[2021-01-20] Janet Yellen suggests 'curtailing' cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin

[bbc.reporter]

@bryant.coleman. America will never allow competition. It has always protected the dollar and its sanctity. I reckon it was one reason why America invaded Iraq on 2003 because Iraq began policies for dropping the dollar for crude oil trading on 2000. The American government did not take this lightly.



Baghdad's switch from the dollar to the euro for oil trading is intended to rebuke Washington's hard-line on sanctions and to encourage Europeans to challenge it. But the political message will cost Iraq millions in lost revenue. RFE/RL correspondent Charles Recknagel looks at what Baghdad will gain and lose, and the impact of the decision to go with the European currency.

Source https://www.rferl.org/a/1095057.html

[Betwrong]

“One area of growing concern, for example, is the potential for terrorists and criminals to use cryptocurrency to finance their activities.”

Of "growing concern", seriously? Didn't we hear the same words from Indian officials several years ago? I thought the issue was settled long time ago, and that anyone with a brain functioning properly would agree with the words of Russell Okung here

“Treasury Sec nominee Yellen says bitcoin is a concern for terrorist financing, money laundering … as if the USD isn’t. Don’t be distracted. The things of old are passing away, fight for your future.”

Apparently I was wrong. And now seeing that U.S. Senate votes to confirm Janet Yellen as Treasury chief, I don't feel good about this.

[figmentofmyass]

Hehe it was Trump who was ok for bitcoin. What he says about his stance on bitcoin might be negative, however, his policies never went out of their way for a clear takedown of the cryptospace.

it was the trump administration who just tried to sneak through horrible crypto regulations at the last second---namely, the "travel rule" (KYC on $250+ cross-border transactions) proposal and the "self-hosted wallet" proposal.

the former is horrible on its face. the latter will result in this:
If you're using Bitstamp, now might be a good time to ditch it.
Bitstamp exchange crazy new KYC

biden might end up being worse for crypto, but fuck trump.

[cr1776]

Hehe it was Trump who was ok for bitcoin. What he says about his stance on bitcoin might be negative, however, his policies never went out of their way for a clear takedown of the cryptospace.

it was the trump administration who just tried to sneak through horrible crypto regulations at the last second---namely, the "travel rule" (KYC on $250+ cross-border transactions) proposal and the "self-hosted wallet" proposal.

the former is horrible on its face. the latter will result in this:
If you're using Bitstamp, now might be a good time to ditch it.
Bitstamp exchange crazy new KYC

biden might end up being worse for crypto, but fuck trump.

The crypto regulations that they floated in December were just stupid, it seemed like someone trying to slip something in while they could and while Trump was occupied with other concerns.    Biden will be worse for bitcoin and crypto, and liberty.  One often has to take the best of the possible choices vs hoping for the perfect choice. 

[bbc.reporter]

Hehe it was Trump who was ok for bitcoin. What he says about his stance on bitcoin might be negative, however, his policies never went out of their way for a clear takedown of the cryptospace.

it was the trump administration who just tried to sneak through horrible crypto regulations at the last second---namely, the "travel rule" (KYC on $250+ cross-border transactions) proposal and the "self-hosted wallet" proposal.

the former is horrible on its face. the latter will result in this:
If you're using Bitstamp, now might be a good time to ditch it.
Bitstamp exchange crazy new KYC

biden might end up being worse for crypto, but fuck trump.

Biden will end up very worse and very aggressive against the cryptospace. This might make us wish it was still Trump and his men in charge hehehe.

In any case, this article talks about how Trump’s presidency and his appointees might have created a lenient regime for the cryptospace. I would argue that we might not have witnessed bitcoin’s new all time highs if it was Hilary who won on 2016.



The Trump administration was largely friendly toward the industry (with a few notable exceptions), and ushered in a wave of regulations and products that were welcomed by the crypto community. The Trump administration stopped short of actually setting a policy direction, however. Almost all of the crypto-friendly actions were conducted by the regulators he nominated to various posts, and no significant legislation on the crypto space was passed or signed into law.

Source https://www.coindesk.com/trump-presidency-crypto-legacy

[Sithara007]

Biden will end up very worse and very aggressive against the cryptospace. This might make us wish it was still Trump and his men in charge hehehe.

In any case, this article talks about how Trump’s presidency and his appointees might have created a lenient regime for the cryptospace. I would argue that we might not have witnessed bitcoin’s new all time highs if it was Hilary who won on 2016.



The Trump administration was largely friendly toward the industry (with a few notable exceptions), and ushered in a wave of regulations and products that were welcomed by the crypto community. The Trump administration stopped short of actually setting a policy direction, however. Almost all of the crypto-friendly actions were conducted by the regulators he nominated to various posts, and no significant legislation on the crypto space was passed or signed into law.

Source https://www.coindesk.com/trump-presidency-crypto-legacy

I would agree. Trump was more or less indifferent to cryptocurrency, but he was not hostile. First of all, we need to understand the fact that mainstream politicians are likely to be hostile towards Bitcoin, due to the competition it poses for the national currencies. And this is especially true for politicians from the left and socialist spectrums, who need to print banknotes like crazy to remain in power. On top of that, Trump was a businessman and he knew about the need to tone down unwanted regulations.

Biden on the other hand has policies similar to that of the Chinese Communist Party. In China, individual users have very few options to invest in. Almost all the assets are over-priced by a factor of 3 to 4, including equities and real estate. The government has imposed restrictions on the purchase of bullion and cryptocurrency, because they believe that if people are given a choice to invest in these assets, then they may no longer invest in other overpriced assets. The super-rich has the option of immigrating, but for the remaining 99.99% of the population there are no other options.

[bbc.reporter]

@Sithara007. My biggest concern is the Democrats might attack and takedown where they can also hurt the whole cryptospace. Tether.

There are a few people in here who are certain that bitcoin will pump if Tether was taken down because they would exit Tether by buying bitcoin hehe. This is comedy.

[Karartma1]

@Sithara007. My biggest concern is the Democrats might attack and takedown where they can also hurt the whole cryptospace. Tether.

There are a few people in here who are certain that bitcoin will pump if Tether was taken down because they would exit Tether by buying bitcoin hehe. This is comedy.

If that is where Tether is going where can I sign for it?  It would be a great happy ending. All USDT in circulation would finally move back to BTC where they belong.
Apart from that, that's something I fail to understand: it's only a mere 1:1 representation of a dollar. There has been more to it to let it grow above many $B of capitalization. There are many stablecoins around but tether has always been the preferred choice of traders, speculators and you name others.
Even though, I might be happy if it disappears, I don't think we will ever have something similar if it blows up.
And decentralized alternatives struggles to take off, unfortunately.

[mindrust]

@Sithara007. My biggest concern is the Democrats might attack and takedown where they can also hurt the whole cryptospace. Tether.

There are a few people in here who are certain that bitcoin will pump if Tether was taken down because they would exit Tether by buying bitcoin hehe. This is comedy.

You know what...

What if they are exiting tether right now? If you were an insider with that information, you would exit tether and buy something else. That could be bitcoin or something else and when enough people do the same thing then bitcoin would moon.

They key word here is, "insider". (knowing something that the majority don't) When that information becomes public, nobody will be able to get out because everybody will try to exit at the same time.

Right now everybody thinks (maybe not everybody) Tether is still OK and no danger ahead. (at least not in the foreseeable future).

Not saying that it is happening right now (i mean the tether collapse) but if it was happening, it would be just like this.

When the news hit the forums, it will already be too late for the Avg. Joe.

[cr1776]

@Sithara007. My biggest concern is the Democrats might attack and takedown where they can also hurt the whole cryptospace. Tether.

There are a few people in here who are certain that bitcoin will pump if Tether was taken down because they would exit Tether by buying bitcoin hehe. This is comedy.

I don't know what will happen, but tether and other centralized parts of the crypto scene are vulnerable to big government authoritarian policies much more so than bitcoin.  If one didn't have to worry about control freaks in government, things would be much better.

[bryant.coleman]

I don't know what will happen, but tether and other centralized parts of the crypto scene are vulnerable to big government authoritarian policies much more so than bitcoin.  If one didn't have to worry about control freaks in government, things would be much better.

Stablecoins such as Tether are vulnerable to authoritarian action, because unlike the case with Bitcoin or Ethereum, they are not decentralized. The authorities can seize Tether assets and make that token completely worthless. And there will be big impact on the cryptocurrency market. If Tether is not safe, then none of the stablecoins are safe. Trading will come to a halt, especially in jurisdictions where fiat currency is not permitted for trading (such as China). And indications are that USDT will be the next target after XRP.

[cr1776]

I don't know what will happen, but tether and other centralized parts of the crypto scene are vulnerable to big government authoritarian policies much more so than bitcoin.  If one didn't have to worry about control freaks in government, things would be much better.

Stablecoins such as Tether are vulnerable to authoritarian action, because unlike the case with Bitcoin or Ethereum, they are not decentralized. The authorities can seize Tether assets and make that token completely worthless. And there will be big impact on the cryptocurrency market. If Tether is not safe, then none of the stablecoins are safe. Trading will come to a halt, especially in jurisdictions where fiat currency is not permitted for trading (such as China). And indications are that USDT will be the next target after XRP.

Exactly.  Anything with a central entity - be it person, small group, corporation, developer, miner etc - in a position of power is vulnerable to authoritarian control.  Look at ripple.  There are probably some jurisdictions that they might be safer than others from over regulation, but they are few and far between.  e.g. online casinos in Antigua, others in Cook Islands, Panama etc.

[bbc.reporter]

@Sithara007. My biggest concern is the Democrats might attack and takedown where they can also hurt the whole cryptospace. Tether.

There are a few people in here who are certain that bitcoin will pump if Tether was taken down because they would exit Tether by buying bitcoin hehe. This is comedy.

If that is where Tether is going where can I sign for it?  It would be a great happy ending. All USDT in circulation would finally move back to BTC where they belong.
Apart from that, that's something I fail to understand: it's only a mere 1:1 representation of a dollar. There has been more to it to let it grow above many $B of capitalization. There are many stablecoins around but tether has always been the preferred choice of traders, speculators and you name others.
Even though, I might be happy if it disappears, I don't think we will ever have something similar if it blows up.
And decentralized alternatives struggles to take off, unfortunately.

I very much disagree that Tether USDT holders can pump bitcoin when the takedown begins. You as a bitcoin holder, why would you sell your bitcoins for something that you know will be worthless after takedown?

[Sithara007]

I very much disagree that Tether USDT holders can pump bitcoin when the takedown begins. You as a bitcoin holder, why would you sell your bitcoins for something that you know will be worthless after takedown?

In that case the trading volume would decline by a lot. Right now, most of the BTC trading volume is made up of BTC-USDT pair. If that is taken out of the equation, then the volume would decline by more than 50%. The scenario will be different from the one we had after SEC took action against XRP. Back then, most of the users had converted their XRP to BTC, ETH or USDT. But in this case the available options are less in number. I guess a majority of the users will try to convert their USDT to USD or other fiat currency, even if that means paying a hefty markup.

[bbc.reporter]

@Sithara007. You understand, good. I have been telling everyone about this on another thread in the speculation subforum, however, they have called it FUD even if the argument was based on facts. How can anyone call it FUD if it was facts based? It is speculation.

Also, I speculate the market makers in the exchanges themselves would remove their coins from the USDT markets. Yes it might cause a pump in the beginning because of low liquidity from the sell side, however, it will certainly dump later on.

[figmentofmyass]

@Sithara007. You understand, good. I have been telling everyone about this on another thread in the speculation subforum, however, they have called it FUD even if the argument was based on facts. How can anyone call it FUD if it was facts based? It is speculation.

well which one is it---facts or speculation? it's one thing to say tether is/was not 1:1 backed, or that the state of new york is suing them---those are certainly facts. i can agree with that. it's another thing to suggest tether's takedown is a sure thing, and that this will crash the bitcoin market. those aren't facts.

And there will be big impact on the cryptocurrency market. If Tether is not safe, then none of the stablecoins are safe.

why? a lot of the market already trusts stablecoins like PAX and USDC a lot more than USDT. they're issued by regulated/licensed companies. plus, if the market starts dumping their stablecoins below their redeemable value, big whales will just arbitrage them back to $1, because free money.

[Betwrong]

~ What if they are exiting tether right now? If you were an insider with that information, you would exit tether and buy something else. That could be bitcoin or something else and when enough people do the same thing then bitcoin would moon.

They key word here is, "insider". (knowing something that the majority don't) When that information becomes public, nobody will be able to get out because everybody will try to exit at the same time.

Right now everybody thinks (maybe not everybody) Tether is still OK and no danger ahead. (at least not in the foreseeable future).

Not saying that it is happening right now (i mean the tether collapse) but if it was happening, it would be just like this.

When the news hit the forums, it will already be too late for the Avg. Joe.

But Tether's market cap is 23 times smaller that that of BTC. Even if all the USDT in existence were spent on buying Bitcoin, although it would affect the price in the positive way, I don't think BTC would moon because of that. I think, we are in a phase when no manipulations with other currencies can affect BTC price much.

[mindrust]

~ What if they are exiting tether right now? If you were an insider with that information, you would exit tether and buy something else. That could be bitcoin or something else and when enough people do the same thing then bitcoin would moon.

They key word here is, "insider". (knowing something that the majority don't) When that information becomes public, nobody will be able to get out because everybody will try to exit at the same time.

Right now everybody thinks (maybe not everybody) Tether is still OK and no danger ahead. (at least not in the foreseeable future).

Not saying that it is happening right now (i mean the tether collapse) but if it was happening, it would be just like this.

When the news hit the forums, it will already be too late for the Avg. Joe.

But Tether's market cap is 23 times smaller that that of BTC. Even if all the USDT in existence were spent on buying Bitcoin, although it would affect the price in the positive way, I don't think BTC would moon because of that. I think, we are in a phase when no manipulations with other currencies can affect BTC price much.

I don't think Bitcoin's MC and Tether's MC have the same dynamics.

Many bitcoins are either lost or haven't moved in the last 5-7+ years which means there are way less bitcoins in circulation than people think and that would mean bitcoin's actual marketcap is actually smaller than it looks and therefore it would also mean that bitcoin would get affected by the collapse of tether more than people think.

Marketcap is only one side of this story. What is even more important that 70% of the crypto trading volume comes from tether which means tether is responsible for the liquidity of all crypto assets by 70%.

Why do you think would happen when crypto markets lose 70% of its liquidity?

[bbc.reporter]

@Sithara007. You understand, good. I have been telling everyone about this on another thread in the speculation subforum, however, they have called it FUD even if the argument was based on facts. How can anyone call it FUD if it was facts based? It is speculation.

well which one is it---facts or speculation? it's one thing to say tether is/was not 1:1 backed, or that the state of new york is suing them---those are certainly facts. i can agree with that. it's another thing to suggest tether's takedown is a sure thing, and that this will crash the bitcoin market. those aren't facts.

I am not telling everyone that Tether, iFinex, Digiifinex and Bitfinex’s take down is a sure thing, however, their takedown if it were to occur might cause the cryptospace’s version of the big short and another long bear market. That is the speculation.

[Sithara007]

why? a lot of the market already trusts stablecoins like PAX and USDC a lot more than USDT. they're issued by regulated/licensed companies. plus, if the market starts dumping their stablecoins below their redeemable value, big whales will just arbitrage them back to $1, because free money.

If their bank accounts are frozen by the authorities, then it may not be possible (at least in the immediate term) to convert USDT to USD at 1:1 ratio. Obviously the risk is there for all the stablecoins, because they need bank accounts to store their fiat cash reserves. I don't think that any of them would chose to store the money in the form of banknotes and coins (even if they do so, the risk of confiscation is there). And a few days back, we saw how easy was it for the banks to shut down the account of the former president of the United States. Given that, do you really think it will be difficult for them to either freeze or shut down the bank account of any of these stablecoin foundations?