The SEC is in talks with Grayscale about a Bitcoin spot ETF, following their legal win in August. Grayscale is engaging with SEC units, and their Chief Legal Officer sees positive progress among firms like BlackRock and Fidelity. Despite Bitcoin hitting a 2023 peak at $36,000, the SEC, led by Gary Gensler, has yet to approve a spot ETF, citing concerns about fraud and market manipulation. Despite delays, major Wall Street players persist in submitting proposals, and Gensler emphasizes the prevalence of fraud in the crypto market.
Read the article: https://coinminutes.com/news/sec-engages-in-talks-with-grayscale-on-proposed-bitcoin-etf/
Read the article: https://coinminutes.com/news/sec-engages-in-talks-with-grayscale-on-proposed-bitcoin-etf/
The fact that there are bureaucrats who have to approve something like this says a lot about the degree of freedom remaining in the US and in the world. In a free country/world, adults should be free to enter into contracts like this without a hack like Gensler having to approve it or not.
The question is this, in most countries political leaders are voted into power by the majority of the citizens and they appoint those people in their positions to make those decisions. Are enough Bitcoin supporters doing the research to find out if they are voting for the correct political party that are supporting Bitcoin?
We now have some of the biggest financial management companies supporting spot ETF's and those same companies are making donations to political parties election campaigns.
I doubt they are yet. Look at Argentina, Cyprus, or Venezuela for example. How many times have the people of Argentina voted in authoritarians? It really only takes one time, e.g. Venezuela, but Argentina keeps doing it, and to make matters worse, international finance still keeps funding them! How many times will it take the people of Argentina to realize that the same socialist authoritarian polices will keep destroying their wealth and thus their country? The degree to which socialism is implemented correlates with the degree of the destruction.
This is part of the reason why a republic or democracy alone is a bad system of government unless there are constitutional limits on the power, otherwise you can have a tyranny of the majority. Just look at the democrat slave owners in the old US south. Just because it was in theory a republic or democracy, it didn't mean that a group weren't slaves. That party is on the same page today: it is my right force people to work in my fields then, it is my right to force people to pay for other choice now due to "need".
