Topic: [2022-07-16]U.S. Treasury invites public to provide input on President Biden's.. (Read 303 times)

I have respect for much of the people in bitcointalk, however, for those who are saying we need decentralization while also saying that regulation and compliance are good for bitcoin's ecosystem, the skeptical me is thinking that they only want their coins to pump. They only speculate on the potential that regulation might help on adoption. This is arguable considering bitcoin's low chance to scale as a medium of exchange and bitcoin's monetary policy.

Actually no, I don't really agree with that.

What does it attract to us? People with no interest in privacy, in an alternative currency, and in being free of monetary institutions. People who think they can get rich overnight because they heard about buying shitcoins, ICOs, and tokens on Youtube or Facebook between funny cats videos.
When the market crashes, you see them all crying because they have lost their savings.
That's why we usually say that when the market crashes, it is purged of the weak hands and that makes the market cleaner.

Furthermore, speculators are (to me) the cancer of the finance system. We can't expect a fair economy with their way of doing things and the results it gives in everyday life. If this is the case in traditional finance, it will be the same in the crypto industry.
And to finally add something I said in another discussion

Now, yes, you can argue that it brings people and popularity and stuff, but it would happen even without them. Sure, it would take more time, but it can't happen overnight. As the saying goes "Rome wasn't built in 1 day". Personally, I think Bitcoin will need another decade, if not more.

The same goes for Bitcoin's price since it's about supply and demand. Personally, I'm not sure if I care about the price. I rarely check it.

When you see the phrase "equitable economic growth" you know it means something other than given individuals the freedom to make their own choices and live with the consequences of them. 

It means politicians want to hijack a self-governing ecosystem so that they can control everyone else involved.  Bitcoin was developed responsibly so far.  Other coins, well, that is a different question, but some of these platforms (e.g. celsius, MtGox et al) were just incompetent or were crooks.  Or both. 

We all know "Public participation" is just a publicity stunt.... to enable the government to say that they involved the public's inputs into their decision making process. They (government) have already made their decision.... and "Public participation" is just another "box" that needs to be ticked to complete the process.

The regulations is inevitable, because "Puppet Masters" that are funding politicians are putting a lot of pressure on politicians to regulate Crypto currencies. 

You do have some really strong points which I agree to most, and I still agree to this part am quoting, but then, I will like to point you to something which I you didn't think of....
And that is the fact that in as much as Bitcoin adoption should come from people who need it for real use, do you agree that speculators played, still play, and would play an important role in the growth of Bitcoin, in price and popularity?
I believe you know that without speculators, that is if the only people buying Bitcoin were just those who need it for real use, Bitcoin wouldn't have attained the height it currently is in price and popularity.
This is just to make you understand that both speculators and real users have indeed played important roles, still play important roles, and would play important roles to both growth and adoption of Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is self-regulating and self-governing.  If the US want to regulate something, they should focus on those so-called stablecoins.  That farce is in dire need of some governance.  How they haven't been majorly clamped down on yet is beyond my comprehension.  The way in which private companies can effectively print tokens which supposedly represent USD, at will, with no limits and very little oversight?  I would have thought the US would have interpreted that as a threat to their economic stability long before now.

You know why? Because most people are in their ignorant bliss, and have no idea what even to say for a public comment for cryptocurrency order (if they even know what crypto is, or have heard of the concept of public comment).

Those who do have a clue are only doing things that keyboard warriors can do, but have no guts to make a change or innovation that requires sweat, tears, and brains.

That's what I often say here. What's the use of a decentralized currency in a centralized environment?

It's rather ironic to preach about Bitcoin but to want regulations at all costs. Laws that go against the ideology of Bitcoin and the system we seek to develop.
When I speak of a centralized environment, it is not only about the use of CEXs and the like. It is primarily about the states, central banks, and other institutions that dictate monetary policy and how we should behave.
Bitcoin is a stateless currency and state-less means stateless.

I scratch my head when I read users here saying "yes bitcoin is good, bitcoin is freedom" and in other discussions saying "yes, regulations are good" I wonder if people really understand the challenges behind... They can argue that it helps the massive adoption of Bitcoin but it is totally wrong. Anyway, Bitcoin doesn't need this, just look at the evolution that has been done since the beginning, when the laws didn't exist at all. You can't expect Bitcoin to be massively adopted in a few years. Especially for a stateless currency. Then, we can look at the Euro, and how many years did it take between discussions, studies, implementation, adaptation, conversion, and everything else. 20 years.

The economic system that we criticize so much, we reproduce the same with the cryptos.

What's the use of a decentralized currency in a centralized environment? I know the answer. Let's face the reality, it's all about speculation.
This is the main reason why people are interested in cryptos (including most of the people on Bitcointalk). If there was no money to be made, they wouldn't even look any further...

Adoption has to come from people who need it for real use, not for speculation. Citizens of countries in development, war, serious economic crisis,..., weigh more on the scale than people who come only to speculate

@LeGaulois. Agreed. This is very head shaking if there are bitcoiners who would welcome regulation on bitcoin. If they want regulation, what would be the use of decentralization? What would be the use of wasting all the electricity to mine those bitcoins if bitcoiners accept and comply with the government's authority to allow or ban bitcoin?

No, it isn't their chance to be heard. Since when does the government listen to the citizen? If a gov. really wants to do it => referendum

Bitcoin and bitcoiners don't care about Biden, do not need him, and didn't invite him to the party.
Ensuring the responsible development of digital assets for equitable economic growth is a fallacious argument. The Americans should translate it as "hey, we want to have control of this market, tell us how to do it"

If people want to read the comments here to get some fun. https://www.regulations.gov/document/TREAS-DO-2022-0014-0001/comment
People are really brainwashed

Source:-Reddit.com