Topic: Demonizing Gary Gensler is pointless and partisan (Read 192 times)

The tax would be only on the electricity used, not based on any revenue or profit like the headline seems to imply.  But that's besides my point.  

Bitcoin is decentralized, it doesn't rely on any government to be nice to miners.  If all the sudden a bunch of miners make less money, or have to stop mining, bitcoin will be fine. 

Right now the US makes up 4% of the global population and US miners solve ~35-40% of all bitcoin blocks.  Wouldn't it be better for Bitcoin if that number went down?  Maybe it would have no effect, I'm not sure, but I don't see how it would be "bad for crypto" if less crypto were mined in the country that already mines the most crypto.  Not to mention the benefit to Texas' shitty power grid.

As far as Gary, I don't like his policies, too ambiguous, I hope Kamala wins and I hope she nicely asks him to step down and he does.  But I also don't think the whole "we want a government that supports crypto but will complain about any and all taxes or regulations" (aka "the billionaire told the billionaires what is best for us, and what is worst for us, and we want to be rich, and also we just fell out of a coconut tree, so we believe them") is short sighted - especially for all you number go up people.  

Yes, a Trump administration will almost certainly cause a spike in price, largely because it means Gary will be gone.  But like any financial policy, there's always a plus and a minus.  We already know how devastating it can be when an exchange collapses, or a scammer pulls off the biggest scam ever - all the bad things we all cry about most happens.  

So over-regulation makes it harder for honest crypto focused businesses  to be profitable and innovate, which makes general adoption more difficult, which means your bitcoin won't be worth as much.  

But under-regulation makes it easier for dishonest businesses/people to be profitable, which makes general adoption more difficult, which means your bitcoin won't be worth as much.

Is how much a Bitcoin is worth now or might be worth tomorrow really the only way to measure whether what's happening is good for it in the long run?  It sure seems like the silicon valley crypto bros are treating bitcoin like a shit coin on the general election block chain and a large portion of the crypto community falling for it.

He is not "friendly" to Bitcoin miners. It's a multi-billion dollar industry run by billionaires. Politicians tend to want to tax things like that so they don't have pay for the government with less popular taxes like those on average individuals.


I never meant to imply that miners evade taxes. And yes, if the US taxes the mining industry then it would decrease their profits, and even potentially reduce the percentage of hashrate there is in the USA. Two things:

1. Reducing the percentage of Bitcoin hashrate taking place in the USA would probably be a healthy thing for Bitcoin generally since it will make it more diverse; at worst, this will make no difference to the average Bitcoin user.

2. None of this has anything to do with Gary Gensler .



Now that's just silly: you are implying that Gensler is just doing what he's doing in order to raise revenue for the US government? These fines are absolutely meaningless compared to the US federal budget, which is several trillion per year.

And reducing fraud in a market helps that market. It's not Gensler's job to promote Bitcoin or any other product. But his actions certainly help a lot of them.



Yes, and it's a trade-off. There are a lot of things governments make illegal in order to keep the population safe, even though that cuts into the freedom of some individuals. It's all part of living in a society. As the saying goes, "some people ruin it for everybody".

I don't know how many Democrats are against that idea but you have to admit it to me: Biden is not friendly with bitcoin when he wants to impose that huge tax.
You need to clearly distinguish that increasing taxes and not paying taxes are completely different, bitcoin miners have never evaded taxes. You have to admit this and if passed, it would be a huge hurdle for the bitcoin mining industry in the United States.


One thing you need to realize is that all of Gary's accusations against crypto companies are about money, most of the lawsuits end when those companies pay fines.
That means they just want to make more money from this market, I don't see any good intention like promoting market development or reducing fraud as you said.


That's the price you pay for living in a country that values ​​human rights and freedom.
Maybe my country doesn't have those things but there will be other problems that are just as bad, every country has its own problems and that is the price we pay when we make choices.

As I said, Gensler himself is clearly focused on the fraud surrounding Bitcoin like brokers and so on. That is good for Bitcoin because it makes the market safer for the average consumer. Gensler has never, ever insinuated weaknesses in Bitcoin itself--he taught Bitcoin at MIT and knows perfectly well about what he is talking about.

As for bias, well, right back at you: there is often a strong "victimhood complex" running through the Bitcoin community wherein people like to see themselves as fighting some kind of mysterious and powerful evil that is out to get them. In this forum it seems like there are several posts per day that say in essence, "they should make Bitcoin legal in the USA! freedom!"--but Bitcoin is perfectly legal in the USA and always has been, and it's grown into a trillion dollar market cap thanks to that legality. But I guess for some people it's no fun unless they think they are "fighting the man" or something .

It is not talked about like a vulnerability of the US dollar that cause it to be stolen or that it is used to traffic drugs or for money laundering. When it is bitcoin, it is not only the medium but what facilitated the fraud.

If you still do not get it you might be the one with the bias here.

- Jay -

All crimes that involve money involve mentioning the medium. When a bank robbery is reported, they don't say, "staplers, those connected to the counter with little cables and... some other stuff was stolen". I'm pretty sure they talk almost exclusively about US dollars being stolen, in the US at least. And surely at least 99% of US law enforcement today is still dedicated to crimes involving US dollars, so... I'm not sure what the problem is here.


I think the fraud tag has been used to crack down on... fraud. The internet itself has fostered a ton of new forms of fraud and consumers have been victimized to the tune of billions of dollars by it. I don't think anybody interprets that as law enforcement being "anti-internet".

And also not unique to Bitcoin--or even the internet generally--is an ongoing trade-off we make as a society between freedom and safety. Today, hospitals in the USA are being attacked on a weekly basis by criminals, leading to pain, suffering, and financial losses. The attackers are using certain forms of crypto (but not plain old Bitcoin for instance) in order to carry out these attacks. On the other side of the equation, its not apparent what the value of keeping large monetary holdings secret from a government with a valid law enforcement inquiry is to the average citizen.

I don't get to store a thousand pounds of TNT in my garage because I think it's cool. I would be putting my neighbors at risk and I don't have any valid reason to do that. I'm all for our society being "as free as possible", and I think the default position of our government should be freedom first--but that has limits.

No one is saying turn your back on anything. Before bitcoin and crypto the medium of financial crime does not get the spotlight. No one says, "2 US dollar scammers have made away with so and so amount", the medium is not the issue but the scam. With crypto, state sponsored headlines highlight the medium and make that out to be the problem.

From your logic I am actually asking for victims of fiat crime amongst others to get relief.

I have made no argument against that.

You were again bringing up generalities with no facts so I will not respond to the "most" assumption.
But to this, it is not up to me to interpret what he or anyone says beyond what is actually said. What I am saying is the fraud tag has been used to crack down on different forms of privacy and decentralization, chase down crime but allow me mix my coins if I have to. It is that simple.

- Jay -

The world is rife with laws and law enforcement too. Why should people willfully turn their back on one form of crime? Why should one kind of crime victim not be given any relief? Just because there are other victims they haven't saved? That's a bizarre argument.

He never said that in the video and you just gave a statement with no evidence to back it up.