Introducing a state-issued cryptocurrency

[PrivacyG]

It's not even private crypto, it's completely public.

I am pretty certain they were talking about how cryptocurrencies are issued (issued by private entities) and not about the open/close nature of the ledger.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[Coyster]

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

I think it's a terrible decision by the way, especially on the part of the citizens, for the government who like to control everything in their way, then this could be good, it is to their advantage if they stop people from being their own bank, take away the control Bitcoin gives people, and somewhat compel them to use crypto that they the government controls, prints and distributes as they like, just the same way they handle their fiat currencies, that way the government remains in control, which is exactly what they want.

But having said that, for citizens who actually appreciate the benefits of being their own bank, then this is indeed a wrong decision from the government, people should be allowed the liberty to have their finance in their own hands, the government can make do with the control they already have via their fiat currencies, and allow people to use decentralized crypto the way they like, and mind you that CBDC's are nothing but just digital fiat currencies, and it'll be no different.

[izsara]

honestly this is a pointless act in my opinion.
how can they think of making the same coin and legalizing the coin but on the other hand banning bitcoin and other cryptos?
this is actually not a good thing because I think something like this will only make their plans fail and never work like governments have done before.

[fiulpro]

Union Finance Ministry has take a decision on a state-issued cryptocurrency soon but ban all private cryptocurrencies. The VHP leader had sought a ban on all cryptocurrencies alleging its usage to fund terrorism, drugs and other 'anti national activities'. As all private cryptocurrencies are still not considered as legal tender or coin in India, but the govt may introduce an official digital currency in India.

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

Anything issued by a government cannot be a cryptocurrency.
You have to understand the fact that the very idea of a cryptocurrency is something that is decentralized and that's the farthest from what Indian government intends to do, now I do think that this is not something that would help crimes and all. Since at the end of the day people do have more probelms with fiat and other things. It's not really an issue with the cryptocurrencies it's the issue with the people itself. Therefore one cannot really think about these things as the fault of cryptocurrencies. If the governmental system was so good why would they need so many laws, rules and regulations??
This would be nothing but fiat therefore there is not even any reason why one should be engaging with them.

[teosanru]

Union Finance Ministry has take a decision on a state-issued cryptocurrency soon but ban all private cryptocurrencies. The VHP leader had sought a ban on all cryptocurrencies alleging its usage to fund terrorism, drugs and other 'anti national activities'. As all private cryptocurrencies are still not considered as legal tender or coin in India, but the govt may introduce an official digital currency in India.

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

Makes no sense at all. introduction of a government-backed currency would be like digital money, it would use blockchain but will not have the very required capabilities of a cryptocurrency which is that the supply will not be limited and also the transactions could be reversed and more importantly it defeats the overall concept of decentralization or P2P which focuses on the elimination of any central authority and allows transaction based on trust amongst the users. It's a bad move in all means if you really know what a cryptocurrency actually is.

[Oceat]

honestly this is a pointless act in my opinion.
how can they think of making the same coin and legalizing the coin but on the other hand banning bitcoin and other cryptos?
this is actually not a good thing because I think something like this will only make their plans fail and never work like governments have done before.

Well, it's obvious that their point is to control the money of the people which is by the way impossible to do when using Bitcoin. They are just like banks and I think OP is lacking of understanding of how Bitcoin works. It's clear that many will attempt to compare or compete with Bitcoin and is trying to be on the top of the list of their people but that's just impossible to happen since they can't force all people to use their own government crypto-currency. Besides, Bitcoin can never be ban but they can ban their people from using it but there's always a way that people would try to use/trade Bitcoin without the government knowledge.

[Fatunad]

Union Finance Ministry has take a decision on a state-issued cryptocurrency soon but ban all private cryptocurrencies. The VHP leader had sought a ban on all cryptocurrencies alleging its usage to fund terrorism, drugs and other 'anti national activities'. As all private cryptocurrencies are still not considered as legal tender or coin in India, but the govt may introduce an official digital currency in India.

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

What would you expect? Government had most likely to have that kind of mindset on which they are mainly against on something which cant really be controlled which it isnt really surprising for them to make such move.Instead on letting their citizens deal up with crypto then they would normally be creating their own and ban all of those crypto
coins in the market and telling that they should focused on state-issued crypto.. Wait what? Anything centralized doesnt really belong into this category.
Laughable indeed.

[hello_good_sir]

Union Finance Ministry has take a decision on a state-issued cryptocurrency soon but ban all private cryptocurrencies. The VHP leader had sought a ban on all cryptocurrencies alleging its usage to fund terrorism, drugs and other 'anti national activities'. As all private cryptocurrencies are still not considered as legal tender or coin in India, but the govt may introduce an official digital currency in India.

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

Hell no.

It is probably the most terrible decision that they have made.

Most of the innovation in the space are going to come from grassroots movements and projects. Not the government. The government is going to try to increase its control over money supply that is already so tightly restricted.

[paxmao]

Sound like a regime that has not only to prevent their citizens to enjoy their freedom of choice on regards to what to own and what to do with it, but also wants to replace that with a controlled version big-brother style. The argument that bitcoin serves to finance illegal activities can be applied to any currency in the world and there are many countries in which most people can conduct illicit activities or move money under the governments radars.

It is just a lame excuse for an unjustified ban, which anyway cannot be effectively inforced.

[Hydrogen]

The federal reserve, america's central bank, is not part of the US government. Separation of monetary policy and state is one common argument for the existence of the fed. A decentralized format intended, in theory, to isolate political conflicts of interest from management of finance and the economy.

Democracy is decentralization of state power and authority. Totalitarianism is a centralized format.

Decentralization (democracy) is a better format for scientific progress and innovation than totalitarianism. Creating a monopoly where a centralized government has all the power and influence has never been a positive precedent for anyone. It has never been good for the wealthy, powerful or ruling class. Its been even worse for the poor and middle class.

State issued cryptocurrency would likely result in a state sponsored monopoly. Which would be defined by decades or centuries of zero innovation and progress. It would be like the bell telecom state sponsored monopoly which stagnated industry progress for many years. I know many will vocally support it. The question is, could they name a single legitimate reason or motive why anyone should support such a thing. Probably not.

[stompix]

Do you realize that if you hold such a currency the authorities can automatically withdraw or seize your coins in your wallet?
Do you realize that the authorities can make mistakes or abuses and this can become even a tool against their opponents?
Now think again: is it a good decision or not?

USDT doing twice the volume of BTC and 4x of ETH and having 4milion addresses with a balance. XRP?
Does this answer your question?  

Democracy is decentralization of state power and authority. Totalitarianism is a centralized format.

Democracy is all the population voting one government or one parliament (congress).
I don't see how democracy is decentralization.

Decentralization (democracy) is a better format for scientific progress and innovation than totalitarianism.

Both the Renaissance and the Industrial Revolution happened before any country adopted universal suffrage.

[dark1234]

the government may regulate policies regarding cryptocurrencies if it concerns the security of transactions in the community but if the rules tie the strings of freedom, I don't think this is a policy. While the reasons for ryptocurrency accusing its use to finance terrorism, drugs and other 'anti-national activities' may happen in that country not for others

[NeuroticFish]

Do you realize that if you hold such a currency the authorities can automatically withdraw or seize your coins in your wallet?
Do you realize that the authorities can make mistakes or abuses and this can become even a tool against their opponents?
Now think again: is it a good decision or not?

USDT doing twice the volume of BTC and 4x of ETH and having 4milion addresses with a balance. XRP?
Does this answer your question?  

I don't follow much neither XRP, nor USDT, so I'm not sure I got what you meant.
But the fact people keep so much wealth locked especially in USDT doesn't make that right (I would clearly not do that) and while a government can seize funds for "legal reasons", most probably Tether will not do that.

[stompix]

I don't follow much neither XRP, nor USDT, so I'm not sure I got what you meant.

That poeple really don't care about the things you've mentioned that much.
Convenience will always beat in a number match concerns about privacy and safety, seatbelts are the perfect example, the "it will not happen to me now attitude" can be applied to anything.

Besides, yeah Bitfinex on their own won't seize your coins or freeze them but once a law enforcement agency will ask them to do so they will happily comply, so it makes really no difference between your own national coin and a coin from a company that will obey everything any government orders.

[NeuroticFish]

That poeple really don't care about the things you've mentioned that much.
Convenience will always beat in a number match concerns about privacy and safety, seatbelts are the perfect example, the "it will not happen to me now attitude" can be applied to anything.

Besides, yeah Bitfinex on their own won't seize your coins or freeze them but once a law enforcement agency will ask them to do so they will happily comply, so it makes really no difference between your own national coin and a coin from a company that will obey everything any government orders.

You're completely correct. (And thanks for clearing up).
Still, I hope that bringing this over and over again may help somebody now and then.
And I still don't agree with OP to be cheering about what "good new thing" the governments bring to us plebs.

[lumierre]

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

I don't really like this idea.Digital state currencies don't have anything similar to original cryptocurrencies. They will still be regulated by the government. The main characteristic of digital money is decentralisation and uncontrollability from authorities, but digital  yuan, euros, rupee, rubles, will be under control, so as for me it is the same as non-cash money on blockchain instead of bank account.

[Zilon]

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

This is a very horrible decision by your government. Do u believe placing a ban on cryptocurrency will reduce the means by which illegal activities are been sponsored around your country. Technocrats gets wiser by the day they might even adopt the digital currency that would be released to continue their activities. The truth remains no where is safe all that is needed is just a sensitization on the positive use of crypto currency even if they desire to introduce a new digital currency both can thrive together

[Fortify]

Union Finance Ministry has take a decision on a state-issued cryptocurrency soon but ban all private cryptocurrencies. The VHP leader had sought a ban on all cryptocurrencies alleging its usage to fund terrorism, drugs and other 'anti national activities'. As all private cryptocurrencies are still not considered as legal tender or coin in India, but the govt may introduce an official digital currency in India.

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

I don't understand why so many people decide to refer back to mentioning cryptocurrency is "not legal tender" in many countries, it's almost as if they don't know what it means and it is totally irrelevant in most scenarios mentioned. In India, the Euro is not legal tender, the Peso is not legal tender, the Pound Sterling is not legal tender - yet they are all perfectly valid currencies and just need to be converted into the local currency. Crypto never has to be legal tender within a country yet can still have a perfectly valid position within the financial system and flourish regardless. It looks to me as if India is trying to dominate the lucrative market and take a cut of all the transaction fees, whether people will have confidence in a government administered online currency is yet to be seen. Part of the reason people like cryptocurrency is that no single entity controls it and could abuse it to the detriment of all existing holders, which governments have a habit of doing when they want to raise money.

[el kaka22]

If it is state issued and cryptocurrency then it is not state controlled, if it is state controlled and state issued then it is not cryptocurrency. Whatever has an "owner" that could control it however they want should not be named crypto, there are some crypto in the market that has some "owners" such as XRP and USDT and BUSD and so forth and even SOL to an extent and there are hundreds of smaller ones that nobody cares about as well.

So, I would say that there is a good chance we could ignore all of this and just not even buy a single dollar worth of state issued crypto. Why would I want to buy something that government controls? If was so interested with something like that then I would have invested my money into dollars, does that make sense? I bought dollars as an investment sentence is quite wrong and should always sound wrong to everyone.

[carlfebz2]

I think its a good decision by government.. What you guys think about it?

This is a very horrible decision by your government. Do u believe placing a ban on cryptocurrency will reduce the means by which illegal activities are been sponsored around your country. Technocrats gets wiser by the day they might even adopt the digital currency that would be released to continue their activities. The truth remains no where is safe all that is needed is just a sensitization on the positive use of crypto currency even if they desire to introduce a new digital currency both can thrive together

Reducing illegal activities is just a common alibi or reason for them to use and people mostly been blinded out by their promises and tending to introduce on something those things specially attached with state issued
and saying that this one is something better? Not surprising which they are always loving on blinding out people and for those who doesnt have any idea on what cryptocurrency would really easily believed

but for those who do know on what crypto is then they would normally able to differentiate on whats a state-issued coin which doesnt make use of blockchain or simply centralized compared into those coins
which do make use of blockchain and cant really be controlled of.

So this one isnt really differs with e-fiat which it isnt surprising for government to end up on this option.