Bitcoin Forum

My only wish is this speculation on more crackdowns under Kamala Harris' administration will not be true. However, is it certain that bitcoin and the other cryptocoins will not pump if Harris is victorious on November? Arthur Hayes certainly speculates that it will not matter if a Republican or Democrat will win. He predicts that bitcoin and the cryptospace will certainly pump under Trump or Harris hehehehe.

The storyline is different, however. The people in social media are beginning to call Harris a communist hehehe.

https://i.ibb.co/QrhQgZw/9-F0443-FD-41-E7-43-F2-BDF2-99-DFAE5-B548-A.jpg

Kamala Harris, the vice president of the United States, aims to maintain the Biden administration’s stringent stance on cryptocurrency regulation.

Harris is reportedly working with Brian Deese and Bharat Ramamurti, two former economic advisers of the Biden administration who have heavily opposed the previous Clarity for Payment Stablecoins Act of 2023 for being too permissive for issuers.

Were Deese and Ramamurti part of “Operation Chokepoint 2.0?”

In March 2023, the US banking system took a hit following the sudden collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and the voluntary liquidation of Silvergate Bank. Signature Bank was also forced to close operations by New York regulators on March 12, two days after Silvergate Bank’s liquidation.


The sudden collapse of the three crypto-friendly US banks was called “Operation Chokepoint 2.0” by crypto venture capitalist Nic Carter, who saw it as a “coordinated effort” to unbank the crypto industry.

In a concerning sign for future crypto regulation, Deese and Ramamurti were allegedly part of the operation, according to Galaxy’s Thorn

Popular American business magazine Fortune has previously referred to Ramamurti as the “White House’s top crypto critic,” who served as a National Economic Council Deputy Director in the White House until October 2023.

This is another reason why Harris’ choice of economic advisers spells a tougher stance for the crypto industry, added Thorn

Read in full https://cointelegraph.com/news/kamala-harris-may-continue-the-biden-administration-s-crypto-crackdown

Trump would be better. If United States has bitcoin as one of their reserves, many countries will follow what US did and also have bitcoin in reserves. Even if Kamala Harris is not having many policies against bitcoin, I am sure she does not have a good plan for crypto generally.

WHAT A BUNCH OF PARTISAN BS

Look, I get it, bbc.reporter wants abortion to be illegal in the USA which is why he desperately wants Trump to be elected. It has nothing to do with Bitcoin.

If this wasn't a partisan attack by Republicans, then the fact that Bitcoin went up 500% under president Biden would make it clear to anybody that  Bitcoin and the crypto markets will be perfectly fine if she's elected--which looks pretty likely now, since Trump has obviously gone completely senile, talking about "nuclear warming" with Elon Musk and rambling incoherently at his poorly-attended rallies.

Trump promises:

1. To deport 5% of the US workforce, which will be the largest mass-deportation executed by any country in history, and something that will send the US economy into ruin.

2. To make abortion illegal across the USA, requiring the biggest police state in US history, and the biggest expansion since the Prohibition in the 1920s, which is how the FBI got started--and cryptocurrencies and massive new police states don't tend to mix well with each other.

3. To eliminate trade with China by imposing ridiculous tariffs on all Chinese goods, disrupting the US economy and making it so things like all of the parts for US computers are impossible to get here, or impossibly expensive.

4. To get into the crypto business himself, meaning that if you are in this business, you will now have to compete directly with the President of the United States, his family, and his party who controls Congress. Good luck with that.

Trump promises massive disruption of the US economy and life if he wins.

Meanwhile, Harris promises more of the same environment where:

1. Bitcoin went up 500% under president Biden.

2. ETFs for Bitcoin and Ether were approved.

3. The US remained the leader in Bitcoin mining.

4. Criminals like SBF were imprisoned, stabilizing the market--whereas Trump pardons criminals who send him money as he did in his presidency.

No rational person wanting the best for the crypto market and for Bitcoin's price to remain stable and grow would want Trump to be president.

She deserves it.

The bull shit from Kamala Harris and Democrat Party is they open the USA. border for illegal immigrants to come in, have free access to health care system and have rights to vote. Remember that they are illegal immigrants, not legal ones.

On the opposite, Kamala Harris and Democrat Party built walls of barriers as preparation for their DNC in coming days. They did not mind about border and security of the whole nation but do care a lot about DNC, their own party and benefit.

I like Elon Musk by his brave and tough decision to close the office of X in Brazil because he didn't want X to agree with request from Brazilian government to censor news on X in Brazil. X is different than Facebook that accept to do censorship to protect their business income.

The US Congress had accepted a bi-partisan deal on improving border security. It was supported by both parties, and it would have been the toughest border control bill passed by Congress in decades.

Then Trump ordered Republicans to kill the deal, because Trump does not want to fix the US border, he wants chaos because he thinks it will get him elected if its a huge mess there.


Immigrants to the US (legal or illegal) do not have "free access to the health care system". Immigrants cannot vote.

This is a bunch of lies told to you by Trump and his party. They tell you these lies because they want abortion to be illegal in the USA, so they will literally side with any candidate, no matter how stupid, no matter how criminal, and no matter how senile as Trump clearly is. They don't care what happens to the USA because they are religiously devoted to the idea that abortion must be illegal.

There is nothing to worry about Kamala Harris cracking down Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies because Trump will win the election and will support our market here.

That’s the same braindead argument Republicans tried to use against Obama and Joe Biden. If the Democratic Party was communist they wouldn’t keep trying to replace Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro with right wing puppets of the US empire. They wouldn’t have bombed Libya back into the stone age.

In American political discourse, whenever someone doesn't have a convincing argument they resort to name calling. If you disagree with someone’s politics just accuse them of communism, racism, going woke, misogyny, antisemitism, fascism, etc. These lazy attempts to portray Harris as a communist might work on people with the intelligence of fifth graders, but it makes the Trump campaign look desperate.

Yeah you are correct. If Kamala is president most likely Gary Gensler will still be at the SEC and his tune definately wont change towards crypto. It will become more strict and regulated than it is now. Trump seems more lax about it. Even if his "Strathegic Bitcoin Reserve" never actually pane out and launch, bitcoin and crypto will at least face less regulation.

The most important will be the removal of Gary Gensler. Hopefully Trump will hire someone who will be crypto friendly. This will never happen under the current Biden administration or the Harris administration next year. Hence our only hope is that Trump wins and it will spure more growth of crypto in the USA.

It would be wrong to blame the Biden administration for the fall of the three crypto-friendly banks. If you read about the reason for the failure of these banks, you will unravel a high level of mismanagement and failure to adopt risk management practices. We can blame the Biden government for not giving them a financial bailout, but the government doesn't need to offer assistance to all failing banks. Everyone in the crypto industry usually sees Gary Gensler as the number one anti-crypto government official, but during his time, several ETFs have been approved.

Most of us see Donald Trump as the soon-coming messiah, but a few years ago, he was anti-crypto. This means people can easily change their stance about a concept. Brian Deese and Bharat Ramamurti might have suddenly become crypto-friendly like Trump. Some of the political news flying on the internet is propaganda that is targeted at crediting or discrediting a candidate. I don't trust politicians and we shouldn't expect much from them.

The crypto industry is supposed to be "unbanked" since Day 1, but the sad truth is that most people can't buy crypto without a bank account.
The crypto industry has been promoted as "anti-bank" for years, but it still relies on the banking system. This should change in the future.
It's funny that this "collapse of the three crypto-friendly US bank" didn't cause any damage to the US crypto industry and it didn't stop crypto adoption in the USA. Maybe this "Operation Chokepoint 2.0" thing is just a conspiracy theory.
Kamala Harris becoming a US president would be bad not only for the crypto industry, but for any other industry in the USA.

I am guessing you are from the united states? I bet every US citizens won't want this too, and its for the safety of the country, it is obvious that kamala isn't american, making this possible will open door for her people in other countries, this woman will turn America into Walled City of Hong Kong if care isn't taken, it will be a shame if any american voted for this woman as the next president of the united states.

With the support of Trump or not Bitcoin will triumph over every hardship, Biden tried his best, Elizabeth warren is another big hater too, they failed to stop Bitcoin too, all these political drama can even be lies, maybe a way to secure the sit since many people in the country are into crypto investment, but in the end I will still vote for Trump even while history has it that he was once against crypto, he just seem to be the better man for the job.

What a load of crap. Trump supporters in this thread are looking pathetic as usual trying to support him by painting the opposition in a negative manner. Both Biden and Trump were always bad choices for the President role.

On the other hand, Harris is a slightly better choice than either of them. You people need to stop using BTC and crypto as weapons for politics since whoever ends up getting elected as the new president won't support the crypto world.

Whoever becomes US president will not stop the growth of bitcoin, Bitcoin has been in existence since 2009 until now and that means it has gone through 4 different US presidents. But if anti-bitcoin, unfriendly crypto-people like Biden or Gary continue to hold power, our development will slow down. Meanwhile, if we get the support of people who have a more open view of bitcoin and cryptocurrency, it will help us grow a little faster. So it will depend on what people want and decide who to vote for.

I'm not talking about other issues like military, inflation, climate...we're just talking about crypto and it seems so far no one in the democratic party is crypto friendly.

I am not quite certain if this is true, however, there are some articles mentioning that if Kamala Harris is victorious on November, it appears that she will hire uncle Gary as her secretary for the department of treasury. This might not be good for the cryptospace in America, I reckon.

There is also mention of grandma Warren who has been promoting her anticrypto army.

https://i.ibb.co/kJSPVTp/CC65-EC76-429-C-4669-B4-C3-D3-E45-BFC46-C3.jpghttps://i.ibb.co/r51XkyN/0-F8-C97-A3-ACAA-4-F8-A-BB56-EDB8-A9-E2-F685.jpg

While publicly, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chairman Gary Gensler hasn’t expressed desire to leave his current role, multiple senior Senate staffers are telling the Washington Reporter that if Vice President Kamala Harris wins in November, she plans to nominate Gensler as her Treasury Secretary. Those rumors corroborate what top Republicans have also told the Reporter on the record.

In an interview with the Reporter, Rep. Tom Emmer (R., Minn.) previously warned that Harris may pick Gensler — or Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) — to serve as her Treasury Secretary. Such a move, he cautioned, would be a disaster for the economy.

Source https://washingtonreporter.news/editorial/scoop-kamala-harris-likely-to-nominate-gary-gensler-as-treasury-secretary-if-elected-senate-sources/

This does not really seem a pretty ideal for me if we think Trump is the only way to achieve greater values on Bitcoin.
There had been speculations that Trump was once against Bitcoin and then embarks to swing on the opposite side lately.

Obviously Biden has not made good stance for the Bitcoin  communities and at a point of political dependence in need of the public voices and supports for his reelection, I believe he must have figured out how errors was being late for him to fix up believing that Bitcoin has gained a largely global dominance of enthusiasts, one community with same goals which Trump has adopted unrelenting for his campaigns with the promises to create more conveniences for the Bitcoin communities including to maximize the valuability of Bitcoin.

We never can tell that if Harris assume office, she might do better for Bitcoin to secure supports for her second tenure by acknowledging the possessions of the Bitcoin communities.

So it could be hard for she to be open minded to this as part of her agendas since Trump has already adopted it a strong tool for himself While on campaigns.
We also need to understand that Trump did not own or control Bitcoin and so also, Harris can not diminish the quality of Bitcoin as these are mere media speculations with political interpersonal interests.

Bitcoin army? You mean the army that has helped Bitcoin become what it is today?

Bitcoin went up 444,344% while Elizabeth Warren has been a Senator.

Maybe, just maybe, obsessing on US politics here is... pretty pointless? Maybe Bitcoin is going to be just fine, like it has been, if Warren and Harris are in their respective offices in 2025?

Maybe the Bitcoin community begging for government help like some are hoping Trump does for them goes contrary to everything Bitcoin ever stood for?

Maybe the strong consumer protections against fraud that Warren and others have fostered actually help Bitcoin go up in price because it allows consumers to buy Bitcoin without fear of being ripped off?

Folks, lots of people in the US have strong opinions about politics for lots of reasons. Republican voters want Trump to win because they truly feel abortion is murder, and thus they will literally vote for Adolf Hitler if it means it could be made illegal here.

But it has nothing to do with Bitcoin. What you are reading here is just... partisans being partisan, and nothing else.

What is clear is that the Biden-Harris pairing has not been very friendly to Bitcoin while they were in charge. I don't know if this could change now due to electoral interests. But ideologically to someone who believes that the best thing for society is more taxes, more regulations and more state control, what suits them are the CBDCs, which is what they have been pushing.

It's always hard for me to understand why the Democratic Party has been and is so against cryptocurrencies when it's pretty clear that, whether they like it or not, they are here to stay, it's not some stupid game. I don't like any of the two candidates for very different reasons but at least Trump is smart enough to understand the power of cryptocurrencies.

Why is that? They are anti-freedom communists. It is not really that hard to understand it. They don’t like capitalism, they don’t like the right to own a property, they don’t like any of these. All they like is free stuff and free stuff don’t grow on trees. Somebody has to work to manufacture it and that’s where you understand what it is all about: Theft.

Yeah, "communists" approved the Bitcoin and Ether ETFs.

Get real, man...

IMHO, it doesn't matter who wins if the goal is related to cryptocurrencies. None of the past administrations had done much to the space. While the state officials are doing their thing like acceptance or laws that discourage anything about Bitcoin, it's not wholly related to the POTUS as they're like doing what they do that will be good for their state.

For example: Texas Senate Passes Bill to Limit Bitcoin Miners' Participation in Demand Response Programs (https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/04/12/texas-senate-passes-bill-to-limit-bitcoin-miners-participation-in-demand-response-programs/)

There is the influence but I don't think that both or all of these candidates are interested to get their first touch about anything related to Bitcoin as the state mayors and officials are the ones that really does the job. CMIIW.

Bitcoin ETFs were initiated many years ago and their adoption is only a matter of time. If it does not pass under Biden's term, it will also pass during Trump's next term because no one can stop the development of bitcoin. Additionally, the adoption of ETFs means they will collect a significant amount of tax revenue and no government hates taxes so there is no need to emphasize this too much. Bitcoin ETF is inevitable.

If they are not against bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, why does Biden want to increase taxes on the bitcoin mining industry, why do they support the SEC in trying to hinder the development of cryptocurrencies?

Legiteum is talking like the SEC approved ETFs because out of their own free will. No, they did not want to do it, just look at the interview with Gensler after the approval where he looks resigned and gives the impression he was pressured to do it by the court.

In reality the SEC approved futures but did not want to approve spot ETF as they knew it could impact the price, since spot ETFs have to own physical bitcoin. They lost in court due to the fact that both spot and futures ETFs are similar instruments and you cannot allow one of them to function while denying every motion for the other. It was a deliberate play by the SEC to delay spot ETFs and keep price of bitcoin low.

Bottom line, the SEC lost the court case and was forced to approve all spot ETFs. The mere fact that the SEC went to court instead of settling is a strong proof that Gensler thought he could win and continue denying ETFs.

Democrats are not friendly towards cryptocurrencies. Prove me wrong.

Bitcoin went up 500% under president Biden.

The US remains the world leader in Bitcoin hashrate.

The ETFs were approved under Biden.

US citizens are far and away the largest holders of Bitcoin and other cryptos.

Thousands of crypto-related businesses in the USA have thrived under Biden.

This has nothing to do with Bitcoin. You want abortion to be illegal in the USA, and you want the senile old racist to be president here so he can do that. No rational person could trust Trump to deal with something as complicated as Bitcoin when, in his podcast with Elon Musk, he went on and on about "nuclear warming" which is incoherent nonsense.

But you trust Trump 100%. That's crazy. And there's only one explanation, which is that you are supporter of the Republican agenda to make abortion illegal in the USA. I get it: "babies" are being "murdered" every day, and you want to build the largest police state the USA has ever seen to stop women from leaving our country to have abortions. That's your opinion. Fine.

But it has nothing to do with Bitcoin.

Bitcoin doesn't depend on the US political and economic climate. It's been growing over the years and having its own bear markets in between regardless of who was the US President. So while it would be nice to see more favourable policies from the US, Bitcoin can do just fine without them. The people most affected as the US citizens and residents themselves, of course.
I don't know if she's working with Deese and Ramamurti or not, but being against stablecoins isn't the same as being against Bitcoin.
I think Bitcoin is just not high on the list of Harris's priorities, but that's not bad per se.

Harris will certainly continue crackdowns on Bitcoin-related companies. She is very likely to be far worse. She wants (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/08/15/kamala-harris-economic-policy-2024/) to seize the means of production, and bitcoin will get in the way of this.
Biden's policies have resulted in less investment in US-based crypto companies, and for crypto-related companies to cease operations in the US. This results in other countries getting these investment dollars, and other countries benefiting from innovation related to crypto currencies, including bitcoin.

I don't know who this dude is but the statement is correct. It doesn't matter who becomes POTUS, bitcoin will continue going up as its adoption grows. For the past 15 years there has been different presidents in the Oval Office and bitcoin kept on rising. The only difference is that certain moves can slow it down temporarily.

And besides, in case you have forgotten there is an entire world outside USA that doesn't care who the US president is :D that's like 96% of the earth population.

Well they are communist-like policies. And you know what? They are not bad! That is what every government anywhere in the world does in the same situation. For good reasons as well. With economic hardship, increasing budget deficit, rising prices and the world falling apart!
The funny part is that I am sure that even if Trump wins, he will eventually follow the same policies... because that is the only solution the economists in our world could manage to come up with so far!

The only problem here is that after The Cold War, Americans are pre-programmed to feel scared when they hear the word "communist" :D

They do that because Venezuela has one of the largest supplies of oil!

They did that because Gaddafi was an idiot who bit more than he could chew, he went against the dollar wanting to replace it with a new currency in Africa.

Neither of these two attitudes change with the president or his party by the way.

It's hard to attribute Bitcoin adoption and price growth during last 15 years since 2009 to any President in the USA. The attribution can be made but it is not easy to provide enough convincing list of reasons to prove it that attribution is accurate. Many things in the USA. are uncontrollable by the President and there are other people, departments, entities that are co-responsible for many things in that national society. Bitcoin has grown up a lot without dependence on past Presidents and is going to expand its growth with its own ways and independence.

They are only curious about the election, a possible next President in the USA. partially because of noise on social media, televisions and so on. News and noise nowadays can be spread very quickly through the Internet and it magnifies what's happening in the USA. In fact people in other countries must pay attention on what's happening in their homelands and local communities than in the USA.

An interesting article from Grayscale.
Bitcoin, Crypto, and the 2024 US Presidential Election (https://www.grayscale.com/research/market-commentary/bitcoin-crypto-and-the-2024-us-presidential-election)

Unfortunately, this is what the world is like today. It is true that we have nothing to do with the American elections directly, but their results will affect all countries of the world and Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies as well.

Many people do not know anything about the elections in their countries, but they know everything about the elections in the United States. This is because the American media dominates the media in the world. Although we do not like this, it is the reality.

Arthur Hayes is the former CEO of Bitmex, the first futures exchange in the cryptospace.

In any case, it appears that there are people in social media that begun sharing information telling everyone that Kamala Harris' economic agenda and policies are 28% corporate tax, 44.6% capital gains tax and 25% tax on unrealized gains. This is very headshaking because this will certainly be very bad for traders of traditional markets and the cryptospace in America hehehe.

It is unbelievable that so much importance is given to who will be the next president of the US, as if the fate of Bitcoin depends on it (which, unfortunately, many obviously think). Some still believe that Donald Do Not Trust will fulfill all those promises, most of which even he himself does not know what he is actually talking about - and others think that Kamala will be so wicked that she will probably end up banning cryptocurrencies in the US.

The truth is that it is completely irrelevant who will become president, because Bitcoin will remain on the margins of their focus for a long time, regardless of what they say in the election campaigns.

Kamala the Commie will bring a disaster upon the crypto industry and it is not just crypto tbh, she is a bad pick for the whole Corporate America. As you know communism and capitalism don’t really mix well.

Donald on the other hand is a wellknown successful businessman. He is as capitalist as one can get.

Look at that:

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/harris-unrealized-gains-tax-would-obliterate-us-economy

Whaat tha fuuck?

People still consider voting her? People really lost their minds that much?

Apart from the United States hosting the largest number of miners and other crypto-related businesses, many countries always copy policies or laws from the US. The US is the political and economic leader of the Western Bloc, so it is common for other allies to adopt similar policies. Hence it is easy to conclude that a crypto-friendly American president might influence other countries to become receptive to the industry.

American media is also playing a key role in hyping economic activities in the US this is why adjustments in the fiscal or monetary policies in the US always affect the price of cryptocurrencies. The US elections will come and go but Bitcoin will continue to be a leading force in the global financial sector. However, I am afraid that with the level of institutional involvement of some major US companies through the ETF, the US will continue to influence the industry.       

The tax is only for people making more than $400,000. Very rich people won't like it, but those people don't like Trump either because of the trade war Trump promises.



As people know, fascism and capitalism don't really mix well. Trump will create the largest police state in US history when he makes abortion illegal.

Trump inherited a ton of money from his father and lost about half of it. He is in fact a terrible business man. And also a convicted criminal.

You mean tax rates are going to rise? Weren't you already expecting that to happen regardless of who wins the election?

I mean that's what they always do at times like this! There are two main things happening:
1. Global tensions.
In case you don't know the highest tax rates in US was during WW2 and I believe on 1944 the peak was 94%. As global tensions grow and since US is always part of all the wars, the government is going to need more money so they'll keep increasing tax rates.

2. Inflation
That is like their principle. To battle inflation they try to decrease the amount of money regular people have in their pockets. That decreases the "demand" which would then slows the price rise hence stopping the inflation from rising.
To decrease the amount of money people have they usually increase interest rates (which they've already done) and increase taxes (which is what they've been doing).

Check the history, they've been doing this for many years. Heck, check other countries, we've all been doing the same thing! The idiots in the governments cannot think of any other solution.

Bitcoin will pump with or without a Trump or Biden or Harris. If the USA bans Bitcoin trading, mining and etc, then the price will significantly go down but I think we are safe because at this point it's the worst decision to ban Bitcoin.
As I see, democrats aren't going to ban it and their strategy is very wise. They approved Bitcoin ETFs, it's a big step in adoption, isn't it? But they'll definitely put regulations to Bitcoin mining and related things.

I don't like democrats, I am not a fan of Trump but he is very overrated in crypto space.

I hope the earlier she had realized this the better it could have been, things are fast changing now and we cannot assume for any political plan by their actions during the election time, quite alright, we are all aware of what Trump is up to and has said concerning bitcoin, but we cant predict that of Kamala, though am not condemning her for any reason, but its time the world realizes the importance of bitcoin and the need of the people, which is in bitcoin adoption.

What I have to admit is that whoever US president is elected, bitcoin is not their main focus in the White House.
Bitcoin is just one of the hot topics they will think about during their reign, but it won't take up much of their time as there are plenty of other things that will be on their agenda. I just hope that US regulations will become friendlier to crypto and its users, regardless of who is elected in the campaign later. Kamala seems unfriendly now with crypto (bitcoin), but that doesn't mean Trump can fulfill all the promises he made.

I completely agree with your argument on this. Many things can change over time, those who do not support bitcoin can express their support within a day, while those who support will change their minds due to pressure or otherwise. It can happen in a world full of drama.

To be honest, it's kind of hard for me to see the USA as a "anti-freedom communists" country, or politicians, but I understand that the ideas of some of them are going too left. Being American and disliking capitalism sounds so weird, I mean, the whole country is based on that. But besides that it's just plain stupid for them to keep this position, they're beyond stubborn.

Republicans will say absolutely anything to get elected.

Sadly, by calling Democrats "communist", all they are doing is erasing what the word even means to their voters. Sorta how campus leftists in the 80s called George Bush, "Nazi". It's just nonsense.

Also, why hasn't this thread been moved to Politics? How political can you get?

@legiteum. This is not a politics discussion thread. This is a news updates, discussion and speculation on what might be the occurrences under a new administration after the elections on November. Why are you showing desperation if Kamala Harris and her speculated relationship with the cryptospace is being discussed in the forum? If you do not like it, you can ignore this thread. We are here to discuss bitcoin, the cryptospace and if the crackdowns will continue, also if bitcoin will pump or dump after November.

https://i.ibb.co/Zf0xyP3/4-F60-E9-B7-8973-49-AF-B82-A-844-CE29-EA2-B7.png

We all know you are only posting Republican disinformation so your favored party, the Republicans, can win the election. And it's very apparent to me that your love of Trump has absolutely nothing to do with crypto, and probably has everything to do with getting abortion to be illegal in the USA.

You are obviously not here to "discuss Bitcoin", you are here to trash one of the two US political parties. Hence all of the name-calling and GOP-generated memes.

Indeed, you haven't even pointed to a single actual policy that Democrats have put forward that has diminished Bitcoin, which I understand would be pretty darn hard since Bitcoin went up 500% under president Biden.

If the moderators want to move all US politics-related discussion to the politics forum, I won't argue with them, but it seems like consistency would demand this thread attacking US Democrats be moved too.

Based on what's going on, we could see that either Trump and the Republican Party is expressing support for bitcoin and cryptocurrency. Meanwhile, everyone realized that during his four years in office, Biden and the Democratic Party were not too friendly to cryptocurrency. Even during the election campaign, they didn't even want to mention cryptocurrencies. So the fact that people here are discussing and expressing support for the republican party means that people are also supporting bitcoin.

The ultimate purpose of this discussion is still bitcoin, people are just concerned about its future and want to know what it will look like after the election is over. No one here cares about Trump or Harris as much as you think.

Really? Then why does it seem like every other post on this forum is somebody pumping up Trump? Why do they keep lying about the Democrats, saying they are the "enemy of crypto" when the facts simply don't support that?

The only reason I can think of is that they support the Republican political agenda, e.g. deporting 5% of US workers, getting into a trade war with China, and making abortion illegal. Since Bitcoin has done so well under Democrats, there is simply no other explanation.

Governments trying to de-stabilize crypto banks has already been debunked a while ago. Silicon Valley Bank went down due to mismanagement, not because of anything the government did. I'm not sure about the downfall of the other two banks though, but it definitely has to have something to do with exposing themselves to too much risk in their credit and loans, and not because of anything the government did (which is supposed to be regulating these banks).

That the Biden administration is not crypto-friendly and that they do not want it to grow is quite clear as they enacted many draconian policies as well as supported Gary's crypto crackdown. Everything is clear as day and anyone can see, but it is confusing when some people say that the cryptocurrency industry has developed very well under Biden.
Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have grown well because as I said no one can stop them, bitcoin is almost inevitable. I believe that if it weren't for the Biden administration or them stopping Gary from treating cryptocurrencies unfairly, we would probably be much better off than we are now.

To date , Harris has not mentioned or expressed her views on cryptocurrency during her campaign, which suggests she is implicitly asserting that she will continue to pursue Biden's legacy or it will be even worse once she is elected.

https://talkimg.com/images/2024/08/22/74Lv2.jpeg
https://x.com/btc_archive/status/1826362374531461549?s=46

OP what do you think about this? As they say in WO, we got a Trump with just a little more hair ::)

They are all the same, for power and function they will change their mind ten times a day if it suits them. This only confirms the conclusion that it is completely irrelevant who will be the next president of the US.

Anything can change, including nature and policies when they have interests and desires to be achieved. But usually when politics is in competition, one will bring the opposite recognition of the competitor. But if you look at this, both will bring up the same issue and that seems to be enough to make supporters split.  But will Kemala be Trump's opponent? I have not read about the declaration and its supporting parties.

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-21/harris-supports-policies-to-expand-crypto-industry-aide-says

If Kabala is going to copy Trump’s campaign why don’t she just join the Republican Party?

Recently Robert F Kennedy did just that.


Wise move Kenny. You don’t wanna partner up with commies. JFK would be proud of ya.

Harris still get what she want from his current party so as long as they make her satisfied with the action done with his comrades then provably that she won't think about leaving Democrats.

What action been done by RFK is really great and he show that he's a true gentleman by stepping out of the game when he know he doesn't have a chance to win and just help his fellow candidates to get more support and win. The endorsement made by Kennedy would provably bring good exposure to Trump and more possible voters to come with his side.

Now everything goes more interesting and Trump get more support coming from influential people.

You should probably count that once again because Biden took office in January 2021 and the price of Bitcoin was around $30k on December 31 2020 and peaked at around 70k. How's that 500%?
On January 6 it was $40k and Trump was technically still the president at that time!

This means nothing though. When Trump took office in 2017 bitcoin went from $700 to 20k, which is around 3x the Biden's record (the one you made up because it was never 500%). According to these numbers trump was much better for bitcoin than Biden.

You're grasping at straws.


You know why they failed with most of their policies? Because they couldn't get the majority. Biden and Democrats tried hard, but failed every time.
Here's one example of an anti bitcoin policy:
https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Crypto%20AML%20One-Pager_7.26.23.pdf

Here's some explanation why they failed
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/treasury-deals-blow-to-elizabeth-warrens-anti-crypto-crusade

So here's the pattern
If Trump wins then he will nominate someone pro-crypto in his administration if based on current rumors Elon Musk, while if Kamala becomes president then she will nominate Gary Gensler as the leader who eradicates crypto in the US. It's that simple so for US citizens make the right choice and also for the crypto community must be careful that Kamala propaganda may greet you for a while but in the end if she is elected then the first person to stab the crypto community in the US will be her and Gary Gensler. The impact will not only be in the US but the crypto community throughout the country will feel the consequences too.

Provably it is and nothing more close to get that position is Elon Musk since we know how big his support to Trump in campaign so most provably he's willing to give a position to Musk if he would accept to became a pro-crypto advocate or run a project for crypto under Trumps term.

And I guess he is more serious regarding on what he promise and say to people. He choose a good VP JD Vance which is also a pro crypto that's why their current tandem is really good and we provably could see a better crypto industry under their term.


Kamala I don't believe that they can bring some good change especially for crypto since they are already been known that they are anti crypto. So most likely people will experience hell under their term so people should pick right leader which can bring good growth and adaption to new improvements to their country.

Heheheh I am sorry, however, I am not trashing. I am creating jokes on them because they are giving us good comedy hehe. I also joke on Trump and I have also expressed skepticism on him. If you are a person who idolize these Democrats or Republicans because you trust and believe that they are good people, I reckon you should ignore these types of threads.

In any case, news update. According to one of Kamala's policy advisers, the vice president will help the growth of the cryptospace under her term if she wins on November. I am skeptical, however, I am waiting on what types of engagements she will do with the cryptospace community during her campaign. Will this be similar to Trump where he creates a show in a conference to make everyone cheer for him or will this be a more serious attitude where Kamala will have a meeting with the industry leaders of the cryptospace?



Vice President Kamala Harris will back measures to help grow digital assets, a policy adviser to her campaign said, highlighting efforts to court an emerging cryptocurrency industry expanding its political influence.

“She’s going to support policies that ensure that emerging technologies and that sort of industry can continue to grow,” Brian Nelson, senior campaign adviser for policy to the campaign, said when asked about the vice president’s efforts to engage the crypto community during a Bloomberg News roundtable at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday.

Read in full https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-21/harris-supports-policies-to-expand-crypto-industry-aide-says

It's always a debate because it's related to power, so what about bitcoin when one of them wins the election contest. Interestingly Trump has a broader view of bitcoin compared to Kamala Harris but this is inseparable from the interests between the two when it comes to bitcoin. At a further level, the impact will only be temporarily influenced by whether Trump wins or not because bitcoin has its own path for the process.

When talking about politics, it will be far from expectations because they are actually talking about interests. But in the case of the contest that is happening in the US, I think this will show a new direction for bitcoin and who will win the election will show the potential for bitcoin to develop there.

I mean Trump may claim to be pro-bitcoin but he couldn't explain it to save his life.   He only came out in support of it to pander for votes.  Communism and socialism aren't the same thing.  Socialism has some good aspects that are important to human well being, the same as being anti-big government does. 

But if you're going to say Kamala want's communism, than the same can be said about Trump wanting a dictatorship.  What these should lead people to understand is that both are horrible for this country, and the US political system is a JOKE. 

Regardless of who wins I don't see it making a huge change on the effect of bitcoin and it's value.  But, we shall see.

I don't think so. If Trump is elected and doesn't make a difference to the crypto industry, I don't think he will receive support from the community as well as large investors Winklevoss or Catherine Wood, or Elon.

If he is elected and has an open policy towards the cryptocurrency industry, that alone will be enough to make the market more positive. Meanwhile, if Kamala is elected and continues to have harsh policies on the industry, many investors will worry about the market and we will face more difficulties.

We often say that government decisions will not affect market development but that is not true. Harsh regulations will directly impact the market, such as making fund houses, organizations, and large investors hesitant to pour capital into the market, causing the industry to slow down. Similarly, why did traditional investors only invest in bitcoin when the ETF was approved and thanks to the ETFs, bitcoin demand increased sharply this year?

Bitcoin will still grow no matter who is elected president, but it will grow quickly or slowly depending on their policies.

There is no doubt that the United States is the biggest influencer not only on cryptocurrencies but on the global economy as a whole, whether because of the dominance of the dollar or because of the economic and political power of the United States, it will remain at the forefront.

Despite all this power and great influence of the United States, it has not been able to ban Bitcoin, on the contrary, we find that Bitcoin has become present on the ground and plays a role in the main elections, so we must be reassured about the strength of Bitcoin, and even if an anti-Bitcoin president comes, he will not be able to do more than what previous anti-Bitcoin presidents did.

I don't like the US but there's no denying that they still dominate the world and have influence over almost every industry, and crypto is no exception.
As far as I know, the total capitalization of the global financial market is over 109 trillion while the US financial market is over 42 trillion. So it is no surprise that they can always make a significant impact on the market with just news.


I think the reason they can't ban bitcoin is because they are a representative democracy and value human rights so banning something is not an easy thing to do.
Yes, banning or blocking bitcoin is an impossible task so far but if we have anti bitcoin politicians then this will more or less affect the growth of bitcoin. So we need to elect and vote for politicians who are not against and open to bitcoin so that it can reach its full potential.
https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/08/23/7isg5.jpeg

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-109-trillion-global-stock-market-in-one-chart/

Honestly, I never cared about anything else in the election other than bitcoin. You and I have argued with each other many times and if you pay attention, you will see all my discussions only mention bitcoin. You have brought up the issue of abortion all the time but I have never wanted to argue with you about it because I am not an American like you. Abortion policy in the United States has nothing to do with my country, why should I care? But for crypto, it will affect my life and that's why I support people voting for Trump.

Look on this forum, besides you, is there anyone else who regularly brings up the issue of abortion?
Everyone has different views and perspectives on life, just like the pictures below. You shouldn't call people liars just because they don't think the same way as you, we should respect each other's decisions.
https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/08/23/78MQG.jpeg
Source: Internet

Kamala is not someone who can be trusted when it comes to crypto regulation, because she has a vision that is basically not much different from Biden. You could say she is carrying out the task of continuing what Biden left behind and look at how bad crypto regulation is during the Biden administration. Although Trump is not the best, at least he is closer to the crypto community and has promises to fulfill if elected. His promises are quite clearly recorded everywhere so that Trump will occupy it whether on a large or small scale. The point is that this political war involves the position of bitcoin and crypto in the US, everything will be determined in the upcoming election. I hope that US citizens, especially crypto activists there, will use their voting rights to choose the right candidate.

I got 5 million MAGA.

I paid 35 dollars for 6 millions.

You missed me?

Edit. I spend one million on "make eth great again". "MEGA".

Portfolio manager.

You have USA selling your bitcoin on Kucoin if you don't crack down.

"Confiscated" And you be like I only obey the law?

Getting a great idea could be illegal long term. Where I steps in.

I’m tired of all of the posturing and politicizing of Bitcoin. The short sighted and simple minded will literally vote for the devil and give up their civil liberties just to see Bitcoin “pump”.  Have we not learned that politicians can’t be trusted. Even RFK is willing to sell out just to get a seat at the table.

I though I'm the only person sick and tired of this Kamala and Trump Bitcoin discussion. Do people here really think government really cares about Bitcoin and crypto over their own dollar they vouch for American citizens to protect and serve the country? How many people in the US buy and hold Bitcoin if not that they just have good business relationship, I'm not sure Bitcoin should be taking side with any of them. If Trump were to be in the whitehouse right now, he wouldn't have said good stuff about Bitcoin.

I heard election is slated to be November and I'm just skeptical what is going to happen that day. The way Kamala is moving slowly with campaign, I'm afraid of that woman and the political men around him. Literally all my Gif are suggesting her anytime I open my phone, they have taken up the media and social media space.

Socialism is okay if the people running the government more properly very much similar to some western European countries. Their taxes might be higher if we compare this to much of the other countries, however, they have free healthcare, better public schools and universities, better infrastructure and they take care of their countrymen much better.

On the claims that Kamala wants communism, they are only internet jokes very much similar to what you mentioned on Trump being a fascist. It will be funny for some and others it will not.

Because they are Trump fans, and as with any Trump fan, they just want to show how much they adore and love and worship Trump at any place given, including bitcoins discussion section of a bitcointalk forum, thinking that would somehow help trump I suppose? It won't, but that's what a trump fan would think anyway.

In reality, crack downs on bitcoin is not a crack down on bitcoin, it's crack down on scammers in crypto space, and they are not really capable of seeing that. Yes, as a judge Kamala will keep on finding criminals and put them in jail, which she did all her life before getting into politics, so that's what she will continue to do. "cryptospace" is what they call scammers who steal money and then put to jail, and cry for help from crypto space later on, sorry I can't shed no tear for scammers.

I hope Harris fails hard. She should and has no merit, she has no real foot to stand on. She is not a good speaker, she looks like that freak creature from Star Wars, she’s not even black 😂 she is not smart. I heard she only got to the top by fucking her way up there which is blasphemy that she has been able to get all the way to the highest office. DO NOT LET THIS BITCH SUCCEED!!!

I may be a bit late in this thread, but my take is that this is not really a partisan issue.

It's a desperate intent of the shitcoin industry to continue with their ICO scams, bribing Trump to relax regulations so they can continue to freely operate their dubious business models which are being under scrutiny by the SEC now. They want to continue to profit from the popularity of the decentralized paradigm, but their business models are not decentralized at all.

If you see the word DeFi or DEX, you can in 95% of the cases replace the "D" by a "C". And the SEC is now going against this, as shown by the case against Uniswap. And that's what the shitcoin industry doesn't like.

So the shitcoin industry tries to coopt Bitcoin supporters to reach their goals, spreading fake information about Kamala Harris and endorsing Trump, and trying to make Bitcoiners believe that she and the Democrats are "anti-Bitcoin".

I'm not against ICOs nor against altcoins. You can do an ICO well and then it's an excellent crowdfunding mechanism. The problem is always transparency! And that's what the SEC always emphasized, as far as I'm aware of.

If you have a token and 20% of the tokens are premined for the founders, then that should be clearly laid out in the whitepaper of the token. I have analyzed the token distribution of some so-called "Ethereum killers" (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5504280.new#new) and it is really a shame how few information is available about the "Tokenomics" or token distribution. And yes, almost all of them have 20% or even 30% reserved for their founders, maybe locked for some years, but ready to be dumped when the moment is right.

This is the point. Bitcoiners are about to become the useful idiots of the shitcoin industry.

Wow you went all out in one post. Easy mate, save some material for your other posts. Even I hesitated to bring her success story up till now. ;D that was some hardcore shiet.

I agree with everything you said here, and my business (for instance) is all about bringing transparency, fairness and stability to the memecoin universe. (Part of the reason we're doing such a long beta is to make sure the platform is extremely solid when lots of money starts going through it).

Haypenny gives you a display of the market analysis of every coin (and in the same format, so it's easy for people to figure it out), and shows the coin's lockout schedule, which can very easily be set by the founders. Founders can lock out all of the units at the time of the ICO, and create a schedule to slowly unlock units over (say) a period of two years--and the platform ensures that they cannot unlock no matter what until the period expires, so investors know there is no funny business.

My vision is that the market will mimic what stock IPOs have done in the modern era, but instead of contracts on paper it will be locked in with technology, making it faster, more efficient, and more airtight.

(There is a whole discussion about Haypenny's anti-pump-and-dump tools here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5506790.0)).

The bottom line for me as for politics goes is: honesty makes money; transparency makes money; regulators and police catching fraudsters helps our industry. The safer it is for a casual investor, the more of them will invest, and this will multiply our market size. The crypto business started from a different mentality than this, but I think that needs to change if we want to grow 10x from where we are now.

Apparently a lot of people have not learnt that, so they trust politicians. I am not from the U.S, so i am not eligible to vote in their election, but i don't really care who wins, and i think those who are supporting either candidates should focus on other things when casting their votes, that what the outcome would mean for BTC. The crazy things is that the forum is turning into a 'politics forum" with the number of threads related to trump or kamala and what it would mean for BTC if either candidates win, and that shouldn't be so.

Had RFKjr joined forces with Kabala, you wouldn’t call it “selling out”.

“Umm this move doesn’t benefit us let’s thrash it.”

The correct reaction should be:

“RFKjr understands crypto probably better than Trump as we have seen it in the bitcoin conference and he decided to join forces with Trump. That’s awesome!”

Aren't Biden and Kamala politicians? And are they trustworthy?
You feel bored and tired because most people here support Trump instead of anyone in the Democratic party. But I bet if everyone supported Kalama, your attitude and mood would be much better, LOL.

As far as I know, RFK expressed support for the Democratic Party but all he got was indifference. If you were him, would you continue to beg people who don't value you? RFK made the right decision to stop running and support Trump because he knew he would be taken more seriously if he joined the Republican Party.

Human nature is selfish, even ordinary people like us will not be willing to help someone if there is no benefit, so there is nothing to criticize when politicians do everything to achieve their goals.

It's never too late for a good post, and I agree that the politicians have very skillfully thrown the bait, and the vast majority have taken a firm bite and won't let go as if their lives depended on it.


Trump Do Not Trust is first of all a businessman, and only then a politician - and you have well detected that those who donate to his campaign understand this and know that they can "buy" him because he will agree to anything just to achieve his goal. If we're going to be honest, most of the people who "invent" new altcoins/tokens and those who trade them don't have too many problems that something will turn into a scam, as long as they manage to profit from it.


The transparency and legitimacy of projects from the world of cryptocurrencies has always been questionable, and it is no secret that such projects have caused huge financial losses for people around the world. All those who claim that the regulations are trying to destroy the freedom to create such projects often point out those state agencies as evil, but I don't think that every kid who has a computer should have a completely open path to create a cryptocurrency, list it on CEX or something and then cheat thousands of people for millions of $ - who will then turn to the authorities to help them find the culprit.


All of them create something for the community, but they behave worse than the central bank, so even though it makes some sense to leave some coins "aside" for the needs of project development, if that percentage is greater than 5%, I would not consider it anything other than calculated action with the goal that one day the owner and his assistants will make a massive profit if their project succeeds.

Bitcoin has always been good for achieving goals in the altcoins industry, and it is no wonder that it is still the case now. Fortunately, this drama will not last long, the only question is whether those who are the main actors will achieve their goals.

If Trump wins the election, he will pay special attention to cryptocurrencies. He has already said that he will make some reforms if he wins. He will bring a big change, especially in the SEC. Gary Gensler is sure to be ousted and replaced by someone new to the crypto space. Although he did not mention the name but pointed to him. Although there is no precedent for direct firing department head of an independent federal agency, Gary Gensler could certainly step down to save his honor. But if this happens then surely a new wave will added in the crypto currency space but many believe that such political intervention on cryptocurrencies or Bitcoin will not bring long-term benefits.

He ignores science when it's inconvenient, is a champion of MAGAs favorite conspiracy theories, he sympathizes with Putin and he likes picking up road kill to take home and eat.  Republican?  No.  Democrat?  No.  MAGA?  Match made in heaven.

This has been my bias on the US presidential elections so far. Under Biden and Kamala, US debt and inflation are close to all time high and there were very serious crackdown on crypto in the last 3 years alone. Kamala has shown that she knows very little about crypto. But Trump knows a lot more. I mean, he even spoke at the Bitcoin Nashville conference even though some of those promises won't be fulfilled, it's good to have a president that understands crypto and why favorable laws will bolster the Bitcoin movement because whether we like it or not, economies built on fiat are bound to suffer from inflation due to infinite money printing.

Agree mostly.

Many people in the Bitcoin (and crypto) world were hugely angry with Sam Bankman-Fried, and they had all the right to that - because he did behave in a criminal way, misappropiating customer funds. But: how do you prevent this? With increased transaparency!

For some reason however, some (not all!) of the "crypto community" are much more lenient with projects where a "D" promises "decentralization", which are completely unregulated but centralized. Or when they see they can "stake" their Bitcoin on an exchange, even if Bitcoin offers no PoS at all, so ... where do the "staking income" actually come from? May it be a Ponzi even? ;)

And yes, as long as platforms can offer products like "Bitcoin staking" without any obligation to clarify where the funds come from, then the risk increases that we see another FTX. So I would require the SEC or the authority in charge in my country to actually demand this transparency from platforms.

I'm slightly disagreeing in one of the points perhaps because I do think that "every kid" should be able to "create a cryptocurrency". However, even that kid should then learn that if they decide that this crypto has a premine and will benefit them, it has to provide transparent information to the customers if they want to trade that crypto, at least on a CEX platform. And not only the source code.

---

What I would expect as a crypto owner from the Harris campaign if I was an US voter was however some clarity: There is the more radical anti-Bitcoin (and anti-crypto) fraction at the Democrats around Elizabeth Warren, and there is also an anti-privacy fraction. I would appreciate some distance of the Harris campaign from these groups. And crypto users leaning to the Democrats should fight against their projects, presenting good alternatives. The best the Democrats can do is focusing on investor protection without trying to "shrink" the crypto sector.

My business is allowing "every kid" to create a digital currency and play around with it, and trade it in a highly controlled environment. As a grizzled veteran of ultra-large-scale high-availability high-dollar-volume system, that last thing on earth I want is for kids to be writing software that handles billions of dollars of other people's money.

The solution is to get those "kids" out of the business of creating a technical platform and needing to protect it, and just allowing them to come up with a cool meme and branding that they promote and get (the other kids) interested in--but all in the context of a solid tech platform made by grown-ups with rules enforced that don't allow any funny business. Coming up with a hot new meme is something any kid can do--but creating a platform that secures people's investments is something that must be left to the grown-ups.

Yes, there is democracy in the United States, but I do not think that the decision to ban Bitcoin is related to human rights, but rather to the huge economic gains that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies bring.

It is true that there are opponents of Bitcoin in the Senate, but on the other hand, there are many who know that banning Bitcoin will deprive the country of huge economic resources due to the loss of investments and taxes that come from it, and at the same time, all of this may go into the hands of hostile countries, and this is what the US government does not want.

But of course, as you mentioned, it is better for a president who is supportive and open to Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.

If crypto gets a crackdown, it will probably be less due to the public perception of corruption, and more due to the fresh water and energy costs involved. 

They almost never banned it in the first place (2009), nor did they ever make any proposals to ban it like China did, until now. The United States, with an annual GDP of nearly $30 trillion, while its total market capitalization has been just over $2 trillion in recent years. I wonder, what benefits has bitcoin or cryptocurrency brought to the US economy since its inception until now?
In terms of taxes, they've probably only really benefited from significant tax breaks since bitcoin ETFs were approved, and that only happened earlier this year.

For my part, I have never agreed that bitcoin is playing a major or significant role in the economy of any country, especially the major powers.

He is a good example of a spoiled kid who took advantage of the flaws in the system to play with other people's money, and that game ended up very badly for everyone who believed in him, and ultimately for himself. You may be aware (although I don't know if it had an impact on FTX) that during his mandate Trump abolished the mandatory regular checks of the financial status of companies below a certain amount, which then resulted in the failure of some banks in the US. Considering the scale of the damage, it is obvious that FTX was unattended for a very long time.


I wrote this in the context of countless scams that cause huge financial losses to people all over the world - of course every kid can do whatever he wants on his computer, but the market must be regulated in a way that does not allow anyone to participate in it. The way it looks today is really the wild west, but it obviously suits many people and that's why they try in every possible way to keep it that way.

---

Looking for clarity in murky water is mostly an impossible mission - and what I want to say is that there are very few people among Democrats and Republicans who even understand what cryptocurrencies are and how to treat them. With rare exceptions, politicians are not very intelligent people, they are not capable but only suitable to carry out orders that come from positions that we ordinary people do not actually see.

I respect your opinion, but it is not just about the market value of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, it is about other aspects that the industry brings to the country, such as crypto-related services, mining industry, mining equipment, blockchain services, etc.

All of these things, in addition to the taxes collected on individuals and companies operating in crypto, enter the economy and contribute to its growth in one way or another, it may not be large at the moment, but it is constantly growing.

In addition to an important factor, which is control, the legality of these companies in the United States allows them to keep them under their control, but banning them will lead to the loss of control from the United States.

I'm not sure if he will spend much time and attention on crypto but he will definitely make some changes in a more positive direction than the current administration. He and the crypto organizations must have come to some sort of agreement that they decided to side with him and as we all know, trump supporters are also crypto positive people like Elon or RFK.
On the other side of the Democratic Party, I don't see anyone openly supporting crypto like Trump, they have maintained Biden's stance of saying no to crypto throughout this campaign.

At bitcoin conference in July this year, Trump told the crowd that he would fire Gary if he were elected, and was immediately greeted with a standing ovation. Gary certainly didn't miss this news and he'll know what to do if Trump wins in November.  :D :D
https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/08/27/9HSrv.png
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2024-07-28/donald-trump-pledges-to-fire-sec-s-gensler-make-us-crypto-capital

@CryptoBuds, GG cannot be replaced by the president because his mandate lasts until 2026 (if I'm not mistaken). Therefore, DDNT (Donald Do Not Trust) said something that it cannot achieve, and those who were delighted by that statement obviously have no idea about laws and politics.

I agree with you about those who were delighted being clueless, GG won't be fired on day 1 for sure (unless you count things Trump says as true because he says so).  But GG won't chair the SEC until the end of his term either.  If Trump wins, GG should resign (imo), and he probably will.  And if he doesn't - Trump will force him out one way or another.  There are a couple of ways he could legally do that - and a couple ways that aren't legal but still possible since the law doesn't matter to Trump, and when you consider Trumps plan to go full autocrat and consolidate power by stripping every independent federal agency of it's independence by removing career nonpartisans government employees and replacing them with MAGAs finest, replacing the chair of the SEC would be no big deal and the least of anyones problems.



He also promised to build 10 freedom cities that will have flying cars. 

I bet if Trump didn't mention that he supports Bitcoin, no one would care about what he does, or if Harris also expressed support for Bitcoin, I believe many people here would support her too. People only care about the future of bitcoin and they will support anyone who stands for bitcoin, not those who want to stop the growth of it.

Biden's policies are clearly putting pressure on bitcoin in particular and the industry in general, and everyone can see that. Just because you don't want Trump to win because of other issues and you are fooling yourself that the Democrats are protecting the growth of the crypto industry.

By the way, what are the benefits of admiring politicians? Like you, what do you get out of admiring Harris? None of us are Trump or Harris fans, we just want Bitcoin to grow.

We can be quite certain that there will be good arguments on for the people who support and for the people who are against the unrealized gains tax, however, can the people have a tax credit on unrealized losses also?

This would certainly be headshaking if a trader is taxed only on unrealized gains but he is not given tax credits on unrealized losses hehehehehee.



Appearing on CNBC’s Squawk Box program, Kamala Harris’ economic advisor confirmed her plan to tax unrealized gains. Indeed, Bharat Rama from Harris’ administration spoke with the program’s hosts, arguing for the benefit of the controversial tax plan.

Source https://watcher.guru/news/kamala-harris-economic-advisor-confirms-plan-to-tax-unrealized-gains

This proposal is for people with over $100 million in assets.

Nobody repeating the freak-out about this is mentioning that. Why? Because the tiny cabal of billionaires who would actually be effected by this tax are the ones pumping millions into the media telling everybody to freak out. Twitter/X has wall-to-wall coverage of this tax, with absolutely zero of the tens of thousand of messages on there pointing out that this only impacts decibillionaires. Who owns Twitter/X again? I forget.

US billionaires pay almost no marginal taxes in the USA. People from other countries find this hard to believe, but it's true. This is Harris responding to voters--on both sides of the political divide--sick of paying more marginal taxes than billionaires do.

In the end, this controversy will be good for Harris because the Republicans are digging their own grave defending billionaires from being taxed like the rest of us are.

Yes, it won't be easy to fire Gary if he doesn't make any serious mistakes until his term ends. I think Trump made such a statement and his purpose was to emphasize to GG, GG will not be able to continue to suppress and put much pressure on crypto during his term and GG's political career will end when his term ends...People support that statement not because they are stupid to know nothing about US politics or laws but because people know that with Trump being elected, the days of crypto suppression will soon be over.

Do you think GG would continue to work happily if Trump were elected?

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/08/29/9Tz1l.png

https://x.com/WalkerAmerica/status/1828860864306524653

Yep, keep fighting the tax on billionaires. A few thousand US voters who this tax will actually effect will not like it--or at least the portion of those who think that only poor people should pay taxes.

For sure taxes are only for poor and middle class

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/08/29/9ToHc.png

https://finbold.com/kamala-harris-proposes-highest-capital-gains-tax-in-over-100-years-for-stocks-and-crypto/

Yep. Her tax proposals don't touch anybody making less than $400k/year and the gains tax only touches people with more than $100 million.

Before Trump, the Republicans were known as the party that was in the thrall of billionaires: for billionaires, by billionaires. Trump somehow managed to make people forget that for a while. Forcing Republicans to defend billionaires getting away with paying no taxes is a way to make them remember.

Keep digging that hole, Republicans :).

It also mentioned that the investor should be 80% liquid for this unrealized tax gains rule to begin on record hehehe. This might have mixed effects, I reckon. This might force investors to buy more assets to be less than 80% liquid to escape the rule, however, this might also cause them to dump their remaining 20% to also escape being taxed by the rule.

Also, the question is not answered. If an investor is 80% liquid but he only has unrealized losses, will they not give the investor a tax cut?

So Harris is proposing that those with $100M in unrealized gains and $80M of that is liquid... need to pay some taxes on that.

In other words, this tax is probably targeting... about 500 Americans  :D :D :D.

Times have changed and it seems a bit confusing. Biden was widely optimistic about Trump victory before withdrawing from the election. Later, after Kamala Harris replaced Biden from the Democratic Party, the scenario changed rapidly and according to the latest Reuters national opinion poll, Trump is 4 points behind Kamala across the country (45:41). Also, Kamala is ahead in the Fox News poll. Trump's campaign says the poll is not true at all.

That's what happens when all the Republicans can come up with is absolutely mindless slurs like, "Communism!". People who call her that don't even know what the word means.

Well under trump btc went up 1900% soo.... trump is better for crypto better for the economy and better for everyones lives under these insane dems we've had some insane shit go down. I say this as being a left leaning moderate my whole life which now I'm more right leaning, covid is really what hit the nail on the head for me I was in a dem state at the time and it was pure insantiy.

Well with that logic, under Trump there was a pandemic that was devastating to the economy and killed almost 1 million Americans while he was in office soo.... Trump is better if you want Americans to die.

Also, btc went up 1900% while Trump was president and, because he did not think he need votes from crypto bros had this stance:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/i.snag.gy/reWAaE.jpg


So if btc goes up while Trump is president and shitting on bitcoin, seems as logical as your original point to conclude that if he takes the opposite approach it will have the opposite effect on bitcoin price.


All of this logic is stupid.

---

I figure their understanding of communism is that it's bad because historically it leads an authoritarian government - which is a fair concern and risk that comes with a country going too far to the left.  But a country that thinks universal healthcare and regulating the price of meat is too communist for them is not a country that needs to worry too much about actually becoming communist.

Ironically a government that goes too far to the right has the same authoritarian risk.  

I'd love to see a MAGAtard research a list of philosophies, political views and behaviors that communist and fascist leaders have and then count up how many communist points Kamala get vs Fascist points for Trump.  I don't think it would be close.

Funny thing how relatively fast Trump can change his opinion on cryptocurrency and also on the United States Dollar. Back then he talked about how powerful and strong the USD was around the world (when he was president of the nation), fast-foward today, he continues to claim the United States is a nation in decline, a failed state and whatever.
It would be the funniest thing ever if he managed to win the presidency and suddenly (right after his inauguration) the United States Dollar is at its peak again and cryptocurrency/Bitcoin is not as great as he once thought it was.  ::)

The fact Trump is trying to appeal to us (users of cryptocurrencies) only shows how desperate he must be feeling on Kamala's poll numbers.

I continue to believe polls numbers are insignificant, compared to the actual number of voters who stay silent. The silent majority as they call it.

So after what "Democrats" (Trump was president, but okay) did "to you" during Covid, you.. now think abortion should be illegal across the USA? Was what you went through really that terrible? I can't imagine my views changing like this, even if there was a war. Covid was a crazy time and a lot of mistakes were made by a lot of people (viz. two thirds of the deaths were Republicans who refused to vax), but that's all over now.

Bitcoin will pump a lot more if Trump wins the election, he has said from the beginning that he will pay special attention to crypto if he wins the election. In that case, if Kamala Harris is elected, it may have a negative impact on Bitcoin. It is said that if Trump wins Bitcoin will cross $90K while if Kamala Harris wins it will drop further.
News link
 (https://news.bitcoin.com/donald-trump-announces-world-liberty-financial-launch-were-embracing-the-future-with-crypto/)
Moreover, last Monday Donald Trump and Kamala Harris met for the first time on the presidential debate stage in Philadelphia. Because of Trump's For being angry over there, Kamala Harris has made some headway, this controversy that could negatively impact Trump's polls. And since that debate Trump's For being angry, neutral voters have also gravitated toward Kamala Harris, with Trump lagging behind. News link (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gdnl9pg1wo)