Postes
3 458Hi, I am going to start a somewhat different step in my portfolio.
I'm going to try increasing positions in a dividend distribution ETF $VHYL (-0,52 %) to be contributing each income to $BTC (-0,49 %)
I am looking for a synergy between a steady drip via quarterly dividend and yield via DCA to BTC.
How do you see it? At the moment I only contribute 1% of the portfolio.
Between February and April $GOLDwhile $BTC (-0,49 %) rose - contrary to typical crisis patterns. $BTC (-0,49 %) The euro benefited from reduced speculative surpluses, institutional inflows and its growing role as a hedge outside traditional financial systems.
#gold suffered from rising real interest rates and inflation expectations.
The short-term ceasefire in the Middle East provided relief #bitcoinHowever, should the crisis flare up again, volatility remains likely - but $BTC (-0,49 %) could nevertheless prove more robust than traditional risk assets.
My recommendation - "We short the digital euro from Bitcoin Maximalist"
https://open.spotify.com/intl-de/track/6Y5uVH7mUndHxRlprBqQRG?si=170f738840f048b5
For those who need something more for the hips "All In by Bitcoin Maximalist"
https://open.spotify.com/intl-de/track/3HT4yxjS2894KkV1f2zLTe?si=73f90fd70b904ca2
For all those who want to get their hips moving as well as their portfolio - "Fire Over Fiat by Too Bit To Fail"
https://open.spotify.com/intl-de/track/0jlLh7gsRE0Wp7HoJXLQei?si=d73b0228ce024c9b
Have a great weekend everyone! 😮💨😎👋
@DonkeyInvestor Finally something clever
@Koenigmidas
@InvestmentPapa
@stefan_21
@Simpson 👀🤝 You know the score.
---
Important note
The opinions and information we provide do not constitute financial advice. They are for informational and educational purposes only and are not intended as a substitute for individual advice from qualified professionals.
---
In recent years, the debate surrounding quantum computers has reached a level that is both scientifically and socially remarkable. New reports about progress at Google, IBM or other research institutions appear almost weekly, while the media and voices from the technology world warn that such a technological breakthrough could shake the foundations of modern cryptography. Here, more than with almost any other topic, sober science, irrational fear, economic interests and technological ignorance collide. At the heart of it all is Bitcoin - the world's first fully decentralized digital money system based on mathematical security. This makes it all the more important to take a comprehensive view that not only conveys technical facts, but also takes into account the structural, political and historical characteristics of Bitcoin.
Why quantum computers could affect Bitcoin at all
A classic computer works sequentially and deterministically. It processes data in bits that assume either the state 0 or 1. The entire digital world is based on this binary architecture. A quantum computer is fundamentally different because its basic unit, the qubit, can assume several states simultaneously thanks to quantum physical phenomena such as superposition and entanglement. These properties enable quantum computers to solve very specific mathematical problems that classical computers could either not solve at all or only with astronomical amounts of time.
The cryptography that protects Bitcoin is based on precisely such mathematical problems - especially those that are easy in one direction and practically unsolvable in the other. In essence, this means: It is easy to generate a public key from a private key, but extremely difficult to recalculate the private key from a public key. For classical computers, this back-calculation is practically impossible. For a future quantum computer, however, Shor's algorithm could theoretically accomplish this task, and this is where the technical relevance begins.
The real danger therefore does not arise from the fact that a quantum computer could "hack everything", but from the possibility of inverting mathematical problems on which Bitcoin signatures are based. Even the theoretical possibility is enough to pose a serious, long-term threat. But there is a long way between theory and practice - and this must be considered carefully and without panic.
How far quantum computers really are
Although research has made enormous progress, the idea of a ready-to-use quantum attack system is greatly exaggerated. Today's most powerful quantum computers only have a few hundred to a few thousand physical qubits. However, it is not the physical qubits that are decisive, but the logical qubits, which must be stabilized by error correction. Each logical qubit requires a large number of error-prone physical qubits.
To realistically threaten the elliptic curve cryptography that Bitcoin uses, hundreds of thousands to millions of logical qubits would be required. This exceeds today's technological capacity by orders of magnitude. Estimates by serious experts speak of possible breakthroughs in the period between 2030 and 2040, although these are mere approximations. Perhaps it will happen sooner, perhaps later. The future of quantum technology research is fundamentally unpredictable.
In addition, many advances reported in the media are based on theoretical laboratory results or very specific test conditions. A quantum computer that can perform a computation under idealized laboratory conditions is completely different from a robust, scalable, error-corrected system capable of computing real-world, complex cryptographic parameters. The difference between "feasible in the lab" and "operational in reality" is enormous.
How a Google roadmap became a Bitcoin alert
A large part of the current quantum panic surrounding Bitcoin can be traced back to a single misunderstanding. Google published a scientific research paper on the development of certain quantum protocols. No year was mentioned in the paper to indicate a specific threat. However, in a supplementary blog post, Google stated that it wanted to make its own infrastructure completely "post-quantum ready" by 2029.
This internal objective was wrongly interpreted by the media as a prediction that Bitcoin would become insecure from 2029. This conclusion is not drawn in any scientific publication. Rather, it stems from journalistic misinterpretation and a general sensationalism that confuses technical roadmaps with threat scenarios. The idea that Bitcoin will be cryptographically vulnerable in a few years is not tenable based on the current state of research.
Visible public keys and old addresses
While modern Bitcoin addresses are protected by the hash function, there is an earlier generation of addresses that were used in the early years of the network: the so-called pay-to-public key addresses. They reveal the public key directly and permanently. It is estimated that some of these addresses belong to Satoshi Nakamoto himself and may contain around one million Bitcoin.
If a quantum computer ever becomes powerful enough, calculating the private key from a publicly visible key would be the first realistic attack surface. The economic attractiveness of an attack would be unprecedented. Even the movement of these early coins would cause panic - whether through an attack or Satoshi's own decision to move them. The combination of technical vulnerability and symbolic significance makes these addresses a special category of risk that cannot be ignored.
Visible public keys and old addresses
Not every Bitcoin address is equally at risk. An important difference is often overlooked: The earliest addresses in the Bitcoin network are so-called pay-to-public-key addresses (P2PK). With these addresses, the complete public key is permanently and openly stored in the blockchain.
In asymmetric cryptography, a public key is the part that you can share with others; it is not enough on its own to move funds - the private key is required for this. However, certain attack methods (based on an Sh algorithm, for example) could derive the private key from a public key, which is why P2PK addresses are a direct target.
Protection through hash-based address types and 10-minute windows
Newer address types, on the other hand, initially only show the hash of the public key. A hash is a one-way function: a fixed output value can easily be calculated from the input, but the original input cannot be reconstructed from this value. As long as you have never sent from such an address, your public key remains hidden - and without a visible public key, an attack using key derivation is not possible. Only when you sign and send a transaction does the public key appear in the network; there is a short but critical time window until confirmation in the next block - about 10 minutes.
Current research results (including from Google) indicate that a powerful quantum computer could theoretically carry out an attack within this time window. This is a future risk, but not the only problem.
Satoshi problem
The bigger risk is what I call the "Satoshi problem". Satoshi Nakamoto, the anonymous inventor of Bitcoin, used P2PK addresses in the early years and apparently collected large amounts of Bitcoin - estimates say around one million BTC, today a double-digit billion amount. These coins have not been moved for years; the associated public keys have been visible in the blockchain ever since. Should a cryptographically relevant quantum computer exist at some point, these addresses would be vulnerable to attack for the first time - not because the technology is simpler per se, but because the potential gain would be enormous. A successful attack on these stocks would probably trigger panic, a massive loss of trust and a dramatic fall in prices. Even if Satoshi were still alive and had access to the private keys: as soon as these coins were moved, the situation would inevitably escalate.
Altcoins
ECDSA as a signature process is shared by almost all major cryptos. Ethereum is just as affected as Bitcoin. The key difference lies in governance. Ethereum has an active core development team that explicitly has post-quantum migration on its radar and can communicate with the Ethereum ecosystem. That doesn't necessarily mean it's easier, but the governance structure makes it a little easier here. The situation is similar for many other coins. Some coins are already post-quantum secure and others are actively being implemented.
Why the biggest vulnerability is not cryptography, but Bitcoin governance
Although the technical problems appear difficult, they are in principle solvable. The cryptography community has long since developed post-quantum algorithms that are secure against Shor's algorithm. NIST ratified corresponding standards in 2024. The hurdle therefore lies less in the software than in the structure of the Bitcoin network.
Bitcoin is completely decentralized. There is no central institution that can authorize or enforce a protocol change. Any major change requires global cooperation across national borders, languages, cultures and interest groups. The blocksize debate in 2017 has already shown how difficult it is to find consensus. A post-quantum migration would be far more complex, as it concerns not only efficiency, but the fundamental question of ownership. Wallets that have not been moved for years - whether through forgetting, loss or death - could become targets of attack if their owners do not migrate in time.
This issue touches on the fundamental principle of Bitcoin: no one can be forced to change their behavior. From a decentralized perspective, this is a feature. In the context of a necessary migration, however, it is a serious structural risk.
A challenge that does not overwhelm Bitcoin, but is demanding
Bitcoin has proven in the past that it is technologically adaptable - albeit slowly, carefully and as part of a global, anarchic consensus process. The threat of quantum computing is forcing the network to take a long-term view. The good news is that there is time. The bad news is that time alone is not enough if coordination does not work.
Science provides the solutions. But whether these solutions are implemented in time does not depend on engineers, but on whether a global community without leadership, without central authority, without binding communication channels and without coercion can achieve the necessary unity.
Who would even allow a quantum computer to be attacked?
Even if a really powerful quantum computer were to exist tomorrow, the crucial question is who would actually use it for an attack. Large technology companies such as Google, IBM and Microsoft are developing quantum computers for completely different purposes - such as medical research, materials science, climate modelling or complex optimization problems. For these companies, an attack on financial systems or global encryption would not only be pointless, but also extremely risky and legally disastrous.
In the long term, however, access to this technology will not remain with Western research institutions. Countries with completely different interests and fewer legal barriers could also have such systems at some point. This means that even if nobody attacks Bitcoin today, this situation could change in the future. The mere existence of a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could create uncertainty because markets always price in risks. Even without a single real attack, the mere announcement of such a breakthrough would trigger crises of confidence.
Quantum computers are not currently an immediate threat. Development is progressing, but the technological gap is still large. At the same time, the world has long been working on solutions. The first binding post-quantum standards were published in 2024, and a large part of the digital infrastructure is already in the process of being converted.
Why state actors would be the real danger
A crucial point in the discussion about quantum computers is who would actually use this technology later on. While large technology companies have no interest in attacking encryption, this does not necessarily apply to all states. Some countries - such as North Korea - have already shown in the past that they finance their political and economic goals through cyber attacks. If such a state were to gain access to a truly powerful quantum computer at some point, the threat situation would change fundamentally, as the threshold for attacks there is significantly lower than for Western companies or democracies.
There is also a second, psychological danger: even if an actual attack never takes place, the mere possibility of a quantum attack could shake confidence in existing systems. Financial markets are sensitive to risks - and even the news that a cryptographically relevant quantum computer exists could trigger uncertainty and crises of confidence long before anything happens.
Could quantum computers speed up Bitcoin mining?
The concern that a future quantum computer could suddenly have enormous advantages in Bitcoin mining is technically unfounded. Bitcoin mining relies entirely on SHA-256 hashing, and it is precisely this type of calculation that is not suitable for quantum computers. While Shor's algorithm can only attack signatures, Grover's algorithm only provides a theoretical quadratic speedup for hash functions - far too low to outperform specialized ASIC miners. Bitcoin mining requires billions of hash attempts per second, a performance that current and foreseeable quantum computers can neither perform stably nor fast enough. In addition, a miner would have to constantly try out new templates and nonces, which quantum computers are technically unable to do efficiently. This is why ASICs will remain the undisputed technology in mining in the long term, while quantum computers offer no practical advantage here.
Bitcoin and the test of the century
Bitcoin was created to exist independently of states, companies and individuals. It is a network that can only be changed by consensus. It is precisely this characteristic that makes it resilient - and at the same time vulnerable to challenges that require collective action. The real question is not whether quantum computers will one day be strong enough to break today's cryptography. The real question is whether Bitcoin, as a global, decentralized system, will be able to prepare for the post-quantum era in a timely and unified manner.
There is no reason to panic, but there is also no reason to be careless. The future of quantum technology is uncertain, but the direction is clear: Bitcoin faces a long-term but solvable challenge. How the network responds will determine whether Bitcoin remains what it is today in the age of quantum computing - the most robust, independent and censorship-resistant monetary system in the world.
---
Important note
The opinions and information provided by us do not constitute financial advice. They are for informational and educational purposes only and are not intended as a substitute for individual advice from qualified professionals.
---
+ 4
The narrative that $BTC (-0,49 %) cycles are over is gaining traction, driven by institutional flows and evolving market structure. Yet price behavior still aligns with historical patterns—accumulation, expansion, and distribution remain visible. Volatility compresses, then releases, just as before. The difference lies in scale and speed, not structure. While $BTC (-0,49 %) continues to respect cyclical tendencies, forward visibility is limited. Macro conditions, liquidity shifts, and regulation now play a larger role. The cycle may persist—but certainty no longer does.
$XRP (-0,37 %) recorded the largest inflows of all assets, attracting USD 119.6 million - the highest figure since mid-December 2025.
Digital asset investment products recorded inflows totaling USD 224 million last week.
While #xrp led the market, the downward $ETH (-0,55 %) the downward trend continued with further outflows, and sentiment towards digital asset $BTC (-0,49 %) remained mixed - with moderate inflows coupled with continued interest in short Bitcoin products.
Also $SOL (-0,45 %) registered inflows, reflecting continued stable investor demand.
For all $BTC (-0,49 %) investors.
We are currently experiencing demographic change in full swing and there is often no discussion about how this will affect our society. This article sheds light on the various facets of this change and offers an outlook on our future.
Fertility
In 1871, the average woman gave birth to around 5 children. For fertility, it is important to note that a society needs about 2.1 children per woman to remain stable. Anything less than 2.1 children leads to a shrinking society. A significant drop in the birth rate occurred during the First World War. After that, the figures rose briefly until Adolf Hitler started a renewed decline. There was then a slight recovery in birth rates in the 1950s, but the graph shows a stagnating trend overall.
For around 50 years, the birth rate in Germany has been below 2.1 children per woman and has now leveled off at 1.5 children. This means that German society is continuing to shrink. We can only maintain our prosperity and keep society stable through immigration, particularly from Eastern Europe. Otherwise we would shrink significantly.
From 1945 to 1970, we had baby boomers who look like a mountain on a graph. This poses a problem, as these baby boomers are now gradually retiring.
Life expectancy
Life expectancy has changed considerably. In 1770, life expectancy in Europe averaged 35 years. Thanks to medical advances, it had risen to almost 78 years by 2019. In Africa, for example, life expectancy rose from 30 years in 1770 to over 60 years today.
Falling infant mortality and medical developments are contributing to the population increase. However, it should be noted that life expectancy in Western countries has now reached a plateau, while in other regions, such as Africa, there is still potential for further increases.
According to Stefan Schulz, an economist, human history shows that around 8 billion people are currently alive - an all-time high. However, future growth could reach its limits, especially in Western countries.
Comparison with China
The situation in China is even more dramatic than in Germany. In 1950, the birth rate was around 6 children per woman. This figure then fell sharply, especially after the introduction of the one-child policy, which led to many women terminating pregnancies - especially girls. This has led to a considerable surplus of men in the Chinese population.
In 2015, China allowed the birth of 2 children again, and later this was even extended to 3 children. However, this measure has had little impact. The current average birth rate is 1.7 children per woman, which means that China will also soon be faced with a shrinking population.
OECD countries in comparison
A look at the OECD countries reveals a clear global trend of falling birth rates. South Korea stands out in particular, with a birth rate of just 0.8 children per woman. If this trend continues, South Korea's population could shrink by half in the next generation.
The falling birth rates in these countries are an alarming signal for future social and economic stability. A declining population can have far-reaching consequences on the labor market, in the social system and in the age structure.
Life expectancy in transition
Life expectancy has changed significantly over the years. In 1770, the average life expectancy in Europe was around 35 years. From 1870 onwards, society experienced a sharp increase due to medical advances. In 2019, the average life expectancy was almost 78 years.
In Africa, the average life expectancy in 1770 was only 30 years. Today it is over 60 years. This improvement is mainly due to medical advances, vaccinations and other health developments. In recent decades, research has developed considerably, which has also significantly reduced infant mortality. These factors contribute to the stability and growth of a society. When people live longer and new generations are added at the same time, this leads to an increase in the population.
Life expectancy in Western countries has reached a high level. However, it is unlikely to rise much further. In Africa, however, there is still potential for further improvement, as can be seen in the corresponding charts and figures.
Critical perspective by Stefan Schulz
Stefan Schulz, an economist and podcast presenter (e.g. on "Jung und Naiv"), has made some interesting points about population development in his book "Die Altenrepublik" (EAN 9783455014693). He emphasizes that humans have been around for 300,000 years, and in that time a total of 100 billion people have been born. 200 years ago there was a maximum of one billion people living at any one time, 100 years ago there were two billion, and today there are almost eight billion. This means that 8% of all people ever born are currently living at the same time - a historic peak.
Although there is slight growth, a tipping point could be reached in the next 10-15 years, depending on developments in society. In Western countries, however, we are close to our demographic peak.
Population structure and population ageing
The population pyramid is a well-known and often used diagram to illustrate the age structure of a population. In countries like Africa, the population pyramid actually looks like a pyramid, with a broad base symbolizing a high birth rate. In contrast, the pyramid in Germany looks more like a vase, reflecting an ageing population.
In 2022, a graph shows that the so-called baby boomers were born in the early 1950s, followed by a significant decline in birth rates in the 1970s - a "birth crash". This generation is now about to retire. If we look ahead to 2035, all the baby boomers will be retired and no longer participating in the labor market. They will move to the pension side of the state, which will have a significant impact on the social and economic structure.
In recent years, these people have contributed significantly to the country's prosperity, supplemented by immigration. As this generation disappears in the coming years, the population structure will continue to change, posing challenges for the welfare state and the economy.
Demographic challenges and Africa's role
Africa is currently the birthplace of the world, with a birth rate of around 4.3 children per woman. This region is the only one that continues to contribute to global population growth, while most other countries, especially in Europe and Asia, are facing demographic challenges and population decline.
Possible developments in Africa
If the birth rate in Africa falls to 3 children per woman, this could lead to a global decline and initiate population shrinkage. The first signs of a possible change can already be seen in the current graphs and statistics. Many Asian countries are also close to a tipping point where they could also start to shrink. African countries, on the other hand, will probably continue to keep their birth rates stable and thus support global population growth in the long term.
Immigration
The demographic problem in Western countries, including many countries in South America, raises the question of where the young people will come from to keep the economy going. Immigration is mainly concentrated in Eastern Europe, where demographic problems also exist and the demand for labor is growing.
It will be interesting to see how this trend develops. Europe faces the particular challenge of rejuvenating an ageing labor market, while at the same time there is increasing pressure to recruit young people from other regions. The demographic situation in Europe is critical and without sustainable solutions, the level of prosperity will be jeopardized.
Retirement of the baby boomers
Healthcare costs in Germany are a fascinating and at the same time worrying topic. These costs are rising massively, especially towards the end of life. As a rule, men die earlier than women, which leads to a more favorable overall balance for healthcare costs - a harsh but real fact. Up to the age of 84, the costs are still within reasonable limits, but they explode considerably for those over 85.
Healthcare costs and their impact
A highly recommended book on this topic is "Gehalt statt behandelt" by Harald Schmidt (ISBN 978-3-86470-741-4). It shows how people in emerging countries generally only reach the age of 65 to 70 and often die after that. In industrialized countries, on the other hand, old age - especially the last 5 to 10 years - is burdened with extremely high resources and costs. This leads to a massive accumulation of financial and medical requirements that place a heavy burden on the healthcare system.
Future outlook
These challenges represent an enormous house of cards that is becoming increasingly unstable. The human labor and resources needed to bear these costs will soon no longer be available in the required quantity. In my personal opinion, we are at a limit that will either be difficult to increase or even maintain. The baby boomers who are now retiring are exacerbating this problem and pushing the system to its limits.
Insight into society's transfer payments
Bernhard Hammer, a social economist from Vienna, has worked intensively on the subject of transfer payments and their economic impact. He produces impressive graphics and technical papers that clearly illustrate the financial burden of social benefits over the course of a person's life.
Cost development over the course of a lifetime
The graphs clearly show that transfer costs are higher for women between the ages of 25 and 50, mainly due to family benefits such as child benefit. After this phase, transfers increase slightly due to school and kindergarten expenses.
However, costs shoot up sharply from retirement age onwards. This shows that women receive less overall, as they have often paid less into the social security system. Men generally receive higher pension entitlements as they tend to pay more into the system.
To underpin these statements, Hammer's charts are very informative and worthwhile in order to visually capture the financial differences between the sexes in the course of retirement.
National debt
The introduction of the fiat money system in 1971 put an end to gold backing, which had a decisive impact on the economy and the population. Birth rates had already fallen dramatically by this time. During the phases of economic upswing, which can be attributed to the demographic dividend, we were able to steadily expand and maintain our prosperity. However, this prosperity was accompanied by a massive increase in national debt.
Current challenges
This raises the question: instead of increasing our debt, we could have expected prosperity to be used more sustainably. We have now reached a point where we are incurring demographic costs while at the same time sitting on a huge mountain of debt. The current data and facts clearly demonstrate this problem, especially in the graphs that illustrate the connection between population development and national debt.
In my opinion, the impending decline in the workforce due to the decline in the baby boomers will lead to a shrinking of the national economy. This could result in a significant decline in prosperity as fewer people are active in the labor market and responsibilities for social and health care systems increase.
Importance of the family for society
In the period between 1900 and 2005, household sizes have changed considerably. The relevant figures and charts show that in 1900, around 45% of families lived in households with more than five people. This structure has changed fundamentally over the years, so that today there are hardly any households with more than five people.
Factors influencing household size
Household size is a crucial aggregate that is linked to various social aspects such as marriage propensity, fertility, divorce rates and the age at which young people move out. These factors have a significant impact on demographics, depending on how large or small a family is.
In 1871, the average household size was 4.64 people, whereas in 2000 it had fallen to an average of 2.1 people. These shifts not only create challenges for the social and economic structure, but also affect the way families operate and thrive in society.
Future outlook for private households
The analysis of private households shows that the structure will continue to change in the coming years. In 1991, the proportion of single-person households was around 35%. By 2018, this share had risen to 40%, and it is predicted that it could even reach 45% in the future. However, these estimates are uncertain, as future developments in terms of births and immigration are difficult to predict. Nevertheless, we can deduce certain trends that are likely to increase further in the coming years.
Decline in families and increase in single-person households
The last two decades have been characterized by a decline in the number of families. While there were still around 13.2 million families in 1996, the number had fallen to 11.6 million by 2021 - a decline of 13%.
According to the new forecasts, the number of single-person households is expected to rise from 17.3 million in 2018 to 19.3 million in 2040. This would mean that 24% of all people living in private households would live alone.
Outsourcing family processes
A decisive aspect of the current social changes is the outsourcing of family processes such as caring for parents, raising children and running kindergartens. When the baby boomers retire and these positions are not filled, this has an impact on the structure and stability of the family. Today's families in Germany and other countries are often not well prepared for these changes.
In my opinion, a family's resilience was higher in 1900 because many of these processes were managed internally, whereas today they are increasingly outsourced. This could affect the social stability and well-being of families in the long term.
Facts and figures
The current facts and figures on demographic developments in Germany are alarming and show clear trends that cannot be ignored:
Significance of this development
The consequences of these developments are serious. It is difficult to imagine what it will mean if one in five workers leaves this economy by 2035. At present, there is little visible urgency and many are holding on to the current situation.
We urgently need a skilled and immigrant workforce, especially well-educated people who can directly fill the vacancies. This must be done in such a way that it does not place an excessive burden on the social security system.
These figures illustrate the challenges facing the pension system and the need to take measures to ensure future stability.
The future of investing
The future of investing is closely linked to demographic change and the associated challenges. These issues are of great importance as they have a decisive influence on economic developments. For a responsible investor, such data and facts should be decisive.
Focus on long-term investments
When making long-term investments, it is essential to look at the demographic parameters. Many people briefly take up such topics at school, but often forget about them in everyday life. This article is intended to draw attention to these aspects and raise awareness. Especially at a time when the figures are alarming worldwide, it is important to keep an eye on population and demographic trends.
In addition to demographic factors, other economic parameters should also be taken into account in planning. A future with a declining economy, reduced wealth and rising debt could have a significant impact on the markets.
Discussion and exchange
What each individual takes from these considerations and derives for their own investment decisions is up to them. I invite you to discuss and exchange ideas in the Getquin community. Sharing ideas can help you understand different perspectives and make informed decisions.
Can Bitcoin solve the demographic challenges?
The discussion around Bitcoin and its potential ability to address social and economic problems is complex. Some factors that have an impact on the current situation are the changing social awareness that has been shaped by the introduction of contraceptives such as the pill, the decoupling of risks from the state and the changing role of women in society. These developments have led to a decline in birth rates.
The pension system and its shortcomings
In the 1960s and 70s, the pension system moved from normal to pay-as-you-go financing. This enabled people to draw pensions without having children of their own, which ultimately does not represent sustainable provision. The model does not work if there is no subsequent generation to pay into the system. A key point is that "the bread that wants to be eaten must first be baked."
Technological improvement as a solution
To increase productivity, technology could also be improved so that fewer people are needed to achieve the same level of productivity. Technologies such as AI and automation are important factors here. However, I am skeptical whether this will be enough to compensate for the human workforce, especially in view of the digital transformation that is slowly progressing in Germany.
The role of Bitcoin
"Bitcoin fixes this" is often said, and many see Bitcoin as a way to think more long-term and reduce short-term consumption. Short-term oriented decisions in companies and by political decision-makers are problematic, as they often only think until the next election or quarterly balance sheet.
Bitcoin could build a bridge as it promotes long-term thinking and encourages people to cut back on consumption. The idea is that a stable value of Bitcoin will allow people to save for the long term and invest in the future, potentially leading to a higher birth rate.
As the recognition of the age pyramid and the problems associated with it are not sufficiently addressed by the state, Bitcoin could offer an individual solution. When people think and plan for the long term, they are more likely to bring more children into the world as they are more aware of their future.
Bitcoin could therefore play an essential role in shaping a more stable and sustainable economic and social future.
Money as retirement provision and the role of children
It is true that money alone is not sufficient provision for old age. To actually have value, someone must be willing to ask for the money. In this context, one could say that "children are the only retirement provision that works", as they are useful even when there is no money.
Trust in the state and in currencies
If trust in the state and its currency wanes because future needs cannot be met, this could lead to people recognizing the added value of Bitcoin. In this situation, highly regulated markets that are no longer tangible to the state could transition into a free market in which Bitcoin can play a role. This could help to meet people's needs in a consolidating economic landscape in the long term.
Impact of Bitcoin on birth rates
One interesting aspect is whether Bitcoin users tend to have more children or have a higher birth rate. Some supporters, or "plebs", have the perception that they are more likely to start their own family and not be completely dependent on the state due to their long-term mindset. This view could suggest that Bitcoin users are more open to starting families.
However, there is no reliable data and facts for this, and I will leave my personal opinion aside. These thoughts come from some Bitcoin users and reflect their views.
The characteristics of the Bitcoin network - decentralization, cooperation and long-term perspectives - also translate well to the concept of the family, which has many of these characteristics. This could be a further argument that a Bitcoin-oriented mindset also leads to a different lifestyle, which may include a greater willingness to start a family.
Offtopic: Demographic change and the economic system
In Germany, it can be observed that many highly qualified specialists are emigrating abroad due to the high tax burden and the associated state costs. Those who follow are often less educated and benefit from the existing social systems. This raises the question of whether there should not be a "race" to be the first state to introduce a Bitcoin standard and simultaneously lower taxes in order to attract highly qualified people.
The role of Bitcoin in fighting inflation
With Bitcoin and other less conventional assets, people could protect themselves from inflation resulting from the current economic challenges. While inflation may eventually fall, it could also rise significantly, spurred by the huge cash flow problem we discussed in the previous text. These points are particularly dramatic given the demographic changes that are not on many people's radar.
Social system and social perception
One result of the fiat money system is that we now spend enormous resources on caring for the elderly. If we had decentralized structures that focused more on families instead of a centralized social system, we could perceive death very differently. It would become clearer that the life of an elderly person cannot be prolonged indefinitely at all possible costs. This could lead to more differentiated decisions being made about necessary medical interventions, such as operations for older people.
In the current system, health insurance will often cover the costs, so relatives have little incentive to think about the necessity of interventions. People tend to fight for life, especially when they believe it is "free" and there is access to medical care. This human reaction is understandable, but it does not reflect the value of human labor.
If incentives were structured differently - for example, if treatment costs were high - this could lead to a reconsideration of whether or not to invest in certain medical interventions. In countries where the average life expectancy is 70 years, it is socially accepted that people die at that age without unnecessary medical interventions. Ironically, such considerations exist here, while the retirement age is also set at 70, which seems paradoxical.
Conclusion
Overall, we are facing some very challenging issues that affect both the social fabric and economic structures. If the existing system remains as it is, this will lead to massive problems in the long term. It is important to recognize and understand this harsh reality in order to make informed decisions for the future. "Don't Trust, Verify!" is the motto here, because sustainable solutions can only be found by critically examining the existing structures.
Challenges and solutions in the context of demographic change
It is indeed extremely difficult to make the right decisions in the current situation. The hard facts that we are currently facing cannot simply be ignored. Even though I wish the best for myself and my loved ones, we have to deal with the challenges that demographic change brings with it.
Financial burdens and government spending
The option of simply printing more money often does not bring the desired solutions. Instead, this simply leads to inflation, where the cost of everything increases without actually improving the quality of life. It is often argued that we either have to work longer or pay higher taxes into pension and health insurance. After all, someone has to pay the bill.
In the current situation, it is difficult to take responsibility for the greater good. Many people think: "I can't look after everyone, so I'll look after myself first." This attitude leads to a dwindling sense of collective responsibility.
Political challenges
The political landscape also contributes to this dilemma. Many politicians are focused on short-term solutions in order to win votes in the next elections. Decisions that affect the future are often postponed because they are unpopular in the present. The need to reform the system in the long term is often ignored.
Fundamental political change may be necessary to tackle these problems. But even the most capable politicians are often caught up in partisan and bureaucratic constraints that make urgent reform difficult.
Social movements in response
One possible solution could lie in the emergence of a grassroots movement, where individuals and communities seek change from the bottom up. Such changes could eventually have an impact on society as a whole.
Global connections and responsibility
The current energy crisis clearly shows that simply "printing" money is not a sustainable solution. It is an example of how we try to solve short-term problems with financial means without addressing the underlying challenges. The reality is that resources are limited and we are indeed in a global competition for solutions.
It is also important to recognize the unequal game that takes place between mature and developing societies. When a wealthy state benefits itself at the expense of other countries, it is not only problematic, but in some ways anti-social.
Conclusion
The challenges are complex and transcend national borders. The question remains: How can we collectively move towards positive change when incentives are so heavily weighted towards short-term gain? Ultimately, it is always the people who bear the responsibility and it is up to us how we respond to these challenges.
In conclusion: The Invisible Crises and their impact
It is a fact that many of us cannot yet really imagine the challenges that lie ahead. The baby boomers are present in almost all professions - be it bus drivers, tradespeople, doctors or nurses. Nursing staff in particular are exemplary of a hidden crisis within our society. Many people only realize how serious the situation actually is when a personal crisis occurs, such as a missing carer or an operation that is not carried out.
The impact on society
The crises caused by the shortage of skilled workers often only become visible when they have a concrete impact on services - be it in transportation, when truck drivers are missing, or in the postal service, which is no longer delivered reliably. Society feels the effects immediately when important services and infrastructures no longer function smoothly.
Many people in the care sector have been aware of the reality of these situations for over 10 years. They know what they are facing and have the problems right in front of them. However, it is only now that wider society is slowly beginning to realize this skills shortage in various professions.
Conclusion
These hidden crises have the potential to have a far-reaching impact on our quality of life and the stability of communities. We are facing a pivotal time where the awareness and actions taken will have a critical impact on our future. It is important that we not only recognize the symptoms, but also address the underlying issues in order to find appropriate solutions and meet the challenges with foresight.
Sources
Book: The Power of Demographics by Paul Morland
Book: The Great Workerlessness by Sebastian Dettmers
https://www.bib.bund.de/DE/Fakten/Fakt/F09-Zusammengefasste-Geburtenziffer-West-Ost-ab-1945.html
https://de.statista.com/infografik/24972/anzahl-der-geburten-pro-frau-in-china/
https://www.econlib.org/in-praise-of-slackers
https://www.bib.bund.de/DE/Fakten/Fakt/F09-Zusammengefasste-Geburtenziffer-West-Ost-ab-1945.html
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy#rising-life-expectancy-around-the-world
https://ourworldindata.org/region-population-210
https://www.gold.de/staatsverschuldung-usa/
https://steuerzahler.de/aktion-position/staatsverschuldung/staatsverschuldung/?L=0
https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2020/03/PD20_069_122.html
https://open.spotify.com/episode/4BLs8EPkb2y63LbteBVyv0?si=u53KcAIRRmi7Vh7B6Cr5vQ&utm
---
Note: Unfortunately, not all graphics could be included in the articles, as Getquin has a limitation. Complete article with all graphics: https://www.innovaclustersolution.com/bw-demografischer-wandel
---
+ 6
So... Portfolio completely reorganized ... let's see if the optimization brings something....
This is how it should look in the future......
Still agree with the people who said it before.... Sold my shares of covered call ETFs worth +-€10,000 today. $JEGP (-1,1 %)
$JEPQ (+0,02 %)
In their place:
Reason: I am 22 😅.
