G20 Meet - Always consider Crypto as problem to the monetary world. New update

[Flexystar]

As we all know G20 happened, and all the 20 countries gathered to discuss various agenda's about current and past schemes that are underway in terms of national and international developments. G20 houses one of the highly developing/developed countries and with classic economic status. So what they discuss and what they propose does matter to the world in some way or the other.

In the recent news interview India Finance Minister Mrs. Nirmala Sitharaman, clearly stated that all the 20 nations should also involve rest of the world on deciding new framework of the crypto. She thinks that crypto poses various threat to the economy and it is not the issue of one nation or 20 but it's an issue related to the entire global economy.

Speaking of which, she added it's far better to have Global Framework for the crypto and we should have collective rules and regulations for the same.

Day by day, they are getting stringent about Crypto usage.

India's Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman participates in a news conference at the 2023 Spring Meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund in Washington, U.S.(REUTERS)
"I am glad to say that there is a greater acceptance among all G20 members, that any action on crypto assets will have to be global. The G20, I think, has responded fairly with alacrity (on the crypto challenge)," Sitharaman told reporters at a news conference after a meeting of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors.

"The G20 and its members agree that it's not going to be possible to have an independent, standalone country dealing with the crypto assets," the minister added.

Sitharaman told reporters that the group has willingly responded to the issue. A "synthesis paper" would be taken up on matters related to crypto assets during India's G20 presidency.

India has maintained it wants a collective global effort to deal with problems posed by cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, and the finance ministry back in February said it had held a seminar for G20 member states to discuss how to come up with a common framework.

Earlier in February, Sitharaman had said, "We are going through the study process so that there can be informed discussion. International Monetary Fund (IMF) and also the Financial Stability Board (FSB) have been doing their own little work on the crypto matter and progressing on their own. We've now asked them to do the papers and give it to us and the rapidity with which these papers have been already from IMF given and from FSB which will be given in time for the July meeting. I feel that we are progressing in this direction. So something should develop."

She made the remarks while responding to a question regarding a consensus among the G20 nations on crypto assets during India's Presidency.

"Recognising the risks attached to the private virtual assets, G20 nations moved a step closer to developing a coordinated and comprehensive policy approach to deal with the crypto assets by considering macroeconomic and regulatory perspectives," she said.

Need global coordination to regulate crypto assets: FM Nirmala Sitharaman

[naira]

Even though the proposal by the Indian party will pay attention to crypto as a form of economic problem, it will not necessarily be agreed upon by every country. For example, in the country where we live, we are part of the G20 members and have even built partnerships with investors to facilitate crypto assets into the category of protected commodity assets.

In 2023 India is hosting the Summit and they have the right to pass laws because the cases they have had with crypto have been deemed quite severe. It would be very natural with India's population size, unstable economy, encouraging every individual not to depend on state finances or facilities that they cannot enjoy. As a result, the people of India are looking to sectors that are broader, more productive and at the same time challenging the government's economy. Let's say they make millions of Dollars from crypto then cash it out in fiat which forces huge amount of money to be printed, resulting in inflation but Indian government can't cut taxes from crypto proceeds.

In essence, at the G20 event later, India needs to make decisions and the support of other countries does not mean that they can be ratified and implemented in their respective countries. Each country will present its problems which are definitely different from what India is facing.

[Moneyprism]

it's quite funny to see these boomers say that crypto is an asset that is unstable and unsafe to invest in, some even say that this is a fraud .. but on the other hand they seem scared of the increasing number of adopters of crypto and don't want their product (fiat) is losing its users.. if they believe that crypto is an asset that is not fit for adoption, why should they fear that adopters of crypto are increasing??  LMAO

[Hispo]

it's quite funny to see these boomers say that crypto is an asset that is unstable and unsafe to invest in, some even say that this is a fraud .. but on the other hand they seem scared of the increasing number of adopters of crypto and don't want their product (fiat) is losing its users.. if they believe that crypto is an asset that is not fit for adoption, why should they fear that adopters of crypto are increasing??  LMAO

It mostly about he control over the macroeconomics which keep those people afraid about the increasing adoption of Bitcoin a and other altcoins. For instance, let us assume that a country has a lot of adoption of Bitcoin and the government wanted to change the number of FIAT in circulation, adjust the interest rates on credit, sell debt, etc. Most of those things would not have the effect they would want it to have because an important percentage of the population would be isolated from whatever the Central Bank or the Treasury of the Stated wanted to do with the National currency.

That alone is enough tho keep bankers up at night.

[Greggry]

This people knee that if crypto become more popular than expected my citizens will be independent of their rulership and control. They never want that to happen so they keep bring one issue or the other and tag it to be a threat to economy. Before bitcoin is there no threats to economy, my president said he doesn't want the youths to fall victim of losing money as if he gave us a dime in the first place.

Bitcoin still the light up, with them or not, bitcoin keeps getting stronger and better.

[coupable]

Although the Indian minister's statements express revolutionary decisions for projects regulating the uses of crypto globally, I think the most important sentence he said was "The G20 and its members agree that it's not going to be possible to have an independent, standalone country dealing with the crypto." assets,". Except if the minister meant only the countries that belong to the G20.
I mean, if an international legal framework is legislated that regulates the uses of crypto, then it must include all countries, and therefore the framing of this field brings together representatives from all countries, such as if this is done through the United Nations or the World Bank, because it will never be feasible for the G20 countries to establish largest economies in the world) to create it alone, since it will be for its interests in the first place.

[Gyfts]

It wouldn't make sense to have global regulatory framework when each country views crypto differently. Even the U.S. and Europe are a bit hesitant on how far they should take regulations because they see crypto as an opportunity for tax revenue.

Some of the countries that are still developing (India and China) probably see it more prudent to regulate crypto more stringently because they need their currency to gain more global competitiveness. Bitcoin would be a direct competitor.

[hugeblack]

The last time I heard the word global consensus was at the Climate Summit and Live, they failed even to develop a general perception, so it is unlikely that there will be a global consensus on any issue in general and on the issue of encryption in particular.

Also, the G-20 represents a global bloc of the 20 best economies in the world, and therefore it is an influential entity. If it adopts any regulations, most countries in the world will follow those regulations (not necessarily all of them, but most of them).

I am not afraid of tightening restrictions globally, but the approach that each individual country is taking is the problem.

[Zlantann]

It mostly about he control over the macroeconomics which keep those people afraid about the increasing adoption of Bitcoin a and other altcoins. For instance, let us assume that a country has a lot of adoption of Bitcoin and the government wanted to change the number of FIAT in circulation, adjust the interest rates on credit, sell debt, etc. Most of those things would not have the effect they would want it to have because an important percentage of the population would be isolated from whatever the Central Bank or the Treasury of the Stated wanted to do with the National currency.

That alone is enough tho keep bankers up at night.

Your points are valid @Hispo but I think the government is also concerned with other problem. Bitcoin might not be able to hinder the government from engaging in its economic policies to control the economy because the currency has a limited supply and it is global which means that only a few citizens of a particular country might own it. Secondly, the government has not been able to control the influx of other currencies in my country. Currencies like dollars have always been in circulation side by side with our local currency. The government can also limit the circulation of their currency and adjust interest rates because Bitcoin will have little or no impact on their policy. I think their concern is mainly the failure of centralized exchanges and crypto-related firms, tax invasion, and control of the financial transaction of citizens.

[Gallar]

countries that are members of the G20 do not all have a bad reputation for crypto, there are several countries that are neutral about responding to crypto-related issues. because of the impact that occurs as a result of crypto, in each country it has a somewhat different impact. I am still amazed today by the words of Indian Prime Minister Narendra and the Bank of India

Modi said a collective global effort is needed to tackle the problems posed by cryptocurrencies. The Reserve Bank of India says that cryptocurrencies should be banned as they are akin to Ponzi schemes.

Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/20230211191151-4-413015/g20-india-dorong-aturan-mata-uang-kripto-ini-contents/amp

Even though crypto, especially bitcoin, cannot be equated with a ponzi scheme, because investing in crypto also requires patience, thoroughness and high knowledge, in order to get maximum results, so that it is far from speculation, that's why crypto is not a get-rich-quick scheme , or promises to be rich, because investors also research and study before starting to invest.

[irhact]

In the recent news interview India Finance Minister Mrs. Nirmala Sitharaman, clearly stated that all the 20 nations should also involve rest of the world on deciding new framework of the crypto. She thinks that crypto poses various threat to the economy and it is not the issue of one nation or 20 but it's an issue related to the entire global economy.

First they ignore you then they try to destroy you before they finally start accepting you because they have no other options as you have triumph in the presence of all the attacks they have thrown your way to bring you down. We're still in the stages of been attack but that won't last long as they'll realized that they can't destroy the market as it has come to stay.

Instead of attacking Bitcoin and cryptocurency by calling it a problem to the monetary system, they should be accepting it and looking for ways it can be used to help the dieing monetary world because it's just a matter of time before it collapses. Already we're seeing the US dollars lose its significant, soon others will follow.

[KiaKia]

it's quite funny to see these boomers say that crypto is an asset that is unstable and unsafe to invest in, some even say that this is a fraud .. but on the other hand they seem scared of the increasing number of adopters of crypto and don't want their product (fiat) is losing its users.. if they believe that crypto is an asset that is not fit for adoption, why should they fear that adopters of crypto are increasing??  LMAO

If crypto is so unsafe it is not their problem, it is the investor's problem, why are they feeling concerned when they can't provide a better way for people around the world to get out of poverty and become financially free? These people are satan's general, they know how many people around the world will benefit from crypto that's why they hate it. There is always something about powerful people and the poor, they never want them to rise. Like Kiyosaki used to say "Keep them poor".

[teosanru]

As we all know G20 happened, and all the 20 countries gathered to discuss various agenda's about current and past schemes that are underway in terms of national and international developments. G20 houses one of the highly developing/developed countries and with classic economic status. So what they discuss and what they propose does matter to the world in some way or the other.

In the recent news interview India Finance Minister Mrs. Nirmala Sitharaman, clearly stated that all the 20 nations should also involve rest of the world on deciding new framework of the crypto. She thinks that crypto poses various threat to the economy and it is not the issue of one nation or 20 but it's an issue related to the entire global economy.

Speaking of which, she added it's far better to have Global Framework for the crypto and we should have collective rules and regulations for the same.

Day by day, they are getting stringent about Crypto usage.

India's Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman participates in a news conference at the 2023 Spring Meetings of the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund in Washington, U.S.(REUTERS)
"I am glad to say that there is a greater acceptance among all G20 members, that any action on crypto assets will have to be global. The G20, I think, has responded fairly with alacrity (on the crypto challenge)," Sitharaman told reporters at a news conference after a meeting of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors.

"The G20 and its members agree that it's not going to be possible to have an independent, standalone country dealing with the crypto assets," the minister added.

Sitharaman told reporters that the group has willingly responded to the issue. A "synthesis paper" would be taken up on matters related to crypto assets during India's G20 presidency.

India has maintained it wants a collective global effort to deal with problems posed by cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, and the finance ministry back in February said it had held a seminar for G20 member states to discuss how to come up with a common framework.

Earlier in February, Sitharaman had said, "We are going through the study process so that there can be informed discussion. International Monetary Fund (IMF) and also the Financial Stability Board (FSB) have been doing their own little work on the crypto matter and progressing on their own. We've now asked them to do the papers and give it to us and the rapidity with which these papers have been already from IMF given and from FSB which will be given in time for the July meeting. I feel that we are progressing in this direction. So something should develop."

She made the remarks while responding to a question regarding a consensus among the G20 nations on crypto assets during India's Presidency.

"Recognising the risks attached to the private virtual assets, G20 nations moved a step closer to developing a coordinated and comprehensive policy approach to deal with the crypto assets by considering macroeconomic and regulatory perspectives," she said.

Need global coordination to regulate crypto assets: FM Nirmala Sitharaman

I am not surprised with this statement of hers. You see obviously Cryptos are a threat to traditional monetary ecosystem because it handicaps the potential of the government to control the money flow of the country. For them controlling flow and taxes is the most important thing and bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies restrict then from doing both the things. Also individually one country can't restrict Cryptos so they want a collective framework.

[Hispo]

It mostly about he control over the macroeconomics which keep those people afraid about the increasing adoption of Bitcoin a and other altcoins. For instance, let us assume that a country has a lot of adoption of Bitcoin and the government wanted to change the number of FIAT in circulation, adjust the interest rates on credit, sell debt, etc. Most of those things would not have the effect they would want it to have because an important percentage of the population would be isolated from whatever the Central Bank or the Treasury of the Stated wanted to do with the National currency.

That alone is enough tho keep bankers up at night.

Your points are valid @Hispo but I think the government is also concerned with other problem. Bitcoin might not be able to hinder the government from engaging in its economic policies to control the economy because the currency has a limited supply and it is global which means that only a few citizens of a particular country might own it. Secondly, the government has not been able to control the influx of other currencies in my country. Currencies like dollars have always been in circulation side by side with our local currency. The government can also limit the circulation of their currency and adjust interest rates because Bitcoin will have little or no impact on their policy. I think their concern is mainly the failure of centralized exchanges and crypto-related firms, tax invasion, and control of the financial transaction of citizens.

Well, you points are valid as well.
But the maximum circulation of Bitcoin in comparison to the population of a country or the world is mostly irrelevant for adoption, because that matters in that sense is the market capitalization, in my humble opinion. Everyone in the world can own Bitcoin because the liquidity will be always be high enough, of course, that scenario would imply a massive increase of the prize.

On your second point about FIAT vs FIAT, what do you think your local government felt when people started to use USA dollars instead your national currency? Most of the times local governments are not happy about it, because they indeed lose control over the macro economics.
It is a fairly similar scenario when we talk about globally recognized assets competing against each other.

If a bank wants to increase the interests to decrease inflation but they only have local currency instead Dollars, then people could still opt to borrow in USD elsewhere. That is why in Argentina the interest in Pesos are huge, but they are low in USD. And there is not much the banks can't do about it.

[tabas]

it's quite funny to see these boomers say that crypto is an asset that is unstable and unsafe to invest in, some even say that this is a fraud .. but on the other hand they seem scared of the increasing number of adopters of crypto and don't want their product (fiat) is losing its users.. if they believe that crypto is an asset that is not fit for adoption, why should they fear that adopters of crypto are increasing??  LMAO

Funny as it is and that's because they can no longer ignore that it's overtaking some other traditional assets that they know and compared with the growth that bitcoin to those, it's incomparable and undeniable that the gain that it has got is impressive.
They're making it look that they fear the increasing adoption rate of bitcoin and the people that starts to use and invest on it but, they're trying to make way so that they can still capitalize and benefit from the current situation.

India's Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman participates in a news conference at the 2023 Spring Meetings of the World Bank Group and "The G20 and its members agree that it's not going to be possible to have an independent, standalone country dealing with the crypto assets," the minister added.

Are they sure about this and haven't seen those countries that don't even need the consultation of theirs and just have accepted and made it as a legal tender? Even not a legal tender but just by being neutral and allowing its penetration and adoption on those countries without having trouble thinking about such.

[goaldigger]

Many government can’t still accept the purpose of crypto, and we are still far from that adoption. Though its good that most of the member still allow their people to have access in crypto world, and I think this is better. Sooner or later, they will adopt as well as many countries already make Bitcoin and cryptocurrency legal. They see this as a threat for some reason, and we know that the government don’t want transparency that much.

[Cryptomultiplier]

Well, they can't stop crypto but can find means to regulate or monitor it. The world has built cashless systems that even cash/fiat has had to opt for a cashless economy, by adoption of its decentralized network, USSD codes transfers, cash apps and POS points/terminals.
 If this is so, I see no reason why crypto can't function side by side, unless there is some form of interest these countries want in return for accepting it, but can't clearly state it.
We can't talk of the massive unemployment and hunger that would ride on the masses who lean on cryptocurrency for survival. If at all, other countries like El Salvador is there among others to showcase how crypto can develop a country and be of good to those who understand its capabilities.

[Baofeng]

Isn't it that's what the summit has been doing for the last 5 years or so? carved out stringent regulations against crypto as they see it affecting the monetary world? But nothing has happen to far, crypto is here and going to stay. Also we have to look at which country is in this group and see if they are pro, anti or in the grey area as far as crypto goes.

Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Türkiye, United Kingdom and United States and the European Union.

So in the list we can see which one of them are in either category of the spectrum. Because with that, we will know their stance if they see the crypto is a pose or threat or it is something that they can live with. So it will be hard for India to have this tighter regulations and I don't think that there will be consensus out of this G20 meeting.

I'm not surprised by India's hard line against crypto though, perhaps it steam to the notion that crypto is being used by criminals. Their Central Banks (RBI), has been anti crypto as they compare it to Ponzi scheme.

[dothebeats]

They're getting rough on crypto, that's for sure, specially India. Aren't they glad that their citizens are somehow becoming economically literate? It helps them make informed decisions with their money, although it takes away some depositors from the banks. Even still, the negatives don't outweigh the positives, but they will act as if crypto isn't helping becauze it takes away from their machineries - the banks and the stock market.

Would have been nice if a lot of concrete, economic ideas and concepts are being tackled in G20 and not something that isolates and opresses bitcoin and crypto in general, but meh.

[Silberman]

They're getting rough on crypto, that's for sure, specially India. Aren't they glad that their citizens are somehow becoming economically literate? It helps them make informed decisions with their money, although it takes away some depositors from the banks. Even still, the negatives don't outweigh the positives, but they will act as if crypto isn't helping becauze it takes away from their machineries - the banks and the stock market.

Would have been nice if a lot of concrete, economic ideas and concepts are being tackled in G20 and not something that isolates and opresses bitcoin and crypto in general, but meh.

Those at the top have always benefited from keeping the masses as uninformed as possible about how the economy works and how they are heavily favored because of it, then it makes sense they are against bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, as those which adopt them with their eyes open are people that understand very well their tricks and they are not wiling to participate anymore in such a rigged game, and as you may guess governments are not happy about this.