SEC fighting for the publics my ass

[crypticj]

Not surprised. We should understand that SEC and government will NEVER be on our side and support Bitcoin.

First, they were attacking stables and then made CBDC, and not they tried to destroy any exchange in the US just to control crypto and get profits from it lol.

It the end, it's all about money and control and not about people.

[1714244922]

1714244922

[1714244922]

1714244922

[1714244922]

1714244922

[1714244922]

1714244922

[1714244922]

1714244922

[1714244922]

1714244922

[Andrija Branislav]

So the existence of CBDC and now the government crypto exchange, what does this tell you? They want the money, they want the bags, it's why they are mad that they aren't a part of crypto space from the start, it's why they hated the new millionaires that operates exchanges right under their noses..

Now these people can really keep track of your freaking lives and money, congratulations.

I think generally the introduction of CBDCs and government crypto exchanges shows that the authorities recognize the potential of cryptocurrencies and want to get involved in the space. While their motives may include financial gain and control, it also signifies a growing acceptance of digital assets. if there are other implied there will be a further story  .

[Sayeds56]

It's always about the money and will always be, know this and accept peace.

While I understand and respect your perspective regarding SEC and government controlled crypto exchanges. It is important to acknowledge that regulatory bodies like SEC are responsible to oversee financial activities to protect investors from any potential risks, such as scams and financial frauds. The introduction of CDBC and government controlled crypto exchanges may have multiple motivations. Governments may be aiming to improve the efficiency of monetary system, promote financial inclusion and establish better transactions monitoring system.

[3kpk3]

It is important to acknowledge that regulatory bodies like SEC are responsible to oversee financial activities to protect investors from any potential risks, such as scams and financial frauds. The introduction of CDBC and government controlled crypto exchanges may have multiple motivations. Governments may be aiming to improve the efficiency of monetary system, promote financial inclusion and establish better transactions monitoring system.

Lol. How gullible are you to believe this crap? These central authorities don't really care much about the commoners and only focus on completing the tasks assigned to them by corrupt people above them.

Also, the world governments only focus on increasing the size of their pockets in any manner whatsoever. Think!

[gunhell16]

Assuming that this is indeed the SEC's plan, we in the crypto community should do well not to enjoy the crypto exchange they made, let's see if the US government can still take advantage of what they made.

If it's crypto securities that the SEC thinks are the majority of people, they still don't want to believe how much they can create their own crypto exchange. In this way, we can at least make up for what the SEC did in harassing well-known exchanges in the crypto market.

Although on some other side, it still has a positive side impact, which may have been the reason why Bitcoin's value rallied in the market as well.

[d5000]

Also, the world governments only focus on increasing the size of their pockets in any manner whatsoever. Think!

They have quite a lot in common then with the common altcoin/DeFi/NFT shill (scnr)

[CODE200]

I wouldn't believe any government who says that they do anything to blockchain and crypto to protect their citizen. All they do is protecting their currency, currency one of the thing (maybe the most important one) that makes them have control over the economy and the people. 

It's not their currency that they're protecting, they're protecting their interests like seat in power, influence and the money that they get when the lobbyists comes in. The economy is secondary, if they did care about the economy, they're probably going to make sure that the inflation isn't rising at such a staggering heights to the point where the salary of a common man and the price of basic goods and services have a huge gap. These maneuver is more than just controlling the money, it's also to control the people and make sure that financial freedom is a pipe dream for many people.

[BenCodie]

But a strict and regulated centralized exchange has a lower chance of bankrupt rather than not strict and less regulated centralized exchanges like Binance, Kucoin, FTX etc, right?

Maybe. More market manipulation is guaranteed though. Unless war takes place through crypto markets and healthy competition is created (possible)

There's no doubt any centralized exchange including the one which officially launched by US is want to earn money through fee and tax, they also want to control and track every holders too. The good thing is people who fall in love with centralized exchange will see this as an improvement, but for real Bitcoin maximalist, it's a huge threat for them especially they're live in US.

Exactly.

Step 1 - build exchange that is capable of tracking citizens, coins, and empower the already wealthy.
Step 2 - remove all exchanges not using this technology in the past to make people register again
Step 3 - add strict kyc to ensure only selected citizens get into the growth
Step 4 - reinvest fees during bull
Step 5 - suppress market to create bear
Step 6 - repeat step 4 & 6 while step 3 works its manage to control national wealth

[tjtonmoy]

It's not about only money and bags. They want control over something that they don't have. Bitcoin is decentralized, and they are trying to get a control over it and make it centralized. Making Bitcoin centralized is impossible, so they took the different approach to take other's coin and put it under control of a centralized platform.
Even if they do it, if people don't use it, they can't control the people. Many will think that, it is controlled by government, so they will get the best security. But then it will have no difference between traditional banks and that exchange platform. It's a well planned move that they are trying to execute. Success is based on public reach and usages. If people refuse to use it, then it will be a very different story. It will be enjoyable to see what will happen.

[stompix]

This is what I was talking about in my previous talking. I have read some of the comments here and I agree that we are all allowed to hold our own opinions and draw our conclusions and make our hypothesis and theory. I am on the side with the OP. No matter what. It all looks too coordinated or should I say too synchronized? This is exactly what @PresonPsych said about it. Anyways a part of me wishes I am wrong about this but then lets watch these asset management institutions do their thing and bitcoin natives won't be wiped.
https://twitter.com/PrestonPysh/status/1671153596547874820

So let me get this right, tinfoil logic:
BlackRock Inc and  Vanguard and a dozen others that are also the major shareholders of Coinbase are driving the SEC to destroy their own investment and lose their clients in order to start a new exchange from scratch where they will be the owners just as they are now with Coinbase!

Now you get why those people are so damn rich? Because they don't go by tinfoil hat logic when they put their money to work!
I wonder if their ETFs get rejected, will all those "insiders" come out again and apologize for all the gibberish they've posted?

[Sayeds56]

Although on some other side, it still has a positive side impact, which may have been the reason why Bitcoin's value rallied in the market as well.

I fully agree with your context that there are some positive aspects to consider amidst recent developments. One notable aspect is continued increase in Bitcoin's price which reflects its resilience despite overall declining trend in alternative crypto currencies prices. Additionally, potential of substantial institutional investment remains high provided, concerns regarding security systems of exchanges, and past incidents of mismanagement, such as those witnessed with LUNA and FTX, are adequately addressed.

[DrBeer]

Not surprised. We should understand that SEC and government will NEVER be on our side and support Bitcoin.

First, they were attacking stables and then made CBDC, and not they tried to destroy any exchange in the US just to control crypto and get profits from it lol.

It the end, it's all about money and control and not about people.

Question - can you cite at least one document or regulation of the SEC, which would ban or outlaw Bitcoin?
I'm sorry, but now it looks like you either manipulate the information or you don't know it!
The SEC has NO REQUEST for Bitcoin. There are questions about assets in alternative cryptocurrencies, which are essentially stocks or income securities. More precisely to the holders and beneficiaries, U.S. citizens
The only complaint is to anonymous currencies, which are very often used for illegal activities, but it seems to me it is quite logical.
If you will answer - please do it reasonably and provide links to the original documents !

[bluebit25]

Like it or not, it is clear that everyone can see and feel the impact of the SEC on the economy, with any statement making it can bring volatility in other economic markets. together. Actually, the recent dramas in the crypto market have made me more interested in the positivity spreading these things, some of which are seen here as farce and I don't exactly understand the purpose of the action. This time of the parties, but this view of the crypto market to me is still a big news, regardless of the change, we will still care and use it.

[GH2022]

But a strict and regulated centralized exchange has a lower chance of bankrupt rather than not strict and less regulated centralized exchanges like Binance, Kucoin, FTX etc, right?

Maybe. More market manipulation is guaranteed though. Unless war takes place through crypto markets and healthy competition is created (possible)

There's no doubt any centralized exchange including the one which officially launched by US is want to earn money through fee and tax, they also want to control and track every holders too. The good thing is people who fall in love with centralized exchange will see this as an improvement, but for real Bitcoin maximalist, it's a huge threat for them especially they're live in US.

Exactly.

Step 1 - build exchange that is capable of tracking citizens, coins, and empower the already wealthy.
Step 2 - remove all exchanges not using this technology in the past to make people register again
Step 3 - add strict kyc to ensure only selected citizens get into the growth
Step 4 - reinvest fees during bull
Step 5 - suppress market to create bear
Step 6 - repeat step 4 & 6 while step 3 works its manage to control national wealth

Step 7 - everybody acts surprised when 'Normies' go over to TOR/The Dark Web to do their exchanges.

No surprise that Vanguard and BlackRock are moving now, with both the UK and USA set to go to the polls for their national Elections by the end of 2024. 

The way to beat them is not to co-operate and I believe that in the UK our main Political parties (and no, this is not and nor should it form a Political 'pile-on') position on Bitcoins is this:

Labour - they're fine with them but would want wider KYC rules
Tories - Sunak wants a 'Britcoin' and also extra KYC
Liberals - no official position
Greens - tend to be 'anti' Crypto as they see them as 'for criminals'... obviously not true, but some people insist...
Plaid - don't appear to be fans of Crypto, more caught up in 'Indy'
SNP - no position except they'd support greater KYC
Reform UK - they're anti excessive laws and in favour of free markets

Only one Political party to this point (and one which people will either love or loathe) is against KYC and the Vanguard-BlackRock takeover.

[GH2022]

Like it or not, it is clear that everyone can see and feel the impact of the SEC on the economy, with any statement making it can bring volatility in other economic markets. together. Actually, the recent dramas in the crypto market have made me more interested in the positivity spreading these things, some of which are seen here as farce and I don't exactly understand the purpose of the action. This time of the parties, but this view of the crypto market to me is still a big news, regardless of the change, we will still care and use it.

VERY well said.

It reminds me of the spoilt brat kids in school who would want to play with the toys of the cooler (or nicer) kids.

When they were told 'no' or 'wait your turn' they'd cry to the teacher, the teacher would demand that they be given the toys.  The spoilt brats (who always win due to tears/tantrums/manipulation etc.) then break the toys and leave them unusable, then they want another toy to play with and the cycle begins again.

There's only one way to cure a spoilt brat - a spanking.

[Andrija Branislav]

Like it or not, it is clear that everyone can see and feel the impact of the SEC on the economy, with any statement making it can bring volatility in other economic markets. together. Actually, the recent dramas in the crypto market have made me more interested in the positivity spreading these things, some of which are seen here as farce and I don't exactly understand the purpose of the action. This time of the parties, but this view of the crypto market to me is still a big news, regardless of the change, we will still care and use it.

The development of crypto is like using a cellphone. Admittedly, it's not fully operational yet, not all of them have done it and some haven't. however, if the entry gate has been opened by the parties, in this case the government, with the straight view that if this is maintained, it will have an impact on the weak rate of economic growth, meaning that there are investors who also want to invest, but are constrained by regulations. I think it's in their minds.

[CageMabok]

The development of crypto is like using a cellphone. Admittedly, it's not fully operational yet, not all of them have done it and some haven't. however, if the entry gate has been opened by the parties, in this case the government, with the straight view that if this is maintained, it will have an impact on the weak rate of economic growth, meaning that there are investors who also want to invest, but are constrained by regulations. I think it's in their minds.

Maybe the desire of the government itself is only to invest in real estate assets so that the government is afraid that investors will prefer investing in crypto rather than real estate. And because of that, there are still many governments that don't make efforts to develop cryptocurrencies in their countries, even though the crypto space itself can also be used to help the economies of many people and countries.

I just want the government to understand crypto more broadly and deeply so they don't misinterpret it. Because something that does not harm the state is a good thing to develop, and needs to be learned so that every citizen can be more independent in earning income without having to depend on the government in their own country.

[BenCodie]

But a strict and regulated centralized exchange has a lower chance of bankrupt rather than not strict and less regulated centralized exchanges like Binance, Kucoin, FTX etc, right?

Maybe. More market manipulation is guaranteed though. Unless war takes place through crypto markets and healthy competition is created (possible)

There's no doubt any centralized exchange including the one which officially launched by US is want to earn money through fee and tax, they also want to control and track every holders too. The good thing is people who fall in love with centralized exchange will see this as an improvement, but for real Bitcoin maximalist, it's a huge threat for them especially they're live in US.

Exactly.

Step 1 - build exchange that is capable of tracking citizens, coins, and empower the already wealthy.
Step 2 - remove all exchanges not using this technology in the past to make people register again
Step 3 - add strict kyc to ensure only selected citizens get into the growth
Step 4 - reinvest fees during bull
Step 5 - suppress market to create bear
Step 6 - repeat step 4 & 6 while step 3 works its manage to control national wealth

Step 7 - everybody acts surprised when 'Normies' go over to TOR/The Dark Web to do their exchanges.

No surprise that Vanguard and BlackRock are moving now, with both the UK and USA set to go to the polls for their national Elections by the end of 2024.  

The way to beat them is not to co-operate and I believe that in the UK our main Political parties (and no, this is not and nor should it form a Political 'pile-on') position on Bitcoins is this:

Labour - they're fine with them but would want wider KYC rules
Tories - Sunak wants a 'Britcoin' and also extra KYC
Liberals - no official position
Greens - tend to be 'anti' Crypto as they see them as 'for criminals'... obviously not true, but some people insist...
Plaid - don't appear to be fans of Crypto, more caught up in 'Indy'
SNP - no position except they'd support greater KYC
Reform UK - they're anti excessive laws and in favour of free markets

Only one Political party to this point (and one which people will either love or loathe) is against KYC and the Vanguard-BlackRock takeover.

Sheeple who are fearful of change and complacent with their mediocre life will loathe Reform UK, or at least not support them. Unfortunately that would be the reality in most western countries until something effects that lifestyle...but at the same time, not even a global scam and limitation of rights (covid) was able to get people to look the other way toward parties trying to make change.

As much as I love rooting for non cooperation of tyranny, brainlessness and complacency will always enable tyranny in the western world. That is what they're bred for at the end of the day.

Great post BTW. You deserve a merit or two...I just don't have any smerit at the moment

[carlfebz2]

It's not about only money and bags. They want control over something that they don't have. Bitcoin is decentralized, and they are trying to get a control over it and make it centralized. Making Bitcoin centralized is impossible, so they took the different approach to take other's coin and put it under control of a centralized platform.
Even if they do it, if people don't use it, they can't control the people. Many will think that, it is controlled by government, so they will get the best security. But then it will have no difference between traditional banks and that exchange platform. It's a well planned move that they are trying to execute. Success is based on public reach and usages. If people refuse to use it, then it will be a very different story. It will be enjoyable to see what will happen.

Thats why they do try to stir up things on this way because there's no way that they could be able to accumulate Bitcoins as much as they could and couldnt be able to trace up on whatever transactions that do happen in the chain. They do simply hate up decentralization in any aspect and this is why these government institutions does really like on touching up things and making up some bullshit decisions that they could possibly do and as long it would really be part of their plan then it would be just fine.

It might not be that so obvious but we are the ones who had been fooled and believing with those shit plays that they are really doing into this economy. Banning and making issues with the current crypto companies or platforms and suing something and later on they do revoke or reversed it out and now launching their own platform? A non so obvious kind of manipulation. hehe 

[fullhdpixel]

The development of crypto is like using a cellphone. Admittedly, it's not fully operational yet, not all of them have done it and some haven't. however, if the entry gate has been opened by the parties, in this case the government, with the straight view that if this is maintained, it will have an impact on the weak rate of economic growth, meaning that there are investors who also want to invest, but are constrained by regulations. I think it's in their minds.

Maybe the desire of the government itself is only to invest in real estate assets so that the government is afraid that investors will prefer investing in crypto rather than real estate. And because of that, there are still many governments that don't make efforts to develop cryptocurrencies in their countries, even though the crypto space itself can also be used to help the economies of many people and countries.

I just want the government to understand crypto more broadly and deeply so they don't misinterpret it. Because something that does not harm the state is a good thing to develop, and needs to be learned so that every citizen can be more independent in earning income without having to depend on the government in their own country.

That is not the issue at all, even if governments want people to invest more in real estate, they wouldn't stop cryptocurrencies from prospering and stop their people from using them, the actual reason behind all that is that they know they cannot totally regulate cryptocurrencies, at least some of them, and that wouldn't give them complete control over the financial activities of their citizens which is what they want and like to do.

Governments will be doomed if they simply let their citizens use cryptocurrencies and keep all their wealth and finances private without them knowing anything about them at all, they like having control in their own hands and they can never sacrifice that at any cost.