Topic: Will bitcoin go under regulation - page 24. (Read 211128 times)
Bitcoin going under regulation means like making it centralized which is not a way to solve the problem and it will make Bitcoin core values disappear forever and most people may avoid using Bitcoin due to that so it is a bad idea according to my understanding
Most of the government on the world know see bitcoin as a helpful resourceful for the economy and advance technology. As time goes by it will become regulated in the most part of the world. but we cannot deny that there are still minor who doesn't want to complicate their economy with the bitcoin o they remained the ban on their country.
Most? I certainly don't think most governments see it as helpful. They view it as a threat to their established dominance over the financial systems. How else could they afford such lavish lifestyles if they weren't collecting immense amounts of tax from the people and huge "donations" from corporate interests? How else could they keep spending fearlessly if they didn't have central banks printing money endlessly to supply their needs? If the people switch to an asset (bitcoin) that has a finite limit and doesn't involve the government, they will lose complete control over this. Therefore, they don't want it to happen.
Honestly, we need a dose of reality around here.
Most of the government on the world know see bitcoin as a helpful resourceful for the economy and advance technology. As time goes by it will become regulated in the most part of the world. but we cannot deny that there are still minor who doesn't want to complicate their economy with the bitcoin o they remained the ban on their country.
I think the world of bitcoin is going to grow bigger, and many governments now worry about the threat of bitcoin and introduce some regulatory measures. If bitcoin is used by more people and industries, the government may relax control of the encrypted world, thinking that it would have a lot of benefits for the economy.
I think so. Day by day Bitcoin is becoming a popular and acceptable virtual currency around the world so that it should be under regulation. If you want to establish this system for a long time then you have to focus on this system by regulation. So discipline would bring you a credibility and that's the important thing for the monetary issue.
Many government are seeing Bitcoin or cryptocurrency as a threat to their financial system and they think it should be regulated to solve the problem. Do you think they can regulate Bitcoin ?
in my opinion, managing bitcoin cannot do that by regulating its investors, if the government regulates I think bitcoin is an official currency and applies to transactions if the government regulates it certainly must guarantee the security of each investor
If SEC approve the Bitcoin ETF then it will be somewhat regulated but we can expect that minimum hundreds of millions will be poured into bitcoin which would be a game changer for whole cryptocurrency market.
If bitcoin will be legalized in the different countries in the world , there should be a conditions and terms in bitcoin and the government because cryptocurrency is a decentralized kind of currency, if the government would regulate it then there will be new sofware for the government to regulate crypto acyivities , I do not think if this soon be realized ,the regulation of botcoin in the internet.
Bitcoin is a decentralized blockchain system so it might be a difficult decision for any government to just wake and take, nevertheless, am of the opinion that it should be regulated so it could reduce the rate of crime involve and give acceptance of it anywhere in the world. Government will find it difficult to do, we need to make bitcoin a wold legal tendency anywhere in the world but this can only be achieved by regualated system.
I personally think bitcoin should not allow others in order to regulate it because if others got the power to regulate it bitcoin will lose its existence and people accept it as it is.
Hi,
everybody.
everybody.
Some countries have started the regulations already but the real actualization may not be possible. The government are not doing this for the good of their citizens but for their selfish interest.
The governments aren't looking to fiddle following Bitcoin but to ban it. But they aren't lithe to figure out a mannerism to get accord of that due to the decentralized flora and fauna of Bitcoin. But today or tomorrow the governments will have to alter Bitcoin and it will be a bit fine too for the industry as it would prevent hackers and scammers from getting away.
Whether it is bad for the world or not no taxes, low transaction fees and no KYC are the main attraction for some user's in the Bitcoin system but once it goes under regulations everything will change and it won't be any different than a fiat currency
I think regulations will be pleasurable for Bitcoin and the crypto currency world. I think that regulations will at the forefront happening happening the governments and vast financial institutions to believe and run Bitcoin improved. They will as well as be dexterous protect their people from those fraudsters and scammers who are using Bitcoin, alt coins and ICOs to maltreat some people. I succession on that as soon as that happens, people will have more confidence upon cryptos so it is easier for them to invest upon it.
Unfortunately, governments have some problems about bitcoin and other cryptocurrency. It’s true that they see crypto as a threat. I know there are people who use btc for financing terror organizations or illegal things, but on the other hand it has a great potantial to use for goodness. Governments can do some regulations but i don’t think it will end the btc.
For me looking at how things are going and the way various government are trying to sabotage the system, i think a time will come that many governments will ask for that but i don't see it happening now.
I think bitcoin will go under regulation, sooner or later government will ask for it but yes, today is not the right time for it. In tge near future it will. Many government are seeing Bitcoin or cryptocurrency as a threat to their financial system and they think it should be regulated to solve the problem. Do you think they can regulate Bitcoin ?
Yes of course they can regulate it if they will make it legal in every country. There is no impossible for the government. There are only two ways Government can do either they make bitcoin legal or they ban it.
Many government are seeing Bitcoin or cryptocurrency as a threat to their financial system and they think it should be regulated to solve the problem. Do you think they can regulate Bitcoin ?
I think no. They will not have enough resources and time to keep track of all bitcoin streams. The only thing they can is to legalize cryptocurrency and take taxes for her transaction and pay them. Because they are no longer in force to stop it, but they can still lead.you CANNOT regulate beer, people will always find ways to create and consume and swap beer with others.
you CAN regulate PEOPLE/BUSINESSES use of beer. in which if caught people/businesses could end up with fines.
but in short beer will continue to be made no matter what.
take the 1920's alcohol prohibition(regulation) for instance(moonshiners/gentlemens clubs era)
now swap the word beer for bitcoin and you will understand
government regulation is not a bitcoin threat. what is a threat is a development control of the code reference. which if too many people only follow one reference point of the code. the network becomes centralised. (spoiler: already happening)
yes the data is distributed, yes the private key holding is distributed, but the decision of code upgrade becomes centralised around a core team.
distrubuted vs decentralisd are 2 different things altogether
and if then that development is moving away from the 2009-2013 ethos of bitcoin, to move people away from bitcoin and instead into other networks. then that is the threat. (sorry cant innovate beer anymore there are limits, but try this potato vodka instead)
governments dont see bitcoin as an economic threat. to them bitcoins are just assets. like iphones or beer. if you buy a bitcoin/iphone/beer its stil moving FIAT from your account to the fiat bank account of a bitcoin/iphone/beer seller.
governments have laws that keep fiat in play, minimum wage, tax, court fines, etc. so fiat is not at risk to governments.
if you are american you still have to pay american taxes in american dollars.
if you dont pay taxes but are seen living a lifestyle of someone having income that should be paying taxes you will be fined in american dollars.. the government will still get their fiat. on way or another
in short unless minimum wage/tax law changes, the government dont care what you buy as long as you get paid the amounts that allow them to tax you, it dont matter if its bitcoin, euro, or moondust.
governments do not care about economic impact. the reason for regulation is to make more income via licences. as its free money for them while making businesses police the businesses customers.. in short government gets free money and makes a business do the work
governments pretend that regulations are about consumer protection. yet most regulations are about policing customers by investigating customers. not supporting customers. if governments cared about protecting customers. then they would not push for regulatory licences. but instead consumer protection insurances.
regulation vs consumer protection are 2 separate things.
take the housing crisis. banks were regulated. but mortgage holders lost out. banks gained. bankers did not get slapped, they got rewarded. mortgage holders not only lost a shelter but the funds they put into that shelter initially.
that is true, and what is their right if they forbid the happiness and success of others for thisyou CAN regulate PEOPLE/BUSINESSES use of beer. in which if caught people/businesses could end up with fines.
but in short beer will continue to be made no matter what.
take the 1920's alcohol prohibition(regulation) for instance(moonshiners/gentlemens clubs era)
now swap the word beer for bitcoin and you will understand
government regulation is not a bitcoin threat. what is a threat is a development control of the code reference. which if too many people only follow one reference point of the code. the network becomes centralised. (spoiler: already happening)
yes the data is distributed, yes the private key holding is distributed, but the decision of code upgrade becomes centralised around a core team.
distrubuted vs decentralisd are 2 different things altogether
and if then that development is moving away from the 2009-2013 ethos of bitcoin, to move people away from bitcoin and instead into other networks. then that is the threat. (sorry cant innovate beer anymore there are limits, but try this potato vodka instead)
governments dont see bitcoin as an economic threat. to them bitcoins are just assets. like iphones or beer. if you buy a bitcoin/iphone/beer its stil moving FIAT from your account to the fiat bank account of a bitcoin/iphone/beer seller.
governments have laws that keep fiat in play, minimum wage, tax, court fines, etc. so fiat is not at risk to governments.
if you are american you still have to pay american taxes in american dollars.
if you dont pay taxes but are seen living a lifestyle of someone having income that should be paying taxes you will be fined in american dollars.. the government will still get their fiat. on way or another
in short unless minimum wage/tax law changes, the government dont care what you buy as long as you get paid the amounts that allow them to tax you, it dont matter if its bitcoin, euro, or moondust.
governments do not care about economic impact. the reason for regulation is to make more income via licences. as its free money for them while making businesses police the businesses customers.. in short government gets free money and makes a business do the work
governments pretend that regulations are about consumer protection. yet most regulations are about policing customers by investigating customers. not supporting customers. if governments cared about protecting customers. then they would not push for regulatory licences. but instead consumer protection insurances.
regulation vs consumer protection are 2 separate things.
take the housing crisis. banks were regulated. but mortgage holders lost out. banks gained. bankers did not get slapped, they got rewarded. mortgage holders not only lost a shelter but the funds they put into that shelter initially.
Jump to: