Reddit Posts
Stephen Colbert treads neutral territory with his NFT approach. Makes an AFT (actual fucking thing) and sells it on eBay for $33,000 USD. Goes one step further by making an NFT avatar of himself holding his AFT. 100 percent of proceeds go to charity.
⚜️Arewa Finance Token⚜️ | Low Tax ⚜️ | Stealth Launched ! ⚜️| LP Locked 🔒 | low MC |💰We Are Going To The Moon
⚜️Arewa Finance Token⚜️ | Low Tax 😮 | Stealth Launched ! 🚀 | LP Locked 🔒 | low MC |💰We Are Going To The Moon🌕
Ape Fun Token — Gaming, Art, Music & Film — On the Blockchain | First dApp is Live | Just Listed on CMC & CG
Super Heavy AFT | Just stealth launch 1 hours ago | $300 MarketCap | easy 10-100x | Launched
Mentions
you know what i mean upcoming AFT🤣
whats the next AFT we all on ladies n gentlemen🔥🔥
Certain departments in government are creating guidelines and trying to act they're laws now. *cough (AFT) cough*
The AFT has classified shoestrings of a certain length as machineguns before. You probably had one and didn't even know it. The Govt has a long tradition of making no sense, then doubling down on its position of absurdity.
I live in Canada, in Ontario of all places. Your regulations to ours are basically meaningless. You specifically used the qualifier \*heavily\* regulated, which is just not true. I'm a financial advisor here and have working professional knowledge of both of our regulatory environments, and I can tell you now that the compliance required to put up an exchange in the US is distinct, but not stringent. It's just basic AML, AFT, KYC and tax reporting. Your MSB's have what's considered to be mostly free reign in that their reporting requirements and monitoring are minimal so long as they meet those basic criteria.
Stephen Colbert sold his paper lunch bag with a note on it as an AFT (Actual Fucken Thing) for over $30,000 and donated it for charity. Before letting it go he took a picture of it as an NFT.
I don't understand. Make something, call it an AFT then sell it for inflated amount of money?
A fart in a jar is an AFT not an NFT
> It becomes a liability on their balance sheet. It is an asset on their balance sheet. One that disappears if you dont pay it off. They certainly dont have to pay it off for you. It may eventually attract negative attention from the fed if ti happens too often, but that is the worst of it. > Otherwise banks would just loan out infinite money The Fed has some rules and guidelines about when and how they can mint; to prevent infinite money from making the whole game collapse. They know that theyll get in trouble if they print too much. They have a quote on how much they can devalue, and what the rules are for doing it. > This applies to taking a low interest loan on any hard asset that tracks up with inflation. It could be gold, re, tractors, bullets, toilet paper, sugar, etc... your loan debt is devalued while your hard asset tracks up with inflation. These assets arent "hard" enough for that to be true. A house loses value and has high costs. Just like a car, a house is an expense and not much better of an investment. Toilet paper is bulky and expensive to store, easily damaged. Sugar is fairly shelf stable, but easily damaged by pests. Gold is devalued with fake gold, and sometimes banned. Ammo is probably the best on that list, except there is legal risk in trying to sell it. (the AFT sometimes goes apeshit on sellers for no valid reason) You arent beating inflation, thats my whole point. Depreciating assets are depreciating, just as the dollar is too. Homes generally do better than commodities, and stocks in turn usually do better than real estate, but none of them match inflation consistently. There is no way to get off the carnival ride with legacy assets. > If that was the case, then banks would just buy up all property and hire management companies to maintain them. Lol, thats exactly the case. the banks do own nearly everything. The illusion of ownership is a much better "management company" rather than hourly workers who know its not their property, so it would be foolish to end the present mortgage order. > Housing prices rise with inflation, so owners will see appreciation. Up to 5% - ignoring, costs maintenance, and overhead. But not enough to counter or overcome inflation (15%-20%). Real estate certainly does not allow people to transmit the full value of the wealth to the future; not only because of the expenses, but because the real value of it falls even as the nominal price rises. Inflation confuses people into thinking their house is appreciating, when in reality it is depreciating. Before bitcoin, the only sure way to transmit wealth into the future that was to own a bank. Before bitcoin the best you could do was lose money slowly, the stock market being the best way to do that among the various ways. Much like a medieval fiefdom, being a banker is the modern nobility. Its a share in the ultimate political power. Bitcoin may end or weaken that noble order, because it allows people to opt out. No games, no custody, no devaluation, no maintenance costs, no fees. Just stored wealth appreciating in perfect tune with the economy.