Introducing a state-issued cryptocurrency

[Obito]

A digital version of the state currency. I don't see anything that has changed from just using fiat and a state-issued cryptocurrency. This isn't heading in the right direction, this is outright forcing people to ditch bitcoin and other crypto in favor of their own. There is no freedom in there and it will just force people to seek for avenues on where they could get their hands on bitcoin. This isn't solving any problems, this is actually creating another one.

They're basically the same with the latter just has a crypto plastered on it's name so as to make sure that people from different age group would be interested especially the millennials and Gen Z. I agree that there is definitely no freedom, that all there is to it is just a way for the government to spend more since they have a new source of funds to pull out from and the best thing is it's digital so they might be able to counterfeit it somehow.

[South Park]

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?

At the end of the day they can do whatever they want, however even if they decide to ban cryptocurrencies that does not meant that people are going to obey them, look at what happens with drugs, it is a huge market for something that damages you both physically and psychologically, bitcoin on the other hand brings benefits to the people holding it for the long term, which means that it is going to be even more difficult for governments to ban it, especially if the economy does not recover significantly during the next years.

[sunsilk]

There's a massive cracking down for privacy coins. This is what most states are doing. Why they just can't embrace all types of crypto? They're all concerned about illegal trades but didn't they know that cash is more used for those type of transactions?

There's even no way for people to track it unless you're dealing with the authorities that will use marked money. But it's a different thing, well, they ban cryptos and pushes people to use their own made cryptos, the cbdc's.

[Quidat]

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?

At the end of the day they can do whatever they want, however even if they decide to ban cryptocurrencies that does not meant that people are going to obey them, look at what happens with drugs, it is a huge market for something that damages you both physically and psychologically, bitcoin on the other hand brings benefits to the people holding it for the long term, which means that it is going to be even more difficult for governments to ban it, especially if the economy does not recover significantly during the next years.

Expect for government on having this kind of acts whether its anticipated or not but for sure they dont really like on something decentralized which they would instead create their own and called it state issued cryptocurrency which its actually not a crypto at all.So this is just simply an e-fiat on just in different name  which it is nothing different so dont expect for some big changes or benefit out aside on functions
just like on what fiat did.

[LUCKMCFLY]

A digital version of the state currency. I don't see anything that has changed from just using fiat and a state-issued cryptocurrency. This isn't heading in the right direction, this is outright forcing people to ditch bitcoin and other crypto in favor of their own. There is no freedom in there and it will just force people to seek for avenues on where they could get their hands on bitcoin. This isn't solving any problems, this is actually creating another one.

That's right, indirectly they just move and add something into more sophisticated technology but with the same system that is used.
Fiat or crypto issued by the government is actually the same as the monopoly behind it, hoping that when fiat is no longer seen by many people, the crypto issued by the government will be the next option.
even though I think things like this will only be a waste of time because even crypto issued by the government will not necessarily be of interest to many people

People may not necessarily be forced to sell BTC, because some people, the most intelligent people, know very well that BTC is the King of cryptocurrencies, that if it weren't for its technology associated with Blockchain, there would still be no currency, it should be noted that Thanks to BTC, banks and governments are very interested in acquiring the technology to see if they are participants in this technology, but it causes them frustration because they cannot control it. From the point of view of the smart investor, he would take advantage of selling the state currency to buy BTC.

[shogun47]

A digital version of the state currency. I don't see anything that has changed from just using fiat and a state-issued cryptocurrency. This isn't heading in the right direction, this is outright forcing people to ditch bitcoin and other crypto in favor of their own. There is no freedom in there and it will just force people to seek for avenues on where they could get their hands on bitcoin. This isn't solving any problems, this is actually creating another one.

They're basically the same with the latter just has a crypto plastered on it's name so as to make sure that people from different age group would be interested especially the millennials and Gen Z. I agree that there is definitely no freedom, that all there is to it is just a way for the government to spend more since they have a new source of funds to pull out from and the best thing is it's digital so they might be able to counterfeit it somehow.

Ok but if there is a blockchain involved, audits should be doable such that it's not possible for governments to counterfeit it. Which is quite different right now. Nobody has a clue what the real money supply is, probably not even the governments themselves.

I think that a state-issued cryptocurrency could be horrible. There'd be no option for preserving privacy anymore and that could entail insane consequences.

[paxmao]

I do not think much about state issues cryptos. At the end of the day these are no more than the already existing electronic cash in the sense that it can be printed and miraculously multiplied by the banking system. It may carry also a loss of privacy and the main positive effect might be for the unbanked that could possible get an account on a central bank rather than having to go through intermediaries that always take their cut.

The digital Euro, Yuan or USD do not make much of a difference in my strategy with crypto nor outside.

[iv4n]

There's a massive cracking down for privacy coins. This is what most states are doing. Why they just can't embrace all types of crypto? They're all concerned about illegal trades but didn't they know that cash is more used for those type of transactions?

There's even no way for people to track it unless you're dealing with the authorities that will use marked money. But it's a different thing, well, they ban cryptos and pushes people to use their own made cryptos, the cbdc's.

They are banning what they can control, and they are pushing what they created and what they can control! Of course, now we have some privacy with cash, but with their digital/crypto version of fiat everything will be in their hands, full control I would say! Nothing new in my opinion and the government's moves don't surprise me anymore, it's what they do! And I guess some countries will be very strict about using decentralized and privacy coins, but also I believe there will be more "open-minded countries"...

[shogun47]

There's a massive cracking down for privacy coins. This is what most states are doing. Why they just can't embrace all types of crypto? They're all concerned about illegal trades but didn't they know that cash is more used for those type of transactions?

There's even no way for people to track it unless you're dealing with the authorities that will use marked money. But it's a different thing, well, they ban cryptos and pushes people to use their own made cryptos, the cbdc's.

They are banning what they can control, and they are pushing what they created and what they can control! Of course, now we have some privacy with cash, but with their digital/crypto version of fiat everything will be in their hands, full control I would say! Nothing new in my opinion and the government's moves don't surprise me anymore, it's what they do! And I guess some countries will be very strict about using decentralized and privacy coins, but also I believe there will be more "open-minded countries"...

I think a lot depends on what country you are living in and the consequences you have to expect. It will be interesting to see how successful China will be in banning cryptocurrencies. They can't send police everywhere, but they can control every single bank account and they also have the social score. They could make using cryptocurrencies so painful that you would life-long consequences and limitations in your private life and in your job life. Chinese government can be ruthless, now let's see how ruthless they will be with their people.

[wxa7115]

They've plainly stated they want to regulate crypto currency, that is a step towards a ban. If they view crypto to be a threat (which any common sense government does), then they begin regulating the currency through convoluted tax law which makes no one want to use the currency.

If your left with high taxed crypto or traditional currency, no one will bother using crypto. And India has a poverty problem regardless, so there isn't any incentive for adoption. Adding in whatever regulations they can come up with will squash any crypto growth in India. Any crypto user should be against the regulation of crypto, it's one step before an outright ban.

That is a scenario that could come to happen, however governments are taking a risk as it is always possible that their regulations are ignored by the population.

So in the case the demand of bitcoin was high and the government passed a law to try to control this and diminish the interest of the population in bitcoin, the population may simply decide to ignore the law and deal with bitcoin as if there was no regulation in place, now for this to happen the demand and the interest in bitcoin will need to be very high, but I think we are slowly moving towards that direction, and when that happens no amount of regulation will be enough to stop people to adopt bitcoin.

[milewilda]

They've plainly stated they want to regulate crypto currency, that is a step towards a ban. If they view crypto to be a threat (which any common sense government does), then they begin regulating the currency through convoluted tax law which makes no one want to use the currency.

If your left with high taxed crypto or traditional currency, no one will bother using crypto. And India has a poverty problem regardless, so there isn't any incentive for adoption. Adding in whatever regulations they can come up with will squash any crypto growth in India. Any crypto user should be against the regulation of crypto, it's one step before an outright ban.

That is a scenario that could come to happen, however governments are taking a risk as it is always possible that their regulations are ignored by the population.

So in the case the demand of bitcoin was high and the government passed a law to try to control this and diminish the interest of the population in bitcoin, the population may simply decide to ignore the law and deal with bitcoin as if there was no regulation in place, now for this to happen the demand and the interest in bitcoin will need to be very high, but I think we are slowly moving towards that direction, and when that happens no amount of regulation will be enough to stop people to adopt bitcoin.

If its mandated then it could be possibly be enforced and citizens wouldnt really be having no choice but to follow or else they wouldnt really able to access
some government services or something like that which its always been the main concern when it comes to this.

State issued will really just act like fiat itself and it would really be centralized which is already expected thats why i dont see the need for some
comparison because with just common sense you could able to determine on what it is all about.

[sunsilk]

There's a massive cracking down for privacy coins. This is what most states are doing. Why they just can't embrace all types of crypto? They're all concerned about illegal trades but didn't they know that cash is more used for those type of transactions?

There's even no way for people to track it unless you're dealing with the authorities that will use marked money. But it's a different thing, well, they ban cryptos and pushes people to use their own made cryptos, the cbdc's.

They are banning what they can control, and they are pushing what they created and what they can control! Of course, now we have some privacy with cash, but with their digital/crypto version of fiat everything will be in their hands, full control I would say! Nothing new in my opinion and the government's moves don't surprise me anymore, it's what they do! And I guess some countries will be very strict about using decentralized and privacy coins, but also I believe there will be more "open-minded countries"...

It's not surprising if we know where it is heading.

There will for sure be those countries that won't mind to have those privacy coins keep going into their jurisdiction for their citizens. They know what it can contribute to their society and economy, despite there's some misuse about it.

And for the countries that are too strict, there's something that they're preparing for their people and that's why they try to eliminate the competitor.

[wxa7115]

They've plainly stated they want to regulate crypto currency, that is a step towards a ban. If they view crypto to be a threat (which any common sense government does), then they begin regulating the currency through convoluted tax law which makes no one want to use the currency.

If your left with high taxed crypto or traditional currency, no one will bother using crypto. And India has a poverty problem regardless, so there isn't any incentive for adoption. Adding in whatever regulations they can come up with will squash any crypto growth in India. Any crypto user should be against the regulation of crypto, it's one step before an outright ban.

That is a scenario that could come to happen, however governments are taking a risk as it is always possible that their regulations are ignored by the population.

So in the case the demand of bitcoin was high and the government passed a law to try to control this and diminish the interest of the population in bitcoin, the population may simply decide to ignore the law and deal with bitcoin as if there was no regulation in place, now for this to happen the demand and the interest in bitcoin will need to be very high, but I think we are slowly moving towards that direction, and when that happens no amount of regulation will be enough to stop people to adopt bitcoin.

If its mandated then it could be possibly be enforced and citizens wouldnt really be having no choice but to follow or else they wouldnt really able to access
some government services or something like that which its always been the main concern when it comes to this.

State issued will really just act like fiat itself and it would really be centralized which is already expected thats why i dont see the need for some
comparison because with just common sense you could able to determine on what it is all about.

Even if it is enforced civil disobedience is a thing, despite the fact that most of the time people will just follow whatever the politicians tells them to do, we know at the same time that the distrust in politicians and their actions is very high, so if a person has to pick between following a law that benefits the government and disobeying it while obtaining benefits for themselves in a way that does not damage anyone in any way or form then the chances they pick the latter option go way up.

This is what we have seen in the past with countries going through hyperinflation and the government demanding that the population hands them out their dollars and gold, and the population resisted such measures, so it is easy to me to see this scenario happening with bitcoin as well.

[Fatunad]

They've plainly stated they want to regulate crypto currency, that is a step towards a ban. If they view crypto to be a threat (which any common sense government does), then they begin regulating the currency through convoluted tax law which makes no one want to use the currency.

If your left with high taxed crypto or traditional currency, no one will bother using crypto. And India has a poverty problem regardless, so there isn't any incentive for adoption. Adding in whatever regulations they can come up with will squash any crypto growth in India. Any crypto user should be against the regulation of crypto, it's one step before an outright ban.

That is a scenario that could come to happen, however governments are taking a risk as it is always possible that their regulations are ignored by the population.

So in the case the demand of bitcoin was high and the government passed a law to try to control this and diminish the interest of the population in bitcoin, the population may simply decide to ignore the law and deal with bitcoin as if there was no regulation in place, now for this to happen the demand and the interest in bitcoin will need to be very high, but I think we are slowly moving towards that direction, and when that happens no amount of regulation will be enough to stop people to adopt bitcoin.

If its mandated then it could be possibly be enforced and citizens wouldnt really be having no choice but to follow or else they wouldnt really able to access
some government services or something like that which its always been the main concern when it comes to this.

State issued will really just act like fiat itself and it would really be centralized which is already expected thats why i dont see the need for some
comparison because with just common sense you could able to determine on what it is all about.

Even if it is enforced civil disobedience is a thing, despite the fact that most of the time people will just follow whatever the politicians tells them to do, we know at the same time that the distrust in politicians and their actions is very high, so if a person has to pick between following a law that benefits the government and disobeying it while obtaining benefits for themselves in a way that does not damage anyone in any way or form then the chances they pick the latter option go way up.

This is what we have seen in the past with countries going through hyperinflation and the government demanding that the population hands them out their dollars and gold, and the population resisted such measures, so it is easy to me to see this scenario happening with bitcoin as well.

And the same system would continue yet its not really new that citizens would really be obeying on whats been mandated or what are those things been trying to be introduced by the government itself and of course they wouldnt really like any trouble and they would really be having that mindset that its better to follow
than making yourself putting into some headache which these actions arent really that surprising at all.

[South Park]

There's a massive cracking down for privacy coins. This is what most states are doing. Why they just can't embrace all types of crypto? They're all concerned about illegal trades but didn't they know that cash is more used for those type of transactions?

There's even no way for people to track it unless you're dealing with the authorities that will use marked money. But it's a different thing, well, they ban cryptos and pushes people to use their own made cryptos, the cbdc's.

Governments are never going to listen to that kind of argument because it does not fit their narrative, they want to paint fiat currencies and any money printed by them as being on the side of justice and cryptocurrencies to be on the side of criminals, we know this is not true but people that are not informed about this will buy their explanation and will give them a chance to try to destroy or at least to limit the influence this market can reach, but I think that with institutional investors already part of the bitcoin ecosystem we can safely say they have failed on all fronts of their fight against this market.

[Rufsilf]

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

Are you joking?

In the Bitcoin forum par excellence, what do you think we will find? We are for a decentralized currency and not the digital versions of the crappy fiat currencies controlled by governments and central banks.

Well, it's almost looking like this OP is pro-government and anti-crypto because why would he even say that the Indian goverment made a good decision. Or maybe he/she just didn't understand why people choose decentralized currency over local fiats or centralized currency that is controlled and manned by the government itself. How's that a good decision mate?
Being in a state of liberty or having financial freedom was truly the best option we had, and not being worried about the inflation because we can adjust to it.

[Argoo]

A digital version of the state currency. I don't see anything that has changed from just using fiat and a state-issued cryptocurrency. This isn't heading in the right direction, this is outright forcing people to ditch bitcoin and other crypto in favor of their own. There is no freedom in there and it will just force people to seek for avenues on where they could get their hands on bitcoin. This isn't solving any problems, this is actually creating another one.

States and their governments look at this problem from a completely different angle. For them, first of all, the efficiency of their digitized national currencies is important. And their CBDCs, using blockchain technology, are indeed becoming much more efficient. We will be able to see this soon enough when governments start issuing their central bank stablecoins in large quantities.
The existing private and other commercial stablecoins are competitors to them and could easily be banned, citing low safety for people and possible violations.

[tygeade]

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.

It’s unnecessary for them to ban bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. I know that majority of them these days now wants to create their own digital currencies (CBDC), but that is not enough reason for them to ban bitcoin. If they are saying that bitcoin is being used for funding terrorism, drugs, and other antinational activities, then they should prove it.

Do they have any proof at all that it has been used for one of those in any way, thereby affecting the country? If they do, then they should provide the proof that shows that what they have said is the truth. Not just making assumptions all the time to put things in their favour, it doesn’t make any sense at all.

[TheGreatPython]

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.

When the CBDC or whatever they want to call it comes in, it is going to be a wild chase for Tether and all the similar companies. People keep believing that the market will not look at these but the reality is that if you have BTC-USDT pair on one hand and BTC-USD on the other legitimately, literally backed by the government instead of some crap company based in Bahamas backing it, then people will prefer the government backed one. Yeah, sure we do not like the government hence why we invest into something decentralized and all that but that is just a lie to tell ourselves.

The reality is that people come in here for money, ETH is consumed by Vitalik, Tron has been playground of Justin Sun, SOL is loved so much but froze blockchain with a snap of finger when there was a problem, we haven't been decentralized in a long time, Tether has been the biggest proof of it, tens of billions of dollars given to them with the understanding it could be taken back if needed, who knows? Maybe we won't be. US government still is better.

[wxa7115]

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

Are you joking?

In the Bitcoin forum par excellence, what do you think we will find? We are for a decentralized currency and not the digital versions of the crappy fiat currencies controlled by governments and central banks.

Well, it's almost looking like this OP is pro-government and anti-crypto because why would he even say that the Indian goverment made a good decision. Or maybe he/she just didn't understand why people choose decentralized currency over local fiats or centralized currency that is controlled and manned by the government itself. How's that a good decision mate?
Being in a state of liberty or having financial freedom was truly the best option we had, and not being worried about the inflation because we can adjust to it.

I think it is way more likely that they just do not understand what they are talking about, after all in theory a centralized currency has its advantages, however the big problem with it and the systems based around it and that Satoshi identified on their white paper is trust.

We need to trust that governments and banks will not abuse their power, and the issue is they always do, so a system that eliminates trust from the equation and that at the same time gives the power back to the people is what was needed, and that is exactly what bitcoin does.