Federal Regulations vs. State Advocacy in the Bitcoin - A conflicting Stance

[Alphakilo]

There's a thread on this forum about Phoenix wallet announcement of not being to serve the US market going forward because of the feds. Pardon me but I am just paraphrasing. This makes me get the idea that the feds don't like Bitcoin and wouldn't want to see Bitcoin succeed in the US as it was meant to according to the creator.

However, what is conflicting for me is that while the feds are doing what they can against bitcoin, Ohio just introduced a bill aimed to protect fundamental bitcoin rights. While one is being anti-bitcoin which is what I believe, the other is being pro-bitcoin within the same country. How can this discrepancy be explained?

[Dunamisx]

Very soon, we are going to be having governments been divided against each other, some will be in support for Bitcoin while some may desperately go against it, this is what we are expecting to see happening soon, not because we want them to have a misconception against each other, but in other for them to learn how to have tolerance for the adoption of bitcoin and those raging attacks couldn't be able to stand for nothing at the end, because there is counterfeit coming against them from the same settings to support for Bitcoin adoption.

[Solosanz]

Fuck regulations.

They're the one who ruin "Fundamental Bitcoin Right".

Anyone can buy and sell Bitcoin, anyone can mine Bitcoin even they use weak CPU, anyone can run full node to decentralize the network, and anyone can self custody their coins without need to reveal to anyone else.

[AVE5]

To me it's easier to understand the reality motive that bitcoin is a technical that's designed by one person in a blockchain to be decentralized and non custodian so, we don't expect everyone to embrace the development especially the top at authorities who're the governments.
It's sure that divisions of the masses would be biased on bitcoin and some would anchor on the system so it's a thing that some are instigated to see bitcoin as threats particularly on their selfish interests but would claim it's a threat against the society economy.
While some regions finds bitcoin to be lucrative technology to elevate individuals investing on it.
The all realty of Satoshi Nakamoto over bitcoin might not all come a reality due to hindrance of the biased people it could also be that bitcoin can as well surge greater tendencies above the intentions of the creator. That's why the ETF are there to operate diplomatically in adjusting and readjust based on the forces of the people.

[Orpichukwu]

This makes me get the idea that the feds don't like Bitcoin and wouldn't want to see Bitcoin succeed in the US as it was meant to according to the creator.

There was never a time when the US government said they liked bitcoin; in fact, they hated it from the beginning, so this shouldn't be something new, but this attack is on those services that offer support for bitcoin.
 
Since they can't control Bitcoin's self, they want to control the way people make use of it 's self they want to control the way people make use of the reasons why they are going after those services that offer crypto currency to be transmitted, either to come and follow the due regulation process or to leave the US market.

[kryptqnick]

The USA is quite a peculiar country because of the power the states have and the delicate balance between state laws and federal laws. It's often hard for me to understand what the states can actually do and what is the competence of nationwide legislatures. But overall, it seems that state laws often function and make different states really different places to live in, and from time to time there are major federal decisions forcing the states to do certain things. For now, as the US is still figuring out its overall Bitcoin policy, it looks like individual states can become Bitcoin-friendly.

[franky1]

the 'fed' only cares about protecting its position in the international markets. its sole job is about regulating to stay in power/international rank as a superpower and protect the federal reserve and treasury to fund its activities to defend its position in the international markets
the fed aligns more with the banking/corporate need. where as the states align with the citizen need(well it supposed to)

the states are suppose to represent and defend the people within the states.. so if people in america desire and want bitcoin then the state level will support such. even if it goes against fed level desires. however the fed can EO override state desires

the US constitution is not just about giving citizens rights, its actually to protect peoples birth given natural abilities from being abused if the fed over stepped

the fed is found to be at conflict with the united states in many area's (migration is just one of many others)
the fed cant even decide what it wants to be.. sometimes it supports migration by hiring coaches and setting up grants with hotels to traffic in migrants. then it uses ICE and gives grants to airlines to traffic migrants out. whether a state wants it or not