Banks Are Terrified of Cryptocurrencies & This Is Why

[BADecker]

Banks Are Terrified of Cryptocurrencies & This Is Why

In this video, Luke Rudkowski talks once again with Josh Sigurdson of World Alternative Media about the latest in crypto news!

This week Bank of America warned in an SEC filing that there's a serious concern that cryptocurrencies will hurt their business and that they need to adapt immediately.

An investigation by Nikkei Asian Review in Japan showed that cryptocurrencies only made up for about 0.16% of money laundering reports which contradicts the mainstream claim that crypto is mainly used for laundering. [Note that it is fiat that is used for most of the rest of money laundering.]

Another notable story is the attempt by states and central banks throughout the world to create their own cryptocurrencies.

Banks Are Terrified of Cryptocurrencies & This Is Why

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsXqZ4RAVw0

[1715269073]

1715269073

[1715269073]

1715269073

[1715269073]

1715269073

[1715269073]

1715269073

[Reatim]

Exactly what we initially though:

(1) They are afraid that they will lose a huge chunk of money here if people suddenly jumps on the crypto bandwagon. They are totally eliminated as third party and that will result of billions of dollars gone from their pockets.

(2) As far as state creating crypto, it won't work in the long run. People will view this as nothing as stocks or mutual funds where the government will put heavy tax on them. Russia for example has crytporubble with over 20% tax. I don't think that people who loves crypto will buy that.

[bitart]

Exactly what we initially though:

(1) They are afraid that they will lose a huge chunk of money here if people suddenly jumps on the crypto bandwagon. They are totally eliminated as third party and that will result of billions of dollars gone from their pockets.

(2) As far as state creating crypto, it won't work in the long run. People will view this as nothing as stocks or mutual funds where the government will put heavy tax on them. Russia for example has crytporubble with over 20% tax. I don't think that people who loves crypto will buy that.

1) There's no problem with people, jumping on the crypto bandwagon. With the help of the Lightning network, people and the merchants would be able to do business (buy and sell goods) without the 3rd party involved. The problem is that if the transaction is not between people but a customer and a merchant, the merchant have to book it's income somehow. As the merchant can't do it's book-keeping in bitcoin but only in national currency, there will be a need for an exchange to make fiat from the bitcoin. So it's not possible to totally eliminate every 3rd party and middleman.
2) People trust their government in developed countries, if they don't, why would they buy the government bonds to put their money in to gain some interest? (I'm talking about average people, who usues the current  governmental system mostly). There are other investors on the market who prefer stocks and other assets but there will always be a group of people who will use what the goverment tells them to use. Others will be happy with cryptos but on the long run, regulations will bring tax into crypto as well, most probably.

[mrtryonebiggums]

Exactly what we initially though:

(1) They are afraid that they will lose a huge chunk of money here if people suddenly jumps on the crypto bandwagon. They are totally eliminated as third party and that will result of billions of dollars gone from their pockets.

(2) As far as state creating crypto, it won't work in the long run. People will view this as nothing as stocks or mutual funds where the government will put heavy tax on them. Russia for example has crytporubble with over 20% tax. I don't think that people who loves crypto will buy that.

1) There's no problem with people, jumping on the crypto bandwagon. With the help of the Lightning network, people and the merchants would be able to do business (buy and sell goods) without the 3rd party involved. The problem is that if the transaction is not between people but a customer and a merchant, the merchant have to book it's income somehow. As the merchant can't do it's book-keeping in bitcoin but only in national currency, there will be a need for an exchange to make fiat from the bitcoin. So it's not possible to totally eliminate every 3rd party and middleman.
2) People trust their government in developed countries, if they don't, why would they buy the government bonds to put their money in to gain some interest? (I'm talking about average people, who usues the current  governmental system mostly). There are other investors on the market who prefer stocks and other assets but there will always be a group of people who will use what the goverment tells them to use. Others will be happy with cryptos but on the long run, regulations will bring tax into crypto as well, most probably.

In response to 2) While people are more than happy to invest in bonds and traditional markets and where they are told to, it doesn't mean it always has to be this way. Also just because the average person isn't wise to how money is made today doesn't mean they will always be naive. When the day comes they learn about how money is created, do you think they will be happy and delighted to buy up government backed coins like Maduro's "Petro"? I highly doubt it and as cryptocurrencies advance more people are learning about where money comes from, and I can tell you that does not bode well for governments in the future.

[Notcalculator]

Exactly what we initially though:

(1) They are afraid that they will lose a huge chunk of money here if people suddenly jumps on the crypto bandwagon. They are totally eliminated as third party and that will result of billions of dollars gone from their pockets.

(2) As far as state creating crypto, it won't work in the long run. People will view this as nothing as stocks or mutual funds where the government will put heavy tax on them. Russia for example has crytporubble with over 20% tax. I don't think that people who loves crypto will buy that.

1) There's no problem with people, jumping on the crypto bandwagon. With the help of the Lightning network, people and the merchants would be able to do business (buy and sell goods) without the 3rd party involved. The problem is that if the transaction is not between people but a customer and a merchant, the merchant have to book it's income somehow. As the merchant can't do it's book-keeping in bitcoin but only in national currency, there will be a need for an exchange to make fiat from the bitcoin. So it's not possible to totally eliminate every 3rd party and middleman.
2) People trust their government in developed countries, if they don't, why would they buy the government bonds to put their money in to gain some interest? (I'm talking about average people, who usues the current  governmental system mostly). There are other investors on the market who prefer stocks and other assets but there will always be a group of people who will use what the goverment tells them to use. Others will be happy with cryptos but on the long run, regulations will bring tax into crypto as well, most probably.

1) If it becomes widely used in transactions between customers and merchants, laws will have to be revised to support it. Otherwise, if the law doesnt recognize it, you might as well be using fish to buy your bread. Because fish and bitcoin would be recognized the same way. Now i do acknowledge your point, that it's hard to eliminate the 3rd party, and that's because we're still subscribed to the centralized paradigm. Lastly, even if we cant eliminate the 3rd parties in customer - merchant transactions, bankers could still be eliminated in such a way that they will no longer be necessary. 

[bitart]

Exactly what we initially though:

(1) They are afraid that they will lose a huge chunk of money here if people suddenly jumps on the crypto bandwagon. They are totally eliminated as third party and that will result of billions of dollars gone from their pockets.

(2) As far as state creating crypto, it won't work in the long run. People will view this as nothing as stocks or mutual funds where the government will put heavy tax on them. Russia for example has crytporubble with over 20% tax. I don't think that people who loves crypto will buy that.

1) There's no problem with people, jumping on the crypto bandwagon. With the help of the Lightning network, people and the merchants would be able to do business (buy and sell goods) without the 3rd party involved. The problem is that if the transaction is not between people but a customer and a merchant, the merchant have to book it's income somehow. As the merchant can't do it's book-keeping in bitcoin but only in national currency, there will be a need for an exchange to make fiat from the bitcoin. So it's not possible to totally eliminate every 3rd party and middleman.
2) People trust their government in developed countries, if they don't, why would they buy the government bonds to put their money in to gain some interest? (I'm talking about average people, who usues the current  governmental system mostly). There are other investors on the market who prefer stocks and other assets but there will always be a group of people who will use what the goverment tells them to use. Others will be happy with cryptos but on the long run, regulations will bring tax into crypto as well, most probably.

1) If it becomes widely used in transactions between customers and merchants, laws will have to be revised to support it. Otherwise, if the law doesnt recognize it, you might as well be using fish to buy your bread. Because fish and bitcoin would be recognized the same way. Now i do acknowledge your point, that it's hard to eliminate the 3rd party, and that's because we're still subscribed to the centralized paradigm. Lastly, even if we cant eliminate the 3rd parties in customer - merchant transactions, bankers could still be eliminated in such a way that they will no longer be necessary. 

I understand your point of view, and it's logical, that they can recognize bitcoin as a part of a barter trade, like you trade goods for goods, directly, without the need for using cash or electronic money. Unfortunately, governments yet don't recognize bitcoin as a kind of 'good' because they tax the incomes you gain from using bitcoin (profit from the trades, etc..), but they don't tax you if you have fish (even if it's a goldfish )