Topic: Why won't the US government give up? (Read 272 times)

Nice table.

I'm pretty sure that the CDBC is not going to help the United States at all in terms of its national debt. Not that they're even interested in containing it.


Joe Rogan seemed level-headed in that episode. It's Sam Altman I'm more concerned about, given that he had just launched a (failed, in my opinion) bionic eye-scanning coin and who knows what he will do with the data.

With their thirst of printing money whenever  need be,  I wonder what the total supply for the CBDC will be or they will keep minting new coins out of nothing 

Afaik the US government hasn't given up on this as can be seen by all these lawsuits going against exchanges of which they are trying to gain some kind of control by regulating bitcoin indirectly through exchanges , and unfortunately we all know that they can not win this fight !!

The article is based on a podcast with Joe Rogan. Joe Rogan is a libertarian-leaning guy, so, naturally, any form of governmental oversight over anything but the basic security of the citizens is interpreted as an attempt to control. That's just the way this political stance treats the state and the government. So 'trying to control Bitcoin' might simply 'trying to impose any sort of legislation to regulate Bitcoin'. I realize that Sam Altman is his own person, but when being a guest on a podcast, you can lean closer to the host's position because that's where the conversation's going.
But what's interesting is that it seems that many in the US are actually frustrated that the US does not want to regulate Bitcoin (which we can see in the reluctance of the SEC to take Bitcoin under its oversight).
As for CBDCs, they just often come up in talks about cryptos and governments because it's sort of a centralized crypto-like thing. It doesn't have anything to do with regulating Bitcoin directly.

If you live in the belief that this is the main reason (or one of the reasons), then you are really delusional or do you think that the US is so poor that it depends on how much BTC they seize and then sell at auctions? Let's take a hypothetical case in which the US would be able to seize all BTC that is currently in circulation (mined) and sell it at the current price of $27 700 for one BTC, which would total about $540 billion. If you are interested, the annual US budget (2023) for defense is about $850 billion.


You don't think they will mine BTC or something similar, do you? Although it is not disputed that people in the US invest in BTC, it is far from what people think, because they still protect their national currency in all possible ways and the average American still values the US dollar no matter what.

---

As for CBDC, it is only a response to the digital age and aims much more to be a competitor to stablecoins than to Bitcoins. At least that is the position of the ECB when it comes to the EU, but I doubt that the FED has a different position on the matter.

This must be the reason, they are doing this because they hate things they can't control. Bitcoin is something they could just regulate but they can never control it and that's why they hate it as much as they possibly could. There is no reason why they would stop neither, they are a huge government and they could just share the load and forever keep on attacking bitcoin without ever stopping.

I think they are going to have a lot of regulations related things on things around bitcoin. It won't be like banning bitcoin, I do not think that they will ever do that, but what they would do will be like attack coinbase on some rules and laws, or attack binance, or attack companies that work with binance, attacking tether, basically do whatever they can do to make sure that things are a lot harder. If you make bitcoin not appealing to the masses, that is as good as banning it, because it would drop the value of it to people and that will hurt.

A CBDC full blown monetary system being implemented in the world I would think would get some major pushback with the public if they openly said they were not accepting cash anymore alltogether and only CBDC funds, I met the attorney who runs the coalition to keep cash in use for business and consumers alike and he is excellent. As of now, as long as Bruce Wayne Renard ATMIA founder and Legal Attorney is on the job I don't see cash going anywhere anytime soon, at least in the US. Cash is privacy man, seriously. I love the blockchain and everyting but there is no tracking modules on cold hard cash.

Why is it only the US government, but what about other governments? Governments will never give up control of bitcoin because they believe that what they cannot control will harm them.


I don't think CBDCs were created to compete with bitcoin, and as far as I know the US government doesn't even have plans to launch its own CBDC, let alone that they intend to compete with bitcoin. There have been several countries that launched their own CBDCs and failed but not because of competition with bitcoin, but because they did not educate people about it before releasing it.

The government really hates things they can't control, they will try hard to control everything with the laws that apply in their country, this is the basic reason the US government will not give up easily on Bitcoin.

by the way, people are starting to become immune to orders from the government, especially if it concerns good things then there is no good reason to really listen to what they say, we are talking about the US government, here I see they are actually confused about what they are doing regarding bitcoin, regulations regarding bitcoin is still gray, if the USA government is too strict with bitcoin then there will be many USA citizens who invest in bitcoin who will not accept it and will definitely demonstrate against them.

while CBDC emerged to be a competitor to btc but as time goes by, no one is interested in CBDC, efforts to leading bitcoin investors to move to CBDC failed miserably, there are also rumors that I heard that there are many speculators domiciled in the US who buy bitcoin, they continue to drive rumors to manipulate the price and make big profits from it (I don't know whether it's just hearsay or it's real).

Maybe the U.S. government still believes that they can still control Bitcoin, so they didn't lose hope until now. But in reality, if I look at it, the U.S. is just stubborn and doesn't want to wake up to the fact that they can't control Bitcoin.

No matter what the US does, it will not be able to stop the dominance of Bitcoin in the whole world. The US government will be even more stressed when they see its value reach $100,000 next year, for sure. So the US should just join the club in the Bitcoin community and support it 100%.

This is the point. Governments have gained some control over bitcoin transactions, and with the upcoming legislation, more. In the EU they want to control bitcoin transactions as if they were banking transactions, and you can always get away with people doing P2P transactions from their cold wallets but they are going to control a large part of what happens on the blockchain.

We want to be free, not to be controlled by the government, but we also want to be protected by them if anyone harms us, many people don't even want to pay taxes but always complain about everything. Are we too greedy? If we want them to protect us from scams like FTX then we should listen to them and obey the law then we have the right to demand such things. But if we want to be free, not be controlled, not have to pay taxes and want to make a lot of profits, we need to take risks and accept our choices. That's why when I participate in the market, I go against my government, so I can't ask them to protect me if I lose money. And in return, when I make a profit, they have no right to tax me.

Because they can never control bitcoin? Its an opensource and no one can control it not even its Founder who made it literally uncontrollable just to make a free finance system wherein no third party can gain advantage over it or for political reason. They knew how it works the only thing they can do is set some crazy rules around it where the people are the one being annoyed about.

I feel you, man. It's like the never-ending battle between old-school finance and the crypto revolution. CBDCs are a way for governments to adapt to the changing financial landscape. They're not necessarily out to kill Bitcoin; they just want to stay in the game. And about giving up on controlling Bitcoin? It's not that easy. Bitcoin's decentralized nature is its strength, but it's also a challenge for governments. They're not giving up; they're trying to figure out how to navigate this new financial frontier without stifling innovation.

The US government doesn't wish to ban bitcoin. They're bitcoin whales. US government get bitcoin through seized bitcoin from criminals. Holds, and soon auction them for profits. The regulation of bitcoin price isn't easy or possible for the government. Greed won't let them forfeit the profits following bitcoin bull run. Hence, they'll always be interested in any bitcoin related case; scams and bankruptcy. So, they finally regulated bitcoin, but not the way we thought they would. Since it's hard to achieve tech wise. The US government economized the demand and supply of bitcoin, as a regulatory technique. Those events you mentioned, fetched or will earn them more bitcoin. These moves, arresting and sentencing the CEO is as a result of breaking the law. It's obligatory for the government to catch criminals who illegally ill-treat the wealth of citizens. A citizen may not regard her government if they don't take action against cyber theft. Aside that, It's impossible to get hold of every cryptocurrency scam plot. Such things keeps happening often and often. Only the biggest of them get the attention of the government. Why, because of the profits; more bitcoins.  In the USA, the demand and supply of bitcoin is regulated. Which is still not bad for bitcoin. It doesn't affect in anyway the operation of bitcoin. Only the usage can be affected by the reduction of the number of US citizens using bitcoin. Equipping the bad factors of bitcoin to scare them away. What they're doing on the long run is helping the bitcoin network grow. Many wise congressmen and government officials are seeing the potentials of bitcoin. Through its long term persistence on the government's war against bitcoin. Most of them invest in bitcoin. Build blockchain services. So, I think the government is satisfying her citizens with what makes them happy; jailing Scammers. And, the government, go ahead to seeing the potentials of bitcoin. With their power over the demand and supply of bitcoin in USA using KYC as a tool. They'll be able to generate more bitcoins for themselves. Hence, the publicity they're giving to bitcoin is on purpose. If not they, the government, wouldn't have given a single publicity to bitcoin: good or bad. The government is doing what should be done, in a way US citizens wants to see what should be done.

CBDC can be easily controlled and monitored. The difference between fiat money and CBDC is that the latter uses blockchain technology. The government wants to have full control over tax and also regulate the entire financial transactions of its citizens.  They want to always know how much you have, what you spend your money on, and where your money is so that they can have the power to freeze and even forcefully take your money.

I don't think they will ever give up on their pursuit to centralize bitcoin. Rather more stringent policies will make bitcoin more difficult to be freely used. My prediction is that in the future government will back the use of centralized exchanges but they will try to limit the use of bitcoin in its decentralized form.

Why are you surprised that governments create CBDCs? We live in an extremely fast-paced world and it is no surprise that all countries are racing with new technology to avoid obsolescence and bring convenience to their countries. Furthermore, I don't see any government saying that they are developing a CBDC to counter bitcoin or compete directly with bitcoin. I haven't seen any articles about that except what you are saying. CBDC was not created to compete with bitcoin, it was created for the advancement of technology and to control us more.

Is this beincrypto.com website yours? Are you promoting it?
Why would the US government give up on anything? USA is still the most powerful country in the world.
Do you really think that the main goal of the US government is to "control Bitcoin"? I think that if the US government really wanted to control Bitcoin, they would have achieved that goal years ago. Bitcoin(and the altcoins) are still too small to be a priority of the US government.
The CBDC project is having  macroeconomic goals(achieving greater control over the money supply and reducing the ability of the commercial banks to influence monetary policy). The main goal of the US "digital dollar" has little to do with fighting Bitcoin(and the altcoins).

Yes. we know Bitcoin Trading is an easy process Bitcoin is a great tool for diversifying a trading portfolio because this currency is almost uncorrelated with other trading instruments. meaning coming to the market, meeting, where there are buyers and sellers who agree on the price.

The connection between what you convey above is clear. For the exact reason, I personally don't know why that is, but what is certain is that BTC is able to break government monopolies and that is why many people choose Bitcoin even though they can choose any type of participation other than that.  .

The US government will not give up its quest to control Bitcoin easily, and even after a decade they will not give up. US policy towards its enemies is far-reaching (it resembles the Cold War).

Even if Bitcoin is decentralized, the United States seeks to control it by controlling central exchanges and all other crypto services through strict regulatory restrictions and KYC and AML policies. Central bank digital currencies (CBDC) are also another way in the US's quest to control Bitcoin.

This battle can be summarized as the will of the people (Bitcoin, decentralization, and privacy) versus the will of governments (centralization and absolute control). Do not expect it to end soon, so let us wait and see the result.

At initial I have not seen country that  embrace bitcoin since 2009 bitcoin has been introduced and secondly, I really understand in cryptocurrency is that generally government is against of their existence because of they taught that bitcoin have to do with embezzlement of funds and other fraudulent acts, what Government wanted is anything centralized and when you say decentralized government is not in support of decentralized currency, assuming top ten (10) countries accepted bitcoin as a legal tender by now bitcoin would have been reached hundred thousand.