Author

Topic: Operation Chokepoint 2.0 was a travesty (Read 105 times)

legendary
Activity: 2604
Merit: 2353
November 30, 2024, 05:25:22 PM
#7
Thankfully those operations or plans have ended and now cryptos won't be cracked down anymore by US authorities during several years at least if we trust the new US president and governement. I hope they will keep their promises otherwise I don't think cryptos will be able to still be use like they are now, because European Union seems to really want to regulate it more strictly. USA could be a shield against that, but not so many countries.
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6320
Crypto Swap Exchange
November 30, 2024, 10:33:11 AM
#6
the insolvency had nothing to do with crypto or political hate of crypto
those banks invested depositors money(fiat) in bonds at low %.. then when higher % bonds came out no one wanted to buy the low bond % notes, and so the bank could not sell their bonds at value to get back money..
they instead were forced to sell bonds at a lose to atleast garner some buyers to be tempted.. but this left them short, and thus insolvent

Or more basically:

Poorly run businesses fail. Wow, what a concept.

Everyone knew that in 2020 when the Trump had the government give money away so that poorly run businesses that did not have enough cash to ride out a couple of really bad months that in 2021-22-23 there would be massive inflation to cover the costs.

Most well run banks / businesses [and people with a clue] saw that coming and made appropriate plans. Other are just running around crying that the market changed and they are too stupid to know how to change with the times.

Kind of like the people saying "millennials killed this business or that business" because it's easier to blame someone else then saying. "Customers / consumers changed and those businesses were run by people too stupid to change with them"

But making it all a conspiracy theory works so much better for people. This way it's never their fault or the fault of people they think are correct.

...There is a thread making the rounds on X/Twitter where Marc Anderssen tells Joe Rohan how 30 tech founders were debarked (including his business partner Horowitz's father)....

They were not debanked in the way that you or I would be. They were taking big risks as tech founders do, it's their job nothing wrong with that. BUT banks are timid on a lot of things. They would rather deal with businesses that are known and stable and can be quantified. So the banks did not want to do business with them. It makes a good story, but the truth was they didn't want their business accounts, had no issues with their personal accounts so long as a large portion of the funds did not come from the businesses they did not want to deal with.

Real life:
Back in 1970 - 1972 here in the US people who wanted to setup car dealerships selling Honda's had the same issue. Want to sell Ford, no problem, GM fine, Dodge just sign this paperwork. Honda scooters / motorcycles no problem. Honda cars? Nope, no business checking, no loans, no nothing, go to the bank down the street they might want that kind of business...we don't....and take your personal account with you when you leave we can't trust your money. The banks that did take the business made a ton of money in the end but it was a risk.

How I know:
Back in the mid 1980s I was friends with someone who's parents went though that. They had 3 successful AMC dealers back in the 60s - 70s. 15 years after the fact his dad was STILL pissed about what happened in the paragraph above. He wanted to sell Honda back in 1970 and went though hell to do it. By 1989 with Chrysler taking over AMC the only dealership he had left was the Honda one. So, no it's not just a story a lot of people lived though things like that. But, Mr. Kelly [funny I'm in my 50s he is in his 80s and he is still Mr. Kelly not Bob or Robert just Mr. Kelly some teenage habits die hard] still complains about the way some banks treated him back them.

-Dave
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
November 30, 2024, 07:41:03 AM
#5
the insolvency had nothing to do with crypto or political hate of crypto
those banks invested depositors money(fiat) in bonds at low %.. then when higher % bonds came out no one wanted to buy the low bond % notes, and so the bank could not sell their bonds at value to get back money..
they instead were forced to sell bonds at a lose to atleast garner some buyers to be tempted.. but this left them short, and thus insolvent
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 1060
November 30, 2024, 07:15:58 AM
#4
Most of these banks used to offer a start-up friendly environment, with low fees and some other perks.
This is, in my opinion, the main reason behind their shutdowns. They were involved too much into projects that didn't survive.
Were some of these projects crypto related? Probably, but certainly not all of them.
legendary
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1169
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
November 30, 2024, 07:09:46 AM
#3
Silvergate, Signature, Silicon Valley Bank: The loss of these three was a major setback to bitcoin and the tech industry.
They were shut down (or forced to under threat) for no legitimate reason, a reminder of government tyranny that was out of control.

Biden and his goon squad ought to be in prison IMO. It would be nice to see one or more of these guys make a comeback under a more business-friendly Trump regime.

Crypto Industry Leaders Claim U.S. Government Behind ‘Operation Chokepoint 2.0’ Effort To Cut Banking Ties With Blockchain Firms

Operation Choke Point 2.0: How U.S. Regulators Fight Bitcoin With Financial Censorship
You must be confused. Those banks weren't shut down because they were "crypto friendly". They were shut down because they were insolvent and had lack of oversight, so basically main reasons why FTX collapsed. So is FTX Biden's fault as well?

Ironically fall of these banks was caused by 2018 bank deregulation done by Donald Trump, where he cut safeguards to prevent them collapsing.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
November 30, 2024, 04:10:04 AM
#2
Not really Biden's concoction, as he's just rubber-stamping the things.

It's more on people like Elizabeth Warren, Janet Yellen, Jerome Powell who through various agencies they influence applied pressure on various fintechs and crypto-friendly institutions.

There is a thread making the rounds on X/Twitter where Marc Anderssen tells Joe Rohan how 30 tech founders were debarked (including his business partner Horowitz's father).

I didn't believe him at first because he didn't name most of them. But now it's making more sense to me, as they really did not want the crypto industry to boom during that time period of 2021-2023.

They thought that they could go create a national stablecoin, but it turns out that most people do not want such a thing.

There were many casualties along the way, not just banks. But those banks that didn't comply with the Federal Reserve chairpeople's veiled threats, were deplatformed as you saw.
member
Activity: 302
Merit: 46
NO SHITCOIN INSIDE
November 29, 2024, 01:55:29 PM
#1
Silvergate, Signature, Silicon Valley Bank: The loss of these three was a major setback to bitcoin and the tech industry.
They were shut down (or forced to under threat) for no legitimate reason, a reminder of government tyranny that was out of control.

Biden and his goon squad ought to be in prison IMO. It would be nice to see one or more of these guys make a comeback under a more business-friendly Trump regime.

Crypto Industry Leaders Claim U.S. Government Behind ‘Operation Chokepoint 2.0’ Effort To Cut Banking Ties With Blockchain Firms

Operation Choke Point 2.0: How U.S. Regulators Fight Bitcoin With Financial Censorship

Jump to: