These are not bad points JiiBs, and there can be benefits in terms of attempting to measure and/or value various kinds of assets, and even differing kinds of assets are giong to comparable features and they will have differing features.. so I am not sure about all of the categories of evaluating the value of assets, since surely folks will see differing attributes of assets differently, and sometimes we might also make errors in terms of how we value something and whether we might account for certain aspects of how it is valued.. Maybe some examples of how to evaluate the value of assets might be in order even though many of us already likely employ some of these:

1) how liquid is the asset - meaning how easy to get in and out and how many places can you accomplish such

2) physicality - can be a advantage or a disadvantage - whether we are referring to physical properties (real estate and/or location, location, location), commodities such as gold, silver or oil, or something that is digital (which is not physical)

3) the extent to which an asset stores value - or is being used in that kind of a way (and is it very efficient in the way that it stores value - and upon what kind of a timeline is the value expected to be stored and/or extracted) - depreciating in value or increasing in value

4) does the asset have various utility value.. such as gold being used in industry or jewelry or bitcoin being used to move value or transact over time and space. These can be considered as utility aspects of the value of an asset

5) expected future value of an asset - we may or may not be able to measure this accurately - or some folks can measure better than others, and surely there could be pay-offs for folks who end up being more correct in their assessements - to the extent that they act upon their assessments

6) can the asset be consumed or does it hold its value or depreciate over time based on various market forces

7) how much regulation is involved with such asset - and or burdens of regulation, taxes, governmental monitoring

there might be some subjective and/or objective ways that assets are valuated - and of course, the subjective ways are ways that some individuals might value something greater than others based on sentiments yet objective value is more likely to contribute to market value in terms of how others value the asset - and of course, these can change over time in the sense that some folks might not realize bitcoin to have value in 2010-2012 because hardly anyone except the geeks actually had any clue about what bitcoin is.. but then the more than bitcoin is around, the more people hear about various ways that it is being used and can be used.

9) financialization of assets - when the asset starts to be used through various kinds of financially designed instruments that have terms to ownership - and surely as we know sometimes may well end up requiring 3rd-party custody in terms of the way the financialize products are designed

10)  Likely other kinds of ways that assets could be evaluated for their value that I had not considered off the top of my head

I just went through these categories off the top of my head and surely I am not claiming to have had made a comprehensive list of ways that assets are valuated or even to have had selected categories of valuation that are exclusive from one another, since sometimes the categories of valuation do seem like they overlap in various ways.. and also, I do not proclaim that the value of assets are necessarily stuck in time.. since sometimes assets might have complementary characteristics and/or may not substitute for other assets.. so some assets may in some ways correlate to the value of other assets or sometimes not correlate very closely.. or even inversely correlate.  

With bitcoin we have a kind of phenomena in which many of us proclaim that the value of so many already existing asset classes have become corrupted by various dollar (and fiat) influences, and sure bitcoin is not completely exempted from such corrupting influences, yet bitcoin has some in-built mechanisms of soundness and scarcity that attempt to bring alternative resolutions to the wide-spread corruption of fiat and debt-based systems (in attempts to create more sound incentive systems that are less manipulatable as compared to supply of fiat money systems) - while at the same time bitcoin is not completely detached from fiat money system, since fiat money systems continue to exist along the side of bitcoin so it might be observed that bitcoin has various kinds of interrelation within those already existing fiat value systems while hopefully having enough independence in order to not be so correlated to (or able to become as corrupted by) those debt-based systems to that hopefully bitcoin is going to end up having greater values based on some of its abilities to bring more responsibility (better incentives) to seemingly out of control and negatively spiraling existing systems of value.  


For sure it is better for beginner and more newbie investors to consider various ways to make sure that they have their emergency funds, reserves and float in fiat (and not in investible and/or working assets), yet at some point, when a person has acquired a certain higher level of wealth, the amount of fiat that it might take to support himself in an emergency may well end up being a very small portion of his overall wealth, so it becomes less important that such more wealthy person needs to preoccupy himself in terms of how much cash that he may well hold versus having his various assets continuing to be in various "working" forms...

Even within the context of achieving "higher levels of wealth," there would be differences between someone who has wealth that is in the 10-20x the size of his annual income/expenses versus someone who has wealth in the range of 100x to 200x his annual income/expenses... and yeah, maybe some of this is unrealistic to even be exploring the ideas of how extremely rich folks end up having more options in regards to how they manage their wealth - yet the idea of having excessive wealth makes it less important to have to follow specific rules of having to keep a certain amount of value in fiat, even though maybe incidentally very wealthy folks may have a variety of ways to draw upon their wealth in different kinds of forms because sometimes when reaching certain high levels of wealth there still ends up being some tendencies to keep some wealth in less volatile forms.. that might even be 1-2 years worth of income/expenses that are kept in ways that could be more easily drawn upon - and yeah, maybe even some rich folks like to live on the edge - and not preserve some kind of a cash/cash equivalent cushion, and even very wealthy folks might some times end up managing their wealth poorly and get themselves into situations in which they might be suffering from some lack of liquidity and then have to sell certain assets at a time that is not convenient based on their engaging in sloppy wealth management.. but again, maybe it does not matter too much if the person has wealth in the range of 100x to 200x his annual income/expenses, but at the same time, sometimes changes in the value of some assets (and extreme volatility) might drop precipitously and so maybe someone with wealth in the ballpark of 100x to 200x his annual income - all of a sudden might find himself with lower levels of wealth because some of his assets lost value at the same time and then all of a sudden he might find himself with having wealth that is ONLY 25x to 40x of his income/expenses and finding himself considering ways to deal with that lower level of wealth (at least on paper) since he still might not want to overly have to sell working assets (such as bitcoin) at a time that those assets are in price dips..and yeah if several assets drop 50% to 80% in a relatively short period of time, even very wealthy folks may well have to make some short-term adjustments including considering why they had gotten themselves into such a situation that they were not managing their wealth very well..

And, yeah, wealthy folks have way more options to not get completely reckt, while at the same time, if a relatively poor person or someone who is in the earlier stages of building his wealth who may have less than 1-2 years worth of income/expenses in his investment portfolio, such lower level wealth persons might become completely reckt by engaging in sloppy investment practices including but not limited to failing/refusing to keep their emergency fund, reserves and float in fairly liquid cash forms... which may seem like a burden and may even seem as if some of their wealth is not working enough for them, but there is a difference between having a decent amount of your wealth working for you and engaging in kinds of gambling that fail/refuse to adequately maintain funds in cash so that actual working portions of your investment portfolio (which may well ONLY be bitcoin for a large number of newbies who are in their earlier stages of attempting to build wealth) can stay invested even during down periods and perhaps being able to continue to buy bitcoin through good and bad times, and worse case scenario if the poor person is not able to continue to buy bitcoin, at least if they are not forced to sell any at a inopportune and downity times in the BTC prices.. that could last 3-6 months or even could last for a couple of years or more..


You are not wrong Kliss, since each of us has to figure out how much of our emergency funds, reserves and/or float to keep in cash versus if we are wanting to have some of it working, yet I think that you are defeating the purpose if you are trying to overly get your reserves and your float to be working for you.. since if you think about it, reserves and float are conceptualized to be cash/cash equivalents and their size may well vary.. surely your emergency fund might be 3-6 months but never used in 20-30 years of having it and maintaining it, since your float and your reserves may well end up absorbing any kind of cash-flow inconsistencies, surprises, miscalculations or even emergencies (or quasi-emergencies) that may come up from time to time, so the level to which any of us runs out of cash and/or our cash cushion, then the more we might end up being forced to cash out of some or all of our bitcoin at a time that is not completely of our own choosing.. ..

so we might not even realize that we had gotten ourselves into a pickle until we are finding out after a few months of suffering cashflow issues and then coming close to exhausting our various funds that we did not have enough funds in cash to deal with the situation and then if after a few months of exhausting our cash, we then have some additional unexpected expenses or loss of income, then where are we?  We may well be at a place of having to sell some or all of our bitcoin and perhaps totally wrecking a plan of building our BTC holdings that we may well might have been employing for 4 years or longer and then we find ourselves having to start over again, but instead of starting out with BTC price being X, we find ourselves restarting and BTC prices are 5x or 10x higher than X.... so yeah.. where are we at that point?  We failed/refused to adequately/sufficiently prepare ourselves to not get reckt.. and we had ended up gambling too much, even though we thought that we were being sufficiently prudent and sufficiently cautious.... but we did not realize that we ended up not being prepared for what ended up happening... and these are not easy balances for any of us to make, especially since we are NOT going to realize that we had not been sufficiently prepared until it is too late... but each of us has to make these kinds of balances and hope that we are sufficiently aggressive in our bitcoin investment, but not overdoing our BTC investment so much that we end up wrecking ourselves a few years down the road.


The only way emergency funds should be used in terms of investment is if they happen to be excessive, and surely some folks might be labeling all of their extra funds as emergency funds, and part of their emergency funds might be reserves and/or float but they are labeling such as emergency funds.

So yeah there can be questions regarding how much emergency funds a person needs to build up.. and if someone is brand new to investing and brand new to consciously paying attention to building and maintaining an emergency fund, then the emergency fund might start out relatively small.. maybe just by coincidence normal people might keep a kind of float of 2-4 weeks of their expenses worth of extra cash that is kind of considered to be used for any any extra expenses that might come about.. but then once they start to invest into something like bitcoin, they realize that they are likely going to need to keep larger amounts, such as 3-6 months worth of emergency fund, but they are not necessarily going to get their emergency fund up to that size immediately, so they end up building up their bitcoin investment and their emergency fund at the same time.. and surely once they get their emergency fund up to a certain size (such as a minimum of 3 months), then they might begin to feel that they have more abilities to be aggressive in their BTC accumulations (adding to their BTC holdings) or even to use some of the excess (greater than 3 months amounts) for the purposes of investing into bitcoin or other kinds of purposes.. but yeah, if they are barely floating on keeping ONLY 3 months as emergency funds that are not touched for any reason except actual emergencies, they may well find that they are not keeping enough emergency funds since sometimes various expenses can come at the same time and quickly eat into such relatively lower level amounts of financial cushion... .so yeah in the end, there becomes more and more need to keep some funds in cash that never get touched because otherwise the depletion of such extra cash ends up putting the person closer and closer to having to dip into his bitcoin investment that might be at a time that is not at his own choosing.


I think that it is very weird to be failing refusing to consider reserves in terms of fiat, unless there are some folks who truly are able to spend all of their expenses in bitcoin.. or if maybe they have so much bitcoin that they are willing to just take the chances of keeping all of their value in bitcoin (presuming they earn in bitcoin), and so these seem to be less common kinds of circumstances, and there is a certain level of healthiness to considering holding and/or converting value into fiat.. since even if some expenses might be payable in bitcoin, they are likely calculated in terms of fiat.. so it does not even seem very realistic that we are considering some of the exceptional cases in which some few folks might completely earn in bitcoin and are able to spend in bitcoin and they just let bitcoin's volatility go where it goes, especially if they are already getting all of their income in bitcoin..

These folks are more specialized and not really representational to be discussing in terms of being applicable to general threads like this.. so maybe their situations should be discussed in other threads that pertain to those special kinds of situations that are far from representative to the circumstances of an overwhelming number of folks, including that probably somewhere close to 99% of the world's population does not have any BTC (no coiners) or if they have some they have way too little (low coiners).  So it seems way more relevant to be trying to address the overwhelming majority of folks who need to get more coin and to figure out ways to build their BTC holdings instead of the more rare folks who have enough or more than enough BTC that ends up putting them into more of a special category rather than being representative of the situations of the overwhelming majority of the population who are low coiners or no coiners.


This is starting to sound like a person who is overly accumulated in bitcoin, and surely even such persons who are overly accumulated in bitcoin may well be better served to make sure that they keep 3-6 months or more in cash and/or cash equivalents - yet surely each person is free to figure out his own balances, and surely if s/he is over allocated in bitcoin, then his/her situation does not sound very typical . but it still seems like there are likely better ways to balance their accounting and even to improve the value retention of their own wealth by keeping some value in cash, cash equivalents or in forms that are something other than bitcoin (not referring to shitcoins.. but yeah, sometimes people with unusual circumstances might well be better served to have some of their value in shitcoins than to have 100% in bitcoin).. even though typically, I would jnot recommend keeping more than 10% of the value of bitcoin in shitcoins, there could be some special circumstances that justify other kinds of balances, and yeah, each person is responsible for his own trade-offs. and not wanting to derail too much into discussing how to weigh shitcoin allocations.. since there is likely enough challenges in terms of merely considering the balances of bitcoin versus cash allocations..


First: Some of the calculations regarding the extent to which BTC is profitable may or may not be applicable to some folks who are either earning in bitcoin or maybe they had been in bitcoin for so long that they have costs per BTC that are way lower than any likely price that BTC might end up going.. so the level of profitability may well not be very much of an issue for some folks who are considering holding most if not all of their value in bitcoin (including their emergency fund, reserves and/or float) and then spending their bitcoin from whatever point that they might need (or want) to spend them.

Second:  I am not sure what purpose you had in terms of mentioning "crypto" markets.  Why should we give any shits about shitcoins?  Do you not know we are talking about bitcoin?  Is there some kind of a need to use the term "crypto" while referring to discussions about bitcoin and perhaps you really meant to say something about bitcoin?  Probably there is no need to use the term crypto, since the use of the term "crypto" might have been meant to talk beyond bitcoin, but you did not specify what you meant when throwing that term into the discussion.. so in some sense the use of the term crypto seemed to have had devolved the discussion into a kind of obscurity, vagueness and potentially misleading some of us in terms of what are we talking about here?  Do you believe that there is such a thing as "crypto" markets?  what kind of a product would I buy if I were buying into "crypto" markets?  Yeah, I know that people use such vague terms all the time, but it does not seem very helpful to refer to something like "crypto" without suggesting what is meant by such a term, especially when we had been talking about bitcoin.

Third:  when you say standard of living is volatile, you likely are referring to the ongoing debasement of various fiat currencies that may well be affecting a lot of ways that value is perverted.. or many times debased for regular folks.