#流动性与利率政策 After reading this round of discussions about liquidity and Bitcoin, I have to say—these macro analysts' differing opinions precisely reveal a fact that those of us who have been through on-chain battles have known for a long time: no one can accurately predict short-term movements, but risk signals cannot be ignored.

Luke Gromen holding onto his position from $30,000 all the way to now still dares to turn short-term bearish, and the logic behind this is worth pondering. The statement "Only quantitative easing can be loose, otherwise it's tightening" is quite sharp—essentially indicating that the probability of a deteriorating liquidity environment is higher. His focus on Tether's movements is also interesting; their balance sheet actually holds more gold reserves, which is a real vote with real money. Although the threat of quantum computing sounds distant, the 2 to 9-year time window is not far for us medium-term investors.

On the other side, Tom Lee is still painting the story of $200,000. Inside Fundstrat, some see risk, others see liquidity—each with their own reasoning. The most dangerous mindset at such times is to choose to listen only to what you want to hear. My experience is: when even professional institutions are divided like this, it precisely indicates that uncertainty is rising. In an environment of increasing uncertainty, FOMO is the biggest enemy.

Rather than guessing whether Bitcoin will go to $60,000 or $200,000 next, it's better to ask yourself first: how much drawdown can your position withstand? Before liquidity policies turn, do you have enough cash reserves set aside? If you can't answer these basic questions well, no matter how beautiful the forecast of a rise, it’s just empty talk. The key to surviving long on-chain has never been about betting right once on a market, but about not going all-in during times of uncertainty.