Among the last three terms on my topic, each has representatives, and they've been having disagreements; the Government and banks against Bitcoin. With no tangible reason why it's so? I mean, Electricity came, the government and the bank accepted it and placed an electricity bill, the internet came they both accepted it and the Government works with ISPs to take bills from data subscriptions. Bitcoin came they took advantage of centralized exchanges, yet they're not satisfied. I've read multiple bad reasons placed on bitcoin volatility, fraud, etc, and don't see it tangible because every innovation has its risks and importance.
The government and banks will never agree on bitcoin or reach a consensus since it is just out of their hands and there is nothing they can do about it. The terrible reputations they're assigning to bitcoin are the least they can do to slow its adoption. Even crimes that were prevalent prior to bitcoin are now being attributed to it, which was not suppose to be so.
On the contrary, why do Bitcoiners quarrel with them? knowing that they, Government and Bank, got no strong evidence to tarnish the image of Bitcoin completely. I think the quarrel will make Bitcoin very famous to the extent that both opponents will have no other option than to submit to Bitcoin.
Allow the quarrel to continue since, in my opinion, it is only increasing the popularity of bitcoin and increasing public awareness of it. And as bitcoin enthusiasts, what we need to do is make it clear to people that bitcoin has nothing to do with the negative connotations that have been associated to it, and to tell them that it is also a reliable means to save money.