Edit: ok not 100% sure of the solution, but I think that there should be a way for the government to stop people putting their life savings into Bitcoin.
This, in fact, goes against what Cryptocurrencies represent and what scares me the most is that people, in this case governments, are trying to regulate the new with the old. Remember, innovation always win.
> Remember, innovation always win.
Concorde and supersonic commercial flight, 3D TV, video phones...I could go on but those are the few that came to mind off the top of my head.
Would you feel better if people stopped calling it a currency? Also do they really have to ban it, can’t they just seize it all? It might be really embarrassing if we ban it and all the capital flees to Russia.
any country that allows crypto as an asset will risk an enormous bubble in their economy. it will eventually suck up all capital from other asset class, because crypto can never lose value unless people stop believing in it. the only reason why people believe in crypto as an asset is because the price keeps rising, and it's because there is limited supply. it is exactly same as how art market works. if anyone fully u…
So bitcoin is like art-as-store-of-value, that makes sense, it could lose 100% of its value unlike national currencies which can only suffer 91% loss in case of a bank run and only 99.9% loss in case of hyperinflation.
Bitcoin and cryptos ought to be banned for good. Cryptocurrencies are scam and outright bubble that will bring down the world economy. There is no currency without an authority to guarantee its value. Cryptos are pure bubble. If there is any good in this thing, it's ease of transaction, which is a question of underlying technology - it has nothing to do with lack of authority or decentralized scheme that cryptocurren…
> Bitcoin and cryptos ought to be banned for good.
Serious question: how would you go about “banning” cryotocurrencies? The most you can do is close exchanges which would make crypto harder to acquire and liquidate.
The good news for the rest of us is that it is very difficult to "ban" cryptocurrencies. That's a feature of them, of course. You can try to crack down on exchanges and methods for converting crypto to/from state-backed currencies, but that doesn't actually stop crypto.
you can make it illegal for a bank to do business with crypto exchanges like what SK is doing right now. If all G10 currency do this then it can kill the bubble in crypto. I actually think this is a better move for crypto's future.
I suspect we'll see other states angling to see what kind of tax revenue they can squeeze out of crypto, rather than banning it. The problem, of course, is how to set up such a system. They can enforce it with the exchanges (witness the recent IRS request that Coinbase faced) and banks. It will be hard to cover all crypto transactions.
Let's be enormously speculative and consider what might happen if cryptocurrencies do not collapse. The implications of this are interesting. They would end up being a worldwide asset that hedges against pretty much everything except worldwide economic collapse. That's sounding like the makings of the next reserve currency. What would be the implications of this for nations that currently benefit from the current wor…
National currencies are not really in risk. Suppose that bitcoin or similar are used as currency in practice (that it's very far of happening, by the way). Even if you are able to do all your operations in a cryptocurrency, you will need to pay taxes. Governments only accept their own currency, so, you need to get it to pay taxes, so, demand of national currency is going to exist always. >> "economic vessels like nat…
But wouldn’t that have a profound impact on the value of a currency? If all demand for it dissappeared except taxes what would happen to it’s value relative to other currencies? What would happen to trade?
I think this almost certainly is not the reason. You can take something as simple as lotteries to show this. Lotteries specifically target and exploit lower income individuals who we can say are probably not 'professional investors.' And they're huge money. In 2016 $80.55 billion was spent on lottery tickets in state lotteries in the US. [1] That's hundreds of dollars per person if each and every adult in the US boug…
> You can take something as simple as lotteries to show this. Lotteries explicitly and extensively inform the consumer precisely what their odds of getting a significant ROI are (namely "slim to none") and lotteries are heavily audited and regulated to make sure they deliver exactly those odds. When polled, those that play understand those odds for the most part and those who play the lottery compulsively understand…
So I guess it's morally better to let people instead gamble their money on bitcoin casinos that are verifiably fair?
any country that allows crypto as an asset will risk an enormous bubble in their economy. it will eventually suck up all capital from other asset class, because crypto can never lose value unless people stop believing in it. the only reason why people believe in crypto as an asset is because the price keeps rising, and it's because there is limited supply. it is exactly same as how art market works. if anyone fully u…
So bitcoin is like art-as-store-of-value, that makes sense, it could lose 100% of its value unlike national currencies which can only suffer 91% loss in case of a bank run and only 99.9% loss in case of hyperinflation. Does your portfolio account for nuclear war?
the reason why crypto is dangerous is because it's very, very easy to get a piece of it. it is open to anyone and you can buy for just a dollar. this drives up price unlike anything out there. yes anything can be a store of value with enough people believing in it. bitcoin succeeded in generating large enough followers to drive up its price like crazy. if it continues, it will suck up capital from all other asset classes - which in turn create a huge global inflation. losing value is one problem and the global inflation crypto will bring, if left unregulated, is another problem.
Updated: South Korea Clarifies Position After Reports of Possible Ban on All Crypto Transactions "On Monday, Financial Services Commission (FSC) Chairman Choi Jong-ku clarified to reporters at a luncheon meeting that “the FSC is mapping out measures to restrict [cryptocurrency] transactions to some extent,” which he did admit include “an all-out ban,” Yonhap reported. “The restriction is aimed at minimizing side effe…
Thank goodness it’s impossible to ban crypto! Everyone in SK withdraw from the exchanges before they seize it!
> Thank goodness it’s impossible to ban crypto!
No it's not. It may be hard to prevent all SK citizens from using cryptocurrencies as SK is a reasonably open society, but it would be straightforward to ban their use.
Thank goodness it’s impossible to ban crypto! Everyone in SK withdraw from the exchanges before they seize it!
> Thank goodness it’s impossible to ban crypto! No it's not. It may be hard to prevent all SK citizens from using cryptocurrencies as SK is a reasonably open society, but it would be straightforward to ban their use.
A ban won't stop crypto any more than it stops illegal drugs, prostitution, etc. That said, there would be an effect on the crypto markets if a handful of major nations took action. So the question I have would be: will they aim for the taxes (presumably allowing crypto trading), or for an outright ban?