Connect with us

After BTC Visits $8.6K, Crypto Traders Predict Bitcoin Price’s Next Stop

After BTC Visits $8.6K, Crypto Traders Predict Bitcoin Price’s Next Stop

Published

on

The price of Bitcoin dropped to $8,600 and is now fluctuating just above $9,000, showing high volatility as several factors make its next step unclear.

The price of Bitcoin (BTC) dropped to as low as $8,600 on May 25 as retail investors on Coinbase led an abrupt short-term downtrend. The price has since fluctuated between $8,800 and $9,200, demonstrating high volatility in a tight range.

Bitcoin is currently at a decisive point where it could fall back below the $8,000 support level and retest lows in the $6,000–$7,000 range or break above $10,500 and initiate a new bull cycle.

Top crypto traders remain mixed on the current trend of Bitcoin. Some believe BTC is heading down to at least $7,100. Such a drop would stabilize the market and establish a stronger foundation for BTC to rally. Others foresee one to two weeks in the low-$9,000 region before a breakout above $10,000 and surge to potentially $14,000, $17,000 and $20,000 in the medium term.

Bullish scenario for Bitcoin

The bullish scenario for Bitcoin in the near term is quite simple. BTC has to surge above $10,600 to surpass its previous peaks in October 2019 and February. For a new bullish uptrend to materialize, BTC has to maintain its momentum above $9,000 and grind to surpass $10,600, eventually establishing a peak above the $11,000 resistance level. The Bitcoin options trader known as Theta Seek wrote:

“Been seeing alot of bearish tweets, but I think that this is the last 1-2 weeks that you'll EVER be able to buy #BTC under $9K.”

If the price of Bitcoin remains above $9,000 until June 1 and achieves a monthly close above mid-$9,000, it would increase the probability of a sizable rally heading into the third quarter.

One significant data point that supports the theory of bulls is the reluctance of Bitcoin holders to sell. In the last two months, the price of Bitcoin almost tripled from $3,600 to $10,080. Yet on-chain data shows that investors are unwilling to sell at that price. Cryptocurrency analyst Philip Swift said:

“60% of all Bitcoin has not moved on the blockchain for at least 1 year. This is an indication of significant hodl'ing. The last time this happened was in early 2016, at the start of the bull run.”

Hodl Wave shows Bitcoin investors are unwilling to sell. Source: Philip Swift

Crypto market data and blockchain analytics firm IntoTheBlock found a similar pattern. Its researchers said the number of large Bitcoin transactions has noticeably declined since May 19. The drop-off in large transactions indicates whales or big individual holders of BTC are not selling. The researchers explained:

“The number of Large Transactions greater than $100k for #Bitcoin started to decline consistently from 9.71k transactions on May 19 (moving 1.04m #BTC and $10.93b) to 8.94k transactions on May 26 (moving 798.54k $BTC and $7.07b).”

Additionally, Scott Melker, a cryptocurrency investor, emphasized that major hedge fund managers in the financial sector began to struggle as the pandemic caused a steep stock market pullback. Considering the high level of volatility in the financial market and in traditional assets such as oil, Bitcoin has recovered relatively well from its “Black Thursday” plunge to $3,600 on March 13. Melker noted:

“My best friend manages 2 billion at a hedge fund. He just told me they’ve been taking most of their money off of the table because the market makes no sense and ‘you can’t put that much capital to work with no conviction.’ Even the big boys have gotten slaughtered.”

The perception of Bitcoin as a store of value and a newly emerging hedge against inflation has improved as a result, causing a rise in inflow of capital into the Bitcoin market from institutional investors.

In the first quarter of 2019, the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust — an investment vehicle that allows institutions to buy into Bitcoin through the public market — recorded an average weekly investment of $3.2 million. In the first quarter of this year, the average weekly investment rose to $29.9 million, increasing by almost 10 times year over year.

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust average weekly investment since 2018. Source: Kevin Rooke

The rise in institutional activity in the Bitcoin market, the reluctance of many investors to sell at current prices, the drop in large transactions, and the tendency of BTC to see a short squeeze when a negative funding rate emerges all point toward a short-term price uptrend.

Bearish scenario in the short term

The bearish scenario for Bitcoin in the near term is a pullback to the $5,800–$7,100 range. Currently, Bitcoin is technically in a lower high formation dating back to June 2019. A “lower high” is formed when the latest peak is lower than the previous high point. As an example, Bitcoin rose to as high as $10,500 in February. This month, it topped out at $10,080, making it a lower high.

Bitcoin has seen six lower highs in a row in the past 12 months, which indicates a bearish cycle spanning over a long period of time. If BTC fails to break above $10,000, it increases the probability of the resumption of a correction. A cryptocurrency researcher at Market Science known as BitDealer said about the lower high formation:

“[Bitcoin] doesnt look too good. Really interesting to me how we haven't taken out any of those highs considering how close price got to them. Reminds me how clean the LHs [lower highs] were following the 20k top. Until we get a HH [higher high], good idea to short near the highs/take profit on longs.”

Lower highs on Bitcoin daily chart since June 2019. Source: Bitdealer

Most bearish theories put out by traders anticipate a short-term decline in price but a strong recovery over the medium to long term. Bitcoin trader Nunya Bizniz suggested BTC may be showing a rough inverse head and shoulders pattern, which is regarded as a textbook bottom indicator. For it to materialize, however, Bitcoin has to fall to at least $7,100, which goes in line with predictions by other prominent traders.

A possible inverse and head shoulders pattern forming. Source: Nunya Bizniz

The price of Bitcoin increased from $8,600 to $9,200 on May 27, but it pulled back almost immediately afterward. The $9,200 level was an important CME gap, which was formed when the CME futures market closed during the weekend. The closure of a CME gap could lead to a drop in the price of BTC, as it tends to hit the gap then reverse.

Variables that can affect the price

Bitcoin saw a price spike as Goldman Sachs conducted a client call on the topic of Bitcoin, gold and inflation. The talk of one of the biggest investment banks in the U.S. discussing the dominant cryptocurrency with its clients led to increased anticipation of further institutional adoption. But on the slide presented to clients, Goldman Sachs reaffirmed its neutral stance on Bitcoin. The slide titled “Cryptocurrencies Including Bitcoin Are Not an Asset Class” read:

“We also believe that while hedge funds may find trading cryptocurrencies appealing because of their high volatility, that allure does not constitute a viable investment rationale.”

Goldman Sachs simply said that Bitcoin does not show evidence of being a hedge against inflation and that the only appeal to institutions is its volatility. Barry Silbert, the CEO of Digital Currency Group and Grayscale, said: “Just reviewed the slides from the Goldman client call later this morning re gold & Bitcoin. This slide header summarizes Goldman's take.”

The actual content of the presentation by Goldman Sachs about Bitcoin and gold does not describe Bitcoin in a way that would invite the bank’s clients to trade or invest in the asset. Hence, the narrative that it would lead more high-net-worth individuals and institutional clients to perceive Bitcoin as a hedge against inflation is false.

Other than that, there are several other minor variables such as miners selling more BTC than they mine on a daily basis post-halving and the increase in the open interest of the Bitcoin futures market that may fuel additional selling pressure.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Authored by Michael Barone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The headlines coming out of the Super…

Published

on

Are Voters Recoiling Against Disorder?

Authored by Michael Barone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The headlines coming out of the Super Tuesday primaries have got it right. Barring cataclysmic changes, Donald Trump and Joe Biden will be the Republican and Democratic nominees for president in 2024.

(Left) President Joe Biden delivers remarks on canceling student debt at Culver City Julian Dixon Library in Culver City, Calif., on Feb. 21, 2024. (Right) Republican presidential candidate and former U.S. President Donald Trump stands on stage during a campaign event at Big League Dreams Las Vegas in Las Vegas, Nev., on Jan. 27, 2024. (Mario Tama/Getty Images; David Becker/Getty Images)

With Nikki Haley’s withdrawal, there will be no more significantly contested primaries or caucuses—the earliest both parties’ races have been over since something like the current primary-dominated system was put in place in 1972.

The primary results have spotlighted some of both nominees’ weaknesses.

Donald Trump lost high-income, high-educated constituencies, including the entire metro area—aka the Swamp. Many but by no means all Haley votes there were cast by Biden Democrats. Mr. Trump can’t afford to lose too many of the others in target states like Pennsylvania and Michigan.

Majorities and large minorities of voters in overwhelmingly Latino counties in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley and some in Houston voted against Joe Biden, and even more against Senate nominee Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas).

Returns from Hispanic precincts in New Hampshire and Massachusetts show the same thing. Mr. Biden can’t afford to lose too many Latino votes in target states like Arizona and Georgia.

When Mr. Trump rode down that escalator in 2015, commentators assumed he’d repel Latinos. Instead, Latino voters nationally, and especially the closest eyewitnesses of Biden’s open-border policy, have been trending heavily Republican.

High-income liberal Democrats may sport lawn signs proclaiming, “In this house, we believe ... no human is illegal.” The logical consequence of that belief is an open border. But modest-income folks in border counties know that flows of illegal immigrants result in disorder, disease, and crime.

There is plenty of impatience with increased disorder in election returns below the presidential level. Consider Los Angeles County, America’s largest county, with nearly 10 million people, more people than 40 of the 50 states. It voted 71 percent for Mr. Biden in 2020.

Current returns show county District Attorney George Gascon winning only 21 percent of the vote in the nonpartisan primary. He’ll apparently face Republican Nathan Hochman, a critic of his liberal policies, in November.

Gascon, elected after the May 2020 death of counterfeit-passing suspect George Floyd in Minneapolis, is one of many county prosecutors supported by billionaire George Soros. His policies include not charging juveniles as adults, not seeking higher penalties for gang membership or use of firearms, and bringing fewer misdemeanor cases.

The predictable result has been increased car thefts, burglaries, and personal robberies. Some 120 assistant district attorneys have left the office, and there’s a backlog of 10,000 unprosecuted cases.

More than a dozen other Soros-backed and similarly liberal prosecutors have faced strong opposition or have left office.

St. Louis prosecutor Kim Gardner resigned last May amid lawsuits seeking her removal, Milwaukee’s John Chisholm retired in January, and Baltimore’s Marilyn Mosby was defeated in July 2022 and convicted of perjury in September 2023. Last November, Loudoun County, Virginia, voters (62 percent Biden) ousted liberal Buta Biberaj, who declined to prosecute a transgender student for assault, and in June 2022 voters in San Francisco (85 percent Biden) recalled famed radical Chesa Boudin.

Similarly, this Tuesday, voters in San Francisco passed ballot measures strengthening police powers and requiring treatment of drug-addicted welfare recipients.

In retrospect, it appears the Floyd video, appearing after three months of COVID-19 confinement, sparked a frenzied, even crazed reaction, especially among the highly educated and articulate. One fatal incident was seen as proof that America’s “systemic racism” was worse than ever and that police forces should be defunded and perhaps abolished.

2020 was “the year America went crazy,” I wrote in January 2021, a year in which police funding was actually cut by Democrats in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and Denver. A year in which young New York Times (NYT) staffers claimed they were endangered by the publication of Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-Ark.) opinion article advocating calling in military forces if necessary to stop rioting, as had been done in Detroit in 1967 and Los Angeles in 1992. A craven NYT publisher even fired the editorial page editor for running the article.

Evidence of visible and tangible discontent with increasing violence and its consequences—barren and locked shelves in Manhattan chain drugstores, skyrocketing carjackings in Washington, D.C.—is as unmistakable in polls and election results as it is in daily life in large metropolitan areas. Maybe 2024 will turn out to be the year even liberal America stopped acting crazy.

Chaos and disorder work against incumbents, as they did in 1968 when Democrats saw their party’s popular vote fall from 61 percent to 43 percent.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 23:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The…

Published

on

Veterans Affairs Kept COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate In Place Without Evidence

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) reviewed no data when deciding in 2023 to keep its COVID-19 vaccine mandate in place.

Doses of a COVID-19 vaccine in Washington in a file image. (Jacquelyn Martin/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

VA Secretary Denis McDonough said on May 1, 2023, that the end of many other federal mandates “will not impact current policies at the Department of Veterans Affairs.”

He said the mandate was remaining for VA health care personnel “to ensure the safety of veterans and our colleagues.”

Mr. McDonough did not cite any studies or other data. A VA spokesperson declined to provide any data that was reviewed when deciding not to rescind the mandate. The Epoch Times submitted a Freedom of Information Act for “all documents outlining which data was relied upon when establishing the mandate when deciding to keep the mandate in place.”

The agency searched for such data and did not find any.

The VA does not even attempt to justify its policies with science, because it can’t,” Leslie Manookian, president and founder of the Health Freedom Defense Fund, told The Epoch Times.

“The VA just trusts that the process and cost of challenging its unfounded policies is so onerous, most people are dissuaded from even trying,” she added.

The VA’s mandate remains in place to this day.

The VA’s website claims that vaccines “help protect you from getting severe illness” and “offer good protection against most COVID-19 variants,” pointing in part to observational data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that estimate the vaccines provide poor protection against symptomatic infection and transient shielding against hospitalization.

There have also been increasing concerns among outside scientists about confirmed side effects like heart inflammation—the VA hid a safety signal it detected for the inflammation—and possible side effects such as tinnitus, which shift the benefit-risk calculus.

President Joe Biden imposed a slate of COVID-19 vaccine mandates in 2021. The VA was the first federal agency to implement a mandate.

President Biden rescinded the mandates in May 2023, citing a drop in COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations. His administration maintains the choice to require vaccines was the right one and saved lives.

“Our administration’s vaccination requirements helped ensure the safety of workers in critical workforces including those in the healthcare and education sectors, protecting themselves and the populations they serve, and strengthening their ability to provide services without disruptions to operations,” the White House said.

Some experts said requiring vaccination meant many younger people were forced to get a vaccine despite the risks potentially outweighing the benefits, leaving fewer doses for older adults.

By mandating the vaccines to younger people and those with natural immunity from having had COVID, older people in the U.S. and other countries did not have access to them, and many people might have died because of that,” Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine on leave from Harvard Medical School, told The Epoch Times previously.

The VA was one of just a handful of agencies to keep its mandate in place following the removal of many federal mandates.

“At this time, the vaccine requirement will remain in effect for VA health care personnel, including VA psychologists, pharmacists, social workers, nursing assistants, physical therapists, respiratory therapists, peer specialists, medical support assistants, engineers, housekeepers, and other clinical, administrative, and infrastructure support employees,” Mr. McDonough wrote to VA employees at the time.

This also includes VA volunteers and contractors. Effectively, this means that any Veterans Health Administration (VHA) employee, volunteer, or contractor who works in VHA facilities, visits VHA facilities, or provides direct care to those we serve will still be subject to the vaccine requirement at this time,” he said. “We continue to monitor and discuss this requirement, and we will provide more information about the vaccination requirements for VA health care employees soon. As always, we will process requests for vaccination exceptions in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies.”

The version of the shots cleared in the fall of 2022, and available through the fall of 2023, did not have any clinical trial data supporting them.

A new version was approved in the fall of 2023 because there were indications that the shots not only offered temporary protection but also that the level of protection was lower than what was observed during earlier stages of the pandemic.

Ms. Manookian, whose group has challenged several of the federal mandates, said that the mandate “illustrates the dangers of the administrative state and how these federal agencies have become a law unto themselves.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 22:10

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

The Coming Of The Police State In America

The Coming Of The Police State In America

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

The National Guard and the State Police are now…

Published

on

The Coming Of The Police State In America

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

The National Guard and the State Police are now patrolling the New York City subway system in an attempt to do something about the explosion of crime. As part of this, there are bag checks and new surveillance of all passengers. No legislation, no debate, just an edict from the mayor.

Many citizens who rely on this system for transportation might welcome this. It’s a city of strict gun control, and no one knows for sure if they have the right to defend themselves. Merchants have been harassed and even arrested for trying to stop looting and pillaging in their own shops.

The message has been sent: Only the police can do this job. Whether they do it or not is another matter.

Things on the subway system have gotten crazy. If you know it well, you can manage to travel safely, but visitors to the city who take the wrong train at the wrong time are taking grave risks.

In actual fact, it’s guaranteed that this will only end in confiscating knives and other things that people carry in order to protect themselves while leaving the actual criminals even more free to prey on citizens.

The law-abiding will suffer and the criminals will grow more numerous. It will not end well.

When you step back from the details, what we have is the dawning of a genuine police state in the United States. It only starts in New York City. Where is the Guard going to be deployed next? Anywhere is possible.

If the crime is bad enough, citizens will welcome it. It must have been this way in most times and places that when the police state arrives, the people cheer.

We will all have our own stories of how this came to be. Some might begin with the passage of the Patriot Act and the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security in 2001. Some will focus on gun control and the taking away of citizens’ rights to defend themselves.

My own version of events is closer in time. It began four years ago this month with lockdowns. That’s what shattered the capacity of civil society to function in the United States. Everything that has happened since follows like one domino tumbling after another.

It goes like this:

1) lockdown,

2) loss of moral compass and spreading of loneliness and nihilism,

3) rioting resulting from citizen frustration, 4) police absent because of ideological hectoring,

5) a rise in uncontrolled immigration/refugees,

6) an epidemic of ill health from substance abuse and otherwise,

7) businesses flee the city

8) cities fall into decay, and that results in

9) more surveillance and police state.

The 10th stage is the sacking of liberty and civilization itself.

It doesn’t fall out this way at every point in history, but this seems like a solid outline of what happened in this case. Four years is a very short period of time to see all of this unfold. But it is a fact that New York City was more-or-less civilized only four years ago. No one could have predicted that it would come to this so quickly.

But once the lockdowns happened, all bets were off. Here we had a policy that most directly trampled on all freedoms that we had taken for granted. Schools, businesses, and churches were slammed shut, with various levels of enforcement. The entire workforce was divided between essential and nonessential, and there was widespread confusion about who precisely was in charge of designating and enforcing this.

It felt like martial law at the time, as if all normal civilian law had been displaced by something else. That something had to do with public health, but there was clearly more going on, because suddenly our social media posts were censored and we were being asked to do things that made no sense, such as mask up for a virus that evaded mask protection and walk in only one direction in grocery aisles.

Vast amounts of the white-collar workforce stayed home—and their kids, too—until it became too much to bear. The city became a ghost town. Most U.S. cities were the same.

As the months of disaster rolled on, the captives were let out of their houses for the summer in order to protest racism but no other reason. As a way of excusing this, the same public health authorities said that racism was a virus as bad as COVID-19, so therefore it was permitted.

The protests had turned to riots in many cities, and the police were being defunded and discouraged to do anything about the problem. Citizens watched in horror as downtowns burned and drug-crazed freaks took over whole sections of cities. It was like every standard of decency had been zapped out of an entire swath of the population.

Meanwhile, large checks were arriving in people’s bank accounts, defying every normal economic expectation. How could people not be working and get their bank accounts more flush with cash than ever? There was a new law that didn’t even require that people pay rent. How weird was that? Even student loans didn’t need to be paid.

By the fall, recess from lockdown was over and everyone was told to go home again. But this time they had a job to do: They were supposed to vote. Not at the polling places, because going there would only spread germs, or so the media said. When the voting results finally came in, it was the absentee ballots that swung the election in favor of the opposition party that actually wanted more lockdowns and eventually pushed vaccine mandates on the whole population.

The new party in control took note of the large population movements out of cities and states that they controlled. This would have a large effect on voting patterns in the future. But they had a plan. They would open the borders to millions of people in the guise of caring for refugees. These new warm bodies would become voters in time and certainly count on the census when it came time to reapportion political power.

Meanwhile, the native population had begun to swim in ill health from substance abuse, widespread depression, and demoralization, plus vaccine injury. This increased dependency on the very institutions that had caused the problem in the first place: the medical/scientific establishment.

The rise of crime drove the small businesses out of the city. They had barely survived the lockdowns, but they certainly could not survive the crime epidemic. This undermined the tax base of the city and allowed the criminals to take further control.

The same cities became sanctuaries for the waves of migrants sacking the country, and partisan mayors actually used tax dollars to house these invaders in high-end hotels in the name of having compassion for the stranger. Citizens were pushed out to make way for rampaging migrant hordes, as incredible as this seems.

But with that, of course, crime rose ever further, inciting citizen anger and providing a pretext to bring in the police state in the form of the National Guard, now tasked with cracking down on crime in the transportation system.

What’s the next step? It’s probably already here: mass surveillance and censorship, plus ever-expanding police power. This will be accompanied by further population movements, as those with the means to do so flee the city and even the country and leave it for everyone else to suffer.

As I tell the story, all of this seems inevitable. It is not. It could have been stopped at any point. A wise and prudent political leadership could have admitted the error from the beginning and called on the country to rediscover freedom, decency, and the difference between right and wrong. But ego and pride stopped that from happening, and we are left with the consequences.

The government grows ever bigger and civil society ever less capable of managing itself in large urban centers. Disaster is unfolding in real time, mitigated only by a rising stock market and a financial system that has yet to fall apart completely.

Are we at the middle stages of total collapse, or at the point where the population and people in leadership positions wise up and decide to put an end to the downward slide? It’s hard to know. But this much we do know: There is a growing pocket of resistance out there that is fed up and refuses to sit by and watch this great country be sacked and taken over by everything it was set up to prevent.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/09/2024 - 16:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending