In an "Office Hours" several days ago, I asked Mr Reich to comment on "Bitcoin" and the like. His short response at the time was that it's all a Ponzi hustle. He seems to have been planning a more in-depth response that I only anticipated within the context of that discussion. >This< is the response I was seeking.
In an "Office Hours" several days ago, I asked Mr Reich to comment on "Bitcoin" and the like. His short response at the time was that it's all a Ponzi hustle. He seems to have been planning a more in-depth response that I only anticipated within the context of that discussion. >This< is the response I was seeking.
As to the question:
"All of which raises the question: As the crypto congressional complex continues to grow, how much longer will lawmakers and regulators be able to rein crypto in?
What do you think?"
I don't think it could possibly happen in the current political climate through legislation. I think the only way it could possibly happen >in< this climate is for the DOD to focus on crypto-currencies as a national security threat, and dedicate a unit of their best assault hackers to insure they're aware of all actors in every crypto transaction they can access, and share any suspicious transactions with the appropriate domestic law enforcement agencies along with the IRS, as well as the CIA to investigate and keep abreast of any possible foreign hostile threats. Keep in mind I say that with fear and trepidation. I'm one of the original "who's gon'na protect us from who's gon'na protect us" types.
Then why - you may wonder - would I take such a position. Quite simply, I think crypto-currency is a far bigger problem than common wisdom may suggest, fraught with unintended consequences that few of us - if any - are equipped to imagine. Also, given that government >creates< the market in the first place, why would we permit antigovernmental, private sector forces to devise a market structure that serves their convenience? Why would we let the foxes rule the henhouse? I strongly urge those of us here who haven't already jumped on the crypto bandwagon, and who are either still mystified by or for whom "the jury is still out" on crypto, to think very carefully about this "new and revolutionary" way of doing business. I'd view it the same way anti-vaxxers view a proven defense against the covid. Those with a relatively reasonable and understandable view is that the covid vaccines haven't been around long enough to understand all the consequences of using it. I feel >just that way< about crypto. Not all innovation is an improvement. Not all change is for the best. The private sector is inherently, by definition, self-serving.
In an "Office Hours" several days ago, I asked Mr Reich to comment on "Bitcoin" and the like. His short response at the time was that it's all a Ponzi hustle. He seems to have been planning a more in-depth response that I only anticipated within the context of that discussion. >This< is the response I was seeking.
As to the question:
"All of which raises the question: As the crypto congressional complex continues to grow, how much longer will lawmakers and regulators be able to rein crypto in?
What do you think?"
I don't think it could possibly happen in the current political climate through legislation. I think the only way it could possibly happen >in< this climate is for the DOD to focus on crypto-currencies as a national security threat, and dedicate a unit of their best assault hackers to insure they're aware of all actors in every crypto transaction they can access, and share any suspicious transactions with the appropriate domestic law enforcement agencies along with the IRS, as well as the CIA to investigate and keep abreast of any possible foreign hostile threats. Keep in mind I say that with fear and trepidation. I'm one of the original "who's gon'na protect us from who's gon'na protect us" types.
Then why - you may wonder - would I take such a position. Quite simply, I think crypto-currency is a far bigger problem than common wisdom may suggest, fraught with unintended consequences that few of us - if any - are equipped to imagine. Also, given that government >creates< the market in the first place, why would we permit antigovernmental, private sector forces to devise a market structure that serves their convenience? Why would we let the foxes rule the henhouse? I strongly urge those of us here who haven't already jumped on the crypto bandwagon, and who are either still mystified by or for whom "the jury is still out" on crypto, to think very carefully about this "new and revolutionary" way of doing business. I'd view it the same way anti-vaxxers view a proven defense against the covid. Those with a relatively reasonable and understandable view is that the covid vaccines haven't been around long enough to understand all the consequences of using it. I feel >just that way< about crypto. Not all innovation is an improvement. Not all change is for the best. The private sector is inherently, by definition, self-serving.