Really great convo with sahil (npub126p…a7vm) here.
I've been hesitant to go for the full "get on zero" thing. But this convo got me reconsidering a bit.
https://fountain.fm/episode/6EQf6yQBgaaB3DToRd2h
I earn some fiat and pay my bills each month. Let's say I have $X in fiat left over. When I have strong, dependable fiat income, I always move that fiat into bitcoin.
But what if I know I'm going to be running a $X+ deficit in fiat bills next month? Or that most of my income now is in bitcoin and I'm going to have to sell some next month regardless? Always felt kind of pointless to scale in only to almost immediately scale back out.
In a bull market, sure, 1 month of gains could easily be worth it. In a crab or bear market, the calculation gets rougher.
But now I'm realizing that I already do FIFO accounting anyway. So if I think about the amounts going in and out as FIFO stacks, then I think I can make it make sense.
I can treat the $X going into bitcoin as a longer-term hodl; those are the last sats I'll be spending from that stack. Longer-term hodls always make sense.
And a month later when I need to spend about $X back out, those are actually the OLDEST sats I have in that stack, aged like a fine wine.
Now maybe FIFO isn't the best tax strategy (to each their own), but I do think it helps to better conceptualize how a "get on zero" approach can make sense in the face of constant, impending spends.
Thoughts?
KeithMukai / Keith Mukai
npub1tv…77wn2
2024-04-03 13:59:26
Author Public Key
npub1tv8gmfhalwnxxquxjzeh6gtdsdz6vg7vx0s3rt7s7uuw6aujh32qn77wn2Published at
2024-04-03 13:59:26Event JSON
{
"id": "f11332cd4aacbe4f767543e72106a9d6e917f3c1e274a847df46fcde0c88a11f",
"pubkey": "5b0e8da6fdfba663038690b37d216d8345a623cc33e111afd0f738ed7792bc54",
"created_at": 1712152766,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"5683ffc7ff8a732565135aad56cdff94ebacd9a616d1313aea8ad48a446bfe99",
"",
"mention"
]
],
"content": "Really great convo with nostr:npub126pll3ll3fej2egnt2k4dn0ljn46ekdxzmgnzwh23t2g53rtl6vs5ca7vm here.\n\nI've been hesitant to go for the full \"get on zero\" thing. But this convo got me reconsidering a bit.\n\nhttps://fountain.fm/episode/6EQf6yQBgaaB3DToRd2h\n\nI earn some fiat and pay my bills each month. Let's say I have $X in fiat left over. When I have strong, dependable fiat income, I always move that fiat into bitcoin.\n\nBut what if I know I'm going to be running a $X+ deficit in fiat bills next month? Or that most of my income now is in bitcoin and I'm going to have to sell some next month regardless? Always felt kind of pointless to scale in only to almost immediately scale back out.\n\nIn a bull market, sure, 1 month of gains could easily be worth it. In a crab or bear market, the calculation gets rougher.\n\nBut now I'm realizing that I already do FIFO accounting anyway. So if I think about the amounts going in and out as FIFO stacks, then I think I can make it make sense.\n\nI can treat the $X going into bitcoin as a longer-term hodl; those are the last sats I'll be spending from that stack. Longer-term hodls always make sense.\n\nAnd a month later when I need to spend about $X back out, those are actually the OLDEST sats I have in that stack, aged like a fine wine.\n\nNow maybe FIFO isn't the best tax strategy (to each their own), but I do think it helps to better conceptualize how a \"get on zero\" approach can make sense in the face of constant, impending spends.\n\nThoughts?",
"sig": "994ac0ba0364143eab003a4526d38a8eb826b134e6e998a27c2180b06822735695ae93c44cbc683bb72c108f3a0fb54b607e1ecc9c9ff4fae5fdc8471caa5182"
}