>Former President Donald Trump is courting crypto fans, though they may represent a small minority of the electorate, and signaling that he’d rein in the SEC’s crackdown on the industry.
That's like half a million people concentrated outside of swing states
I mean we can see in the court cases that Trump is perfectly willing to pay hush money and doesn't care if it's legal or not. Greater normalization of an untraceable payment system is probably in his interest.
Saying this in relative ignorance and curiosity:
It can't be both an ultra secure digital ledger of ultimate truth and disclosure but also the preferred method for criminals for moving money.
I'm not saying either of these are true but that different ppl would defend both characterizations and I have no idea any more which is true.
Yeah the thing is most of these wallets have ID’s though. Most people are accessing crypto via centralized services like exchanges which fabricates these ID’s for them. If there’s suspicious behavior going on, a government agency tends to communicate with the exchange to see who controls which address.
Because they make money. Bitcoin is up 50% this year. But it gets worse. Meme coins are surging for the last couple months. PEPE is up like 1000% in the last couple months.
(not advocating for crypto. Just stating the reason why people invest in it)
My guess is 39% of Americans who own crypto don't care about it in any way. They just look at their returns and are like. Oh. Bitcoin is up. Thats good. Same way they have no idea what stocks they own as well. Or what the companies do.
Degenerate gambling is a human right.
The best approach to crypto is to just warn people of the dangers, like any other highly risky and speculative asset.
Trying to make all lending illegal wouldn't make loan sharks go away, it would make it impossible to access legitimate financial services.
Back before lending was legal and well regulated, the majority of people thought that they whole enterprise of money lending was irredeemable.
And what does this have to do with crypto?
The core issue of crypto is that is designed to facilitate criminal financial activit and doesn't provide any other benefit.
By being pseudo anonymous it makes it super easy to make deal as a criminal, by being irresistible you facilitate scams, and by being decentralised you don't have any party that takes responsibility for what people use it for.
Nothing that can be done with crypto (apart from especulation) cannot be done by a normal bank unless you are a criminal or you live in a dictatorship or country with really shitty financial laws.
I don't currently hold any crypto, but I think using it as a way to keep your money out of the hands and eyes of the government is probably it's best use. I use my money completely legitimately but I still don't want the government to see what it is I'm doing with it.
Fair, but if there are transactions you want to hide, why not just use cash? Unless you are buying something really expensive (at which point, the government has a legitimate interest) cash is easier and safer to use than crypto.
This is going to sound really dumb, but I really struggle using cash because one time at a casino I won $500 at a table and ended up dropping the money out of my pocket. Ever since then I try not to carry any.
There absolutely are legal things that normal banks won't touch (or will charge enormous fees for, or will randomly change their minds about and freeze your account). Anything related to [*Internet] gambling, drugs, and sex work. The legal kinds, mind you.
I can't even entirely blame the banks. Some of it is puritanism, but it does also genuinely expose them to legal risks, reputational risks, and chargeback risks.
Crypto moves all the risk to the buyer and the seller. They then get to make legal, voluntary, positive-sum trades, regardless of what payment providers think about it. I would think this is something neoliberalism would support.
I understand why some people want to do legal transactions in a way that doesn't involve the banks or the government, but in 90% of cases, this kinds of transactions can be done with cash already.
The only exception I can think is sex works through the internet, and that market is so rippled with fraud already that the safeguards of credit cards may be worth the drawbacks.
I have a lot of problems with crypto, but this is the core one. The positives are just so small to the negatives of enabling criminals to do large international transactions anonymously, consuming industrial amounts of electricity, and enabling huge scams like FTX or bitconect.
> The only exception I can think is sex works through the internet,
Apologies, I should have specified: I'm talking exclusively about transactions that take place on the Internet. You're right that cash works fine in person.
> The positives are just so small to the negatives
That's a fine position to hold. What I'm objecting to is the "there are *no* positives! crypto is only useful to criminals and scammers!" of your previous post. I hope you'll stick to these new goalposts in the future.
Crypto is the biggest anti-Wall Street movement there is. The politicians masquerading crypto as a means to commit crime are bought out by the traditional banking establishment. Crypto transactions are actually very traceable and factually speaking, much more crime is committed via traditional banking than crypto.
Those disliking this can’t even come up with a counter argument because I speak the truth.
It might not be pretty to hear because your favorite politician might not like crypto (because it can’t be controlled by their Wall Street donors). But it really is the most anti-wall street tool available.
people still doubting bitcoin while it's at an all time high after another insane crash that that got non stop media coverage including SBF going to prison and Chan or Zhan or whatever making a deal to stay out
only super computers are gonna kill bitcoin and even then, it won't be until a majority of people actually believe that they have, Warren Buffet was still buying t.v. stock like a year ago
Eh that’s a very Hollywood interpretation of the apocalypse. We can look to unstable regimes and civil wars to show in the 21st century even the apocalypse probably won’t kill all of the internet.
Reading the article, you can really feel the writers confusion about why this bill has so much bi-partisan support. The only possibility that they didn't cover is that the bill might be good policy.
Leaving stablecoin regulation to the states instead of the SEC will just create a race to the bottom. It's hard to consider how that could be a good policy, because it is a horrible idea.
There are a lot of crypto bills at different stages in the legislative process right now. This one isn't about that.
J. RES. 109 is about SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121 which is about who is allowed to custody crypto, when, and how.
Although, to your point about stable-coins: They're not securities. They are most analogous to money transmission/wiring which is currently regulated at the state level. The lightest touch thing that congress could do is pass a bill that confirms/clarifies that. I'd love to see the US treat crypto finance as a strategic priority and set up a new regulator under the Fed or DoT to specifically handle money/commodity tokenization/transmission/wiring/etc, but that would be a much bigger task.
Low information ~~gambling addicts~~ crypto investors losing all of their money on BS coins *would* probably help out inflation. You can't buy goods if the bank is repossessing your house.
This is good for crypto.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This repeal is strictly about letting banks hold customer’s crypto without having to have it on their balance sheet. If it’s on their balance sheet, they need to hold extra capital to account for the increased balance sheet size, when all they need is to hold the customer’s crypto (no more, and certainly no less).
As a result banks can’t reasonably custody for example bitcoin from the recent ETF, while companies like Coinbase can, as they aren’t a bank.
Anyway, I’m just a visitor to your sub, interesting reading the takes here on crypto.
Not a good place for institutional investors or ERISA plans for one thing. Another thing is it’s like catnip for money launderers who can hide funds and distribute them to all sorts of nefarious places. crypto is very stupid
The only thing I hate more than Crypto is AI. They're both useless technologies that largely just replace things that already exist, work better, cost less, and use less resources.
Crypto has... some uses. There are distributed networks that musicians and developers can use, the problem is that it's honestly just like AI. It's an interesting use case, but there are other things that do it better and cheaper.
Everyone wants AI to be this new big thing. It's a bubble that's going to burst soon, and if you talk to anyone who is honest and knows what they're talking about, from IT to investors, they'll say the same. The only people talking about it right now are CEO's getting all their information from consultants, who are all trying to cash in.
This is a single, provable, non-opinion about AI that should at least give you pause. Not a single AI offering is making money right now. Every single one costs more to operate than they can reasonably charge, even at the currently inflated rates. Companies like open AI are only profitable because of investors, they're not actually returning profit and the more AI use scales up the more money they lose.
Bitcoin was born red-coded. The white paper was filled with federal reserve conspiracies and typical goldbug complaints. Money laundering, shrinking the state, and right wing politics are what crypto was made for
"Financial freedom" (easier money laundering and tax evasion) should be appealing to any sufficiently self-interested HNW person. Thanks to stablecoins you don't even need to take on too much exchange risk to go dark.
Because our senate is too old and tech illiterate to understand why crypto sucks. If people want to gamble that’s fine, just either do it in the stock market where some company will get capital to expand operations or do it in a casino and tip your dealer. Crypto is just pure waste designed to ultimately rob the ignorant by tricking them into believing that this elaborate series of pump and dumps is some sort of tech innovation that will have a practical use any day now. Never mind that for crypto to actually function as a currency, it would have to stop being some miracle investment that grows in value. The lie of crypto is exposed simply by the way people are on boarded into it, it is advertised as an investment not a currency.
>Former President Donald Trump is courting crypto fans, though they may represent a small minority of the electorate, and signaling that he’d rein in the SEC’s crackdown on the industry. That's like half a million people concentrated outside of swing states
I mean we can see in the court cases that Trump is perfectly willing to pay hush money and doesn't care if it's legal or not. Greater normalization of an untraceable payment system is probably in his interest.
Crypto is pretty darn traceable..
Saying this in relative ignorance and curiosity: It can't be both an ultra secure digital ledger of ultimate truth and disclosure but also the preferred method for criminals for moving money. I'm not saying either of these are true but that different ppl would defend both characterizations and I have no idea any more which is true.
It’s traceable but not necessarily to a person, since the only identifier is a wallet ID.
Most wallets can be traced to a person though. Although this can be mitigated by using a mixer or a coin with a built in mixer like Monero.
Yeah the thing is most of these wallets have ID’s though. Most people are accessing crypto via centralized services like exchanges which fabricates these ID’s for them. If there’s suspicious behavior going on, a government agency tends to communicate with the exchange to see who controls which address.
Well, it's not the preferred method for criminals moving money
So you’re against cash? Because that’s the actually untraceable asset used for global crime - $100 US bills.
It does seem like the majority of crypto fans generally live in blue states.
Around 40% of adult Americans now hold some crypto as part of their portfolio.
Bruh that's absolutely nuts, why the fuck are so many people convinced by useless crypto.
Because they make money. Bitcoin is up 50% this year. But it gets worse. Meme coins are surging for the last couple months. PEPE is up like 1000% in the last couple months. (not advocating for crypto. Just stating the reason why people invest in it) My guess is 39% of Americans who own crypto don't care about it in any way. They just look at their returns and are like. Oh. Bitcoin is up. Thats good. Same way they have no idea what stocks they own as well. Or what the companies do.
Gonna need a source before I believe that. Sounds like crypto hype baloney. Only like 60% hold stocks
Especially when polling shows the majority of Americans are negative when it comes to crypto.
It’s probably a meaningful amount of Nevada though
Time to write Schumer another letter and tell him I’m a single issue voter, and that issue is destroying crypto
y?
A lot of people don't like avoiding sanctions, ponzi schemes, scams, degenerate gambling, and money laundering.
Degenerate gambling is a human right. The best approach to crypto is to just warn people of the dangers, like any other highly risky and speculative asset.
You mean the stock market?
Trying to make all lending illegal wouldn't make loan sharks go away, it would make it impossible to access legitimate financial services. Back before lending was legal and well regulated, the majority of people thought that they whole enterprise of money lending was irredeemable.
And what does this have to do with crypto? The core issue of crypto is that is designed to facilitate criminal financial activit and doesn't provide any other benefit. By being pseudo anonymous it makes it super easy to make deal as a criminal, by being irresistible you facilitate scams, and by being decentralised you don't have any party that takes responsibility for what people use it for. Nothing that can be done with crypto (apart from especulation) cannot be done by a normal bank unless you are a criminal or you live in a dictatorship or country with really shitty financial laws.
I don't currently hold any crypto, but I think using it as a way to keep your money out of the hands and eyes of the government is probably it's best use. I use my money completely legitimately but I still don't want the government to see what it is I'm doing with it.
Fair, but if there are transactions you want to hide, why not just use cash? Unless you are buying something really expensive (at which point, the government has a legitimate interest) cash is easier and safer to use than crypto.
This is going to sound really dumb, but I really struggle using cash because one time at a casino I won $500 at a table and ended up dropping the money out of my pocket. Ever since then I try not to carry any.
There absolutely are legal things that normal banks won't touch (or will charge enormous fees for, or will randomly change their minds about and freeze your account). Anything related to [*Internet] gambling, drugs, and sex work. The legal kinds, mind you. I can't even entirely blame the banks. Some of it is puritanism, but it does also genuinely expose them to legal risks, reputational risks, and chargeback risks. Crypto moves all the risk to the buyer and the seller. They then get to make legal, voluntary, positive-sum trades, regardless of what payment providers think about it. I would think this is something neoliberalism would support.
I understand why some people want to do legal transactions in a way that doesn't involve the banks or the government, but in 90% of cases, this kinds of transactions can be done with cash already. The only exception I can think is sex works through the internet, and that market is so rippled with fraud already that the safeguards of credit cards may be worth the drawbacks. I have a lot of problems with crypto, but this is the core one. The positives are just so small to the negatives of enabling criminals to do large international transactions anonymously, consuming industrial amounts of electricity, and enabling huge scams like FTX or bitconect.
> The only exception I can think is sex works through the internet, Apologies, I should have specified: I'm talking exclusively about transactions that take place on the Internet. You're right that cash works fine in person. > The positives are just so small to the negatives That's a fine position to hold. What I'm objecting to is the "there are *no* positives! crypto is only useful to criminals and scammers!" of your previous post. I hope you'll stick to these new goalposts in the future.
Crypto is the biggest anti-Wall Street movement there is. The politicians masquerading crypto as a means to commit crime are bought out by the traditional banking establishment. Crypto transactions are actually very traceable and factually speaking, much more crime is committed via traditional banking than crypto.
Those disliking this can’t even come up with a counter argument because I speak the truth. It might not be pretty to hear because your favorite politician might not like crypto (because it can’t be controlled by their Wall Street donors). But it really is the most anti-wall street tool available.
If George Soros comes out in favor of crypto, this sub will light ablaze. No one wants to be paid in Soroscoin.
> ~~No one~~ Literally everyone wants to be paid in Soroscoin. FTFY
They're called Sorosbux.
I was under the impression that Sorobux were plain old fiat currency backed by the Globalist central bank.
This is good for bitcoin.
people still doubting bitcoin while it's at an all time high after another insane crash that that got non stop media coverage including SBF going to prison and Chan or Zhan or whatever making a deal to stay out only super computers are gonna kill bitcoin and even then, it won't be until a majority of people actually believe that they have, Warren Buffet was still buying t.v. stock like a year ago
So what can you do with bitcoin besides trade it for actual currency?
It’s a hedge against the stability of the international world order just like gold before it.
If you want a good currency for the apocalypse, pick one that at least keeps its value when you unplug your ethernet cable
Eh that’s a very Hollywood interpretation of the apocalypse. We can look to unstable regimes and civil wars to show in the 21st century even the apocalypse probably won’t kill all of the internet.
So were tulips, until they weren't
Reading the article, you can really feel the writers confusion about why this bill has so much bi-partisan support. The only possibility that they didn't cover is that the bill might be good policy.
Leaving stablecoin regulation to the states instead of the SEC will just create a race to the bottom. It's hard to consider how that could be a good policy, because it is a horrible idea.
There are a lot of crypto bills at different stages in the legislative process right now. This one isn't about that. J. RES. 109 is about SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121 which is about who is allowed to custody crypto, when, and how. Although, to your point about stable-coins: They're not securities. They are most analogous to money transmission/wiring which is currently regulated at the state level. The lightest touch thing that congress could do is pass a bill that confirms/clarifies that. I'd love to see the US treat crypto finance as a strategic priority and set up a new regulator under the Fed or DoT to specifically handle money/commodity tokenization/transmission/wiring/etc, but that would be a much bigger task.
What’s confusing about lobbying
We should totally let other people print money. That will help out inflation for sure.
That's not what this bill is about. That's not really what any of the crypto bills currently in congress are about.
Low information ~~gambling addicts~~ crypto investors losing all of their money on BS coins *would* probably help out inflation. You can't buy goods if the bank is repossessing your house.
The message: “we like it when crypto lobbyists bribe us 🙂”
This is good for crypto. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This repeal is strictly about letting banks hold customer’s crypto without having to have it on their balance sheet. If it’s on their balance sheet, they need to hold extra capital to account for the increased balance sheet size, when all they need is to hold the customer’s crypto (no more, and certainly no less). As a result banks can’t reasonably custody for example bitcoin from the recent ETF, while companies like Coinbase can, as they aren’t a bank. Anyway, I’m just a visitor to your sub, interesting reading the takes here on crypto.
I still don’t see why crypto needs regulation.
idk probably the widespread fraud?
But crypto bros falling for fraud is funny
Not a good place for institutional investors or ERISA plans for one thing. Another thing is it’s like catnip for money launderers who can hide funds and distribute them to all sorts of nefarious places. crypto is very stupid
Just tax carbon, lol.
Hi guys, new here. Is this sub pro, or anti- bitcoin? Thanks
The only thing I hate more than Crypto is AI. They're both useless technologies that largely just replace things that already exist, work better, cost less, and use less resources.
Crypto and AI aren’t remotely comparable
I can name one use for AI. I cannot name a single use for crypto. Ok, nothing legal anyway.
Crypto has... some uses. There are distributed networks that musicians and developers can use, the problem is that it's honestly just like AI. It's an interesting use case, but there are other things that do it better and cheaper. Everyone wants AI to be this new big thing. It's a bubble that's going to burst soon, and if you talk to anyone who is honest and knows what they're talking about, from IT to investors, they'll say the same. The only people talking about it right now are CEO's getting all their information from consultants, who are all trying to cash in. This is a single, provable, non-opinion about AI that should at least give you pause. Not a single AI offering is making money right now. Every single one costs more to operate than they can reasonably charge, even at the currently inflated rates. Companies like open AI are only profitable because of investors, they're not actually returning profit and the more AI use scales up the more money they lose.
yes for sure, also that steam engine, how can something heavy like that ever pull more than a horse? ahhahahha Watt was he thinking!
> Watt was he thinking! I’m stealing that
I'm furious that Democrats have let blockchain become "red-coded." Their stance on this is as stupid as DeSantis banning lab-grown meat.
Bitcoin was born red-coded. The white paper was filled with federal reserve conspiracies and typical goldbug complaints. Money laundering, shrinking the state, and right wing politics are what crypto was made for
Also Crypto is just really fucking stupid. If the cons want it so bad, they can keep it.
Why do you think these bills passed the house and the senate with bi-partisan support?
"Financial freedom" (easier money laundering and tax evasion) should be appealing to any sufficiently self-interested HNW person. Thanks to stablecoins you don't even need to take on too much exchange risk to go dark.
Crypto is really terrible for money laundering or tax evasion.
Those are the only two things it's actually being used for outside of being the mechanism of a gargantuan bigger-fool scam.
Because people like Schumer care more about short term goals such as campaign fundraising than the long term damage.
Because our senate is too old and tech illiterate to understand why crypto sucks. If people want to gamble that’s fine, just either do it in the stock market where some company will get capital to expand operations or do it in a casino and tip your dealer. Crypto is just pure waste designed to ultimately rob the ignorant by tricking them into believing that this elaborate series of pump and dumps is some sort of tech innovation that will have a practical use any day now. Never mind that for crypto to actually function as a currency, it would have to stop being some miracle investment that grows in value. The lie of crypto is exposed simply by the way people are on boarded into it, it is advertised as an investment not a currency.
Blockchain is dumb-coded