Regulations only for BTC to increase in FIAT value?

[coffeeastronaut]

Hi all!

People in this forum and in many other discussions are fast to talk about the 'need for regulations'.

Most of the times it is in connection to mass adoption and for price speculation ideas.

Is regulations really only for Bitcoin to increase in price? What about the whole idea about a P2P currency without governments and banks being involved as a middle man .... Regulations issued by authorities, is that not only for the old system to take control of this emerging p2p currency market? I dont know but why should Bitcoin be regulated by governments and other authorities according to you?

[1714191727]

1714191727

[1714191727]

1714191727

[1714191727]

1714191727

[1714191727]

1714191727

[1714191727]

1714191727

[1714191727]

1714191727

[OmegaStarScream]

In simple terms, the reason why bitcoin enthusiasts believe that the price will increase after regulations are because people, in general, relate bitcoin to scams, drugs, weapons, etc. so when the government make rules about it, more people will go into the bitcoin market out of confidence and trust in the government which will eventually result in more demand and give us a price increase.

That could be a valid theory but not necessarily and as we can see, bitcoin has been growing for the past few years and all that was based on the strong community and dev team we have.

[Ipwich]

Bitcoin will be regulated over time, there wouldn't be a uniform implementation of the rules since every country might have different approach on crypto.

My analysis tells me that the global effect would be positive, people who are potential to adopt crypto will start using it with confidence, and also investors in different part of the world would be confident in investing knowing they have government to protect them.

I will completely change from negative to positive, the system is decentralized and we don't need the government for it to function, but if we are talking about real adoption, we need the government to grow, we just have to choose, we allow to be regulated or they will eliminate bitcoin completely.

[Beerwizzard]

Bitcoin already can be used for P2P payments. For example I can buy a chair from some stranger and pay him with BTC. Unfortunately, we are not always buying stuff from other people, that are not working as a single organization.
But when you are coming to the shop then you are probably buying the same chair in the shop then this shop probably should have its own bank account and most of its transactions would be somehow related with this bank.
In this case proper regulations would help the shop to accept crypto.

[coffeeastronaut]

Bitcoin will be regulated over time, there wouldn't be a uniform implementation of the rules since every country might have different approach on crypto.

My analysis tells me that the global effect would be positive, people who are potential to adopt crypto will start using it with confidence, and also investors in different part of the world would be confident in investing knowing they have government to protect them.

I will completely change from negative to positive, the system is decentralized and we don't need the government for it to function, but if we are talking about real adoption, we need the government to grow, we just have to choose, we allow to be regulated or they will eliminate bitcoin completely.

I guess that last part is the key question. Can they even eliminate bitcoin completely? Would not the effect of such measures be the same as trying to remove the pirate bay?

[gentlemand]

Most money would not move in to an area that's either free of regulation or carries uncertainty. That's the way of the world. It could carry on doing what it's doing just fine without that money.

Most regulation relates to when BTC interacts with regular currencies. You can use it entirely free of regulation, no proper wallet or transaction can be regulated, but until the scene develops further and becomes more of a closed loop you're likely to bump up against regulated services.

[coffeeastronaut]

Most money would not move in to an area that's either free of regulation or carries uncertainty. That's the way of the world. It could carry on doing what it's doing just fine without that money.

Most regulation relates to when BTC interacts with regular currencies. You can use it entirely free of regulation, no proper wallet or transaction can be regulated, but until the scene develops further and becomes more of a closed loop you're likely to bump up against regulated services.

So with that said, you mean that regulations mostly is about AML questions?

[zuziekatee]

Regulations is not needed for bitcoin and it won’t fit it. This has been repeated many times unless we want to defeat the aim of decentralization and privacy then we will be heading back to the old monetary systems. What can be regulated is the bodies that trades these assets like exchnages and the likes to safeguard people’s funds.

[lyks15]

I think this is possible when BTC become regulated the right amount of tax will be put on every BTC that we use and thay we buy. So that tax are going to become a national fund and make to increase the fiat value. Imagine the number of BTC users and investors that every country will have. This is a huge help to increase the fiat money value and I think this may the reason for the less income of bitcoin investors.

[gentlemand]

So with that said, you mean that regulations mostly is about AML questions?

Partly but also at some point exchanges will be subject to rules about preventing dodgy trading such as the ones that already exist in stock markets. And anywhere that has custody of customer coins may be expected to adhere to certain security or insurance standards.

Regulation isn't just about irritating people. It can also be for their protection.

[aylabadia05]

Because of the number of regulatory issues being discussed, many are wondering what that will do to the value of bitcoin. BTC doesn’t operate in a vacuum. Regulatory decisions will affect bitcoin’s price. Bitcoin uses peer-to-peer technology to operate, without central authority or central banks managing bitcoin transactions and publishing is done collectively by the network.

[avikz]

Hi all!

People in this forum and in many other discussions are fast to talk about the 'need for regulations'.

Most of the times it is in connection to mass adoption and for price speculation ideas.

Is regulations really only for Bitcoin to increase in price? What about the whole idea about a P2P currency without governments and banks being involved as a middle man .... Regulations issued by authorities, is that not only for the old system to take control of this emerging p2p currency market? I dont know but why should Bitcoin be regulated by governments and other authorities according to you?

There is a difference between regulation and over regulation. I will only talk about regulation here because I truly believe, only regulation can help us achieve the true use of bitcoin, a p2p currency!

A majority of the merchants today don't accept bitcoin in their stores just because of its confusing legal status in many countries. Some also believe that bitcoin is banned worldwide because terrorists use it. There are lot of misconceptions floating around bitcoin just because there is no regulation and education available for it.

I strongly believe, bitcoin needs to be used as a currency sustem in order to grow holistically. The major roadblock is the absence of regulation. We can't buy our daily goods using bitcoin because no stores in my country accepts it. If my government decides to regulate it, buying daily goods using bitcoin will become a reality, which will increase the use of bitcoin as well as the demand!

Government regulation is solely needed for bitcoin's own good!

[coffeeastronaut]

Hi all!

People in this forum and in many other discussions are fast to talk about the 'need for regulations'.

Most of the times it is in connection to mass adoption and for price speculation ideas.

Is regulations really only for Bitcoin to increase in price? What about the whole idea about a P2P currency without governments and banks being involved as a middle man .... Regulations issued by authorities, is that not only for the old system to take control of this emerging p2p currency market? I dont know but why should Bitcoin be regulated by governments and other authorities according to you?

There is a difference between regulation and over regulation. I will only talk about regulation here because I truly believe, only regulation can help us achieve the true use of bitcoin, a p2p currency!

A majority of the merchants today don't accept bitcoin in their stores just because of its confusing legal status in many countries. Some also believe that bitcoin is banned worldwide because terrorists use it. There are lot of misconceptions floating around bitcoin just because there is no regulation and education available for it.

I strongly believe, bitcoin needs to be used as a currency sustem in order to grow holistically. The major roadblock is the absence of regulation. We can't buy our daily goods using bitcoin because no stores in my country accepts it. If my government decides to regulate it, buying daily goods using bitcoin will become a reality, which will increase the use of bitcoin as well as the demand!

Government regulation is solely needed for bitcoin's own good!

In general I am against "regulations", but not regulations per se, but more against the narrative that regulations will increase the price of bitcoin which is in line iwth the whole digital gold idea which I dont really see being the true point of bitcoin. The idea waS for it to be a p2p currency, not a p2p digital gold! Just my opinion here, obviously there are good points made about the digital gold narrative too. Anyhow ...

I bolded the most interesting point you made there. I am willing to agree to that statement. I think that the key note is regulation and over regulation. What many fail to realise, not saying you, but authorities, is that the ledger traces all transactions and BTC is not anonymous and in a way a not the most clever approach to AML questions. However, privacy coins COULD be but it kind of falls under the same roof of physical cash, to some extent.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

[kryptqnick]

In simple terms, the reason why bitcoin enthusiasts believe that the price will increase after regulations are because people, in general, relate bitcoin to scams, drugs, weapons, etc. so when the government make rules about it, more people will go into the bitcoin market out of confidence and trust in the government which will eventually result in more demand and give us a price increase.

That could be a valid theory but not necessarily and as we can see, bitcoin has been growing for the past few years and all that was based on the strong community and dev team we have.

I think it's not much of a talk about the price, but about adoption. While Bitcoin is compared to top payment systems, at the current rate of growth of users it needs more than 20 years to reach the number of users of Apple pay. If we want Bitcoin to be used as money, we need governmental recognition of it. So that people can receive income in BTC, declare BTC as their savings when applying for visas, pay with BTC in online shops etc. Unlegalized status is a big obstacle for these things.

[dothebeats]

One reason I see is because bitcoin is already being used by people as a means to get more of their local issued currency by means of speculation and trading. If we kept the idea of 1 BTC = 1 BTC and people haven't discovered its speculative properties, we may have flourished as a strict P2P currency system without government intervention, however since people are using bitcoin to get fiat and vice-versa, that's when governments feel the need to step in. With this, regulations are somewhat painful compromise we as a community have agreed to ever since people exchanged bitcoins to fiat, and that is back in 2010.

[coffeeastronaut]

One reason I see is because bitcoin is already being used by people as a means to get more of their local issued currency by means of speculation and trading. If we kept the idea of 1 BTC = 1 BTC and people haven't discovered its speculative properties, we may have flourished as a strict P2P currency system without government intervention, however since people are using bitcoin to get fiat and vice-versa, that's when governments feel the need to step in. With this, regulations are somewhat painful compromise we as a community have agreed to ever since people exchanged bitcoins to fiat, and that is back in 2010.

In my opinion, BTC will never replace FIAT in that way. I dont think that was the point either. The point is to coexist and be an alternative I guess (?). So no compromise really made, right?

[Ailmand]

With bitcoin regulation, it will be less likely to be used for scam and illegal activities since it will be punisheable by law. The reason why government is not fully agreed with crypto is that it can be used illegally imagine if a big crime money will be moved via crypto, it is less likely to be tracked since it is decentralized and users are anonymous.

[Bitinity]

With bitcoin regulation, it will be less likely to be used for scam and illegal activities since it will be punisheable by law. The reason why government is not fully agreed with crypto is that it can be used illegally imagine if a big crime money will be moved via crypto, it is less likely to be tracked since it is decentralized and users are anonymous.

Bitcoin regulation wont stop illegal activities, those who want to do illegal activities basically do not care about the law. Far away before bitcoin was launched, illegal activities were done using fiat money.
If what you mean by regulation is that bitcoin transactions will be traceable by the government then I dont think bitcoiner will be agree with the regulations. One of the main benefit of bitcoin that makes many people invest their money and use bitcoin is about its anonymity.

[Haunebu]

One reason I see is because bitcoin is already being used by people as a means to get more of their local issued currency by means of speculation and trading. If we kept the idea of 1 BTC = 1 BTC and people haven't discovered its speculative properties, we may have flourished as a strict P2P currency system without government intervention, however since people are using bitcoin to get fiat and vice-versa, that's when governments feel the need to step in. With this, regulations are somewhat painful compromise we as a community have agreed to ever since people exchanged bitcoins to fiat, and that is back in 2010.

In my opinion, BTC will never replace FIAT in that way. I dont think that was the point either. The point is to coexist and be an alternative I guess (?). So no compromise really made, right?

I agree completely. Replacing FIAT is out of the question in my opinion. Bitcoin was designed to serve as an alternate payment solution to FIAT, gold etc by providing users complete anonymity while conducting their financial transactions.

Regulation to an extent can help Bitcoin which is why I am not completely against it.

[Zadicar]

One reason I see is because bitcoin is already being used by people as a means to get more of their local issued currency by means of speculation and trading. If we kept the idea of 1 BTC = 1 BTC and people haven't discovered its speculative properties, we may have flourished as a strict P2P currency system without government intervention, however since people are using bitcoin to get fiat and vice-versa, that's when governments feel the need to step in. With this, regulations are somewhat painful compromise we as a community have agreed to ever since people exchanged bitcoins to fiat, and that is back in 2010.

In my opinion, BTC will never replace FIAT in that way. I dont think that was the point either. The point is to coexist and be an alternative I guess (?). So no compromise really made, right?

I agree completely. Replacing FIAT is out of the question in my opinion. Bitcoin was designed to serve as an alternate payment solution to FIAT, gold etc by providing users complete anonymity while conducting their financial transactions.

Regulation to an extent can help Bitcoin which is why I am not completely against it.

Dont know why people do forces out that thing about Bitcoin replacing Fiat yet this thing wont really happen even on our dreams.Traditional market would retain and as long there are
governments who do hold up, they wont really let those things to happen thats why dont really expect that this scenario would be plausible.Sad to say but in further for bitcoin to be recognized, regulation
is one of the ways.