't know how high that number is likely to be given its greater scarcity. That rhymes of asset compared to other asset classes. We don't know that yet. I'm saying I understand what Jeremy's trying to say. I emphatically disagree. It's a reality in our lifespans. I'm not suggesting it never will happen. I'm saying that none of us will be alive to see it if it does happen, because it's too. Our system is too ingrained and too embedded and too chaotic and to even support such a narrative from my lens.
What do you do then?
I've said it before, I think you should hold some bitcoin. I think there's no downside to holding bitcoin. I think there's no downside holding any of the cores even now.
And as long as you don't put as much, you know, money to put you in the, in the red, you're fine. You know, make sure it's. Throw away money at all times. Toss a little bit for your check. You know something, just understand, I think some people are so embedded in this idea of being a millionaire overnight. Why long as you can make some money, what the hell do you matter? What does it matter, right? And then it's going to have ups and downs. I mean, just wait. I guarantee you bitcoin is going to crash. I guarantee you there's no way it's going to keep going up forever from here. At some point it's going to crash again. We're going to have another crash down and you'll be watching and saying, well, geez, let's say it goes down to 70,000 bucks, which some people are estimating. 70,000 bucks is a steep discount over what it is right now.
Just not long ago we were looking at it, 12,000 bucks. These, these are major dips. But it just happens to be the nature of the beast. And it's the way it's going to be that way for a long time, if not eternity.
But you can never, it's never a bad time to consider investing or consider investing more. It simply is that you more your money goes further if it's dipped down. We also expect that we're not going to get rate cuts, which sucks.
Most say we're not going to get rate cuts. I'm waiting for rate cuts because I'd like to do a refi. But if we're not going to get rate cuts, there's no value in doing a refi. I agree with Trump in one regard, which is that rate should have been cut a long time ago. We should not see mortgages, as an example, any greater than 3% at this point. It's a joke. They're doing it artificial. It's not helping.
If we see those go down, I believe it helps the housing market in every single state possible but they understand, well, you know this inflation is up by a couple points and whatever, fine.
Then you're going to see a rush to cryptocurrency.
At some point it's going to crash back down.
I expect that to happen.
I'm going to watch Etherium because it's what tells me when that's going to happen.
If Ethereum hits that all time high and exceeds it, a crash is coming soon after and then we just have to see, okay, what does that mean for everything, everybody else and everybody's wealth status? By status and wealth I mean your, your individual wealth, you know, everything, all your assets because everything has a stacked effect. If one gets impacted, everything else gets impacted. That's what I want to see and that's going to tell us where we go from there over the next three, five, whatever years.
SAM.
