Merged Bitcoin - Part 3

[jeremyp]

Banning alcohol production was counter productive. Banning recreational drug use was counter productive. Therefore banning cryptos will work?

Oooh, cherry picking at work.

Banning asbestos, banning lead in petrol, banning firearms (obviously not in the USA because they are special), banning shoplifting, banning murder.

When you ban something, you have to weigh the benefits of the ban (e.g. less alcohol related disease) against the side effects (e.g. mob crime). What would be the disastrous side effects of banning crypto currency? I can't see any downsides at all of banning it.

 

[Dr.Sid]

Oooh, cherry picking at work.

Banning asbestos, banning lead in petrol, banning firearms (obviously not in the USA because they are special), banning shoplifting, banning murder.

When you ban something, you have to weigh the benefits of the ban (e.g. less alcohol related disease) against the side effects (e.g. mob crime). What would be the disastrous side effects of banning crypto currency? I can't see any downsides at all of banning it.

There's a difference. Banning something which majority of society wants, which is common .. doesn't work. Azbestost or lead in petrol are clearly not that, much less murder. Alcohol on the other hand can't be easily banned.
As for crypto, I doubt it's that much popular. And it would be even less if the price fell, which it would after any such form of regulation.

 

[psionl0]

What would be the disastrous side effects of banning crypto currency? I can't see any downsides at all of banning it.

The crypto market is worth hundreds of billions. How well do you think it will go if we tell all of these crypto holders that their holdings are now suddenly worthless?

 

[gnome]

Investing in a currency without intrinsic value carries the risk that it will lose its abstract value, including by regulatory action. If I paid dollars for 300,000,000 of Everquest II platinum and the game eventually shuts down, isn't that shame on me? Or do I need to go down to Daybreak games and cry foul?

In the case of dollars, you're risking that the US government or financial system collapses. While that's possible, it seems to be remote enough that people are willing to stay invested. What does Bitcoin have for that, what did it ever have for that?

 

[Suddenly]

The crypto market is worth hundreds of billions. How well do you think it will go if we tell all of these crypto holders that their holdings are now suddenly worthless?

Fine, really. That isn't many people and most of that is on paper. It wouldn't even be hard for them to put in an internet gambling type ban where they don't make crypto illegal as much as just make it illegal for banks and financial institutions to process transactions stemming from crypto. Then the banks get KYC paranoia and crypto speculation becomes unworkable.

 

[novaphile]

Just looking at the current price of Bitcoin.

Ouch. That's a lot of value lost.

 

[psionl0]

Fine, really. That isn't many people and most of that is on paper. It wouldn't even be hard for them to put in an internet gambling type ban where they don't make crypto illegal as much as just make it illegal for banks and financial institutions to process transactions stemming from crypto. Then the banks get KYC paranoia and crypto speculation becomes unworkable.

You're dreaming if you think that you can put an end to cryptos with a piece of legislation like that.

More to the point, why should we try to ban cryptos?

 

[Babbylonian]

You're dreaming if you think that you can put an end to cryptos with a piece of legislation like that.

More to the point, why should we try to ban cryptos?

Because they use - waste - absurd amounts of electricity. How is that not reason enough?

 

[jeremyp]

The crypto market is worth hundreds of billions. How well do you think it will go if we tell all of these crypto holders that their holdings are now suddenly worthless?

That happens anyway but on a more piecemeal basis (I've read the Twitter threads related to the Luna crash). Perhaps it's better to get all the pain over and done with in one go.

 

[jeremyp]

You're dreaming if you think that you can put an end to cryptos with a piece of legislation like that.

More to the point, why should we try to ban cryptos?

Because they are not good for anything that's legal, but they are good for fleecing people of their life's savings and they are incredibly wasteful in energy terms.

 

[psionl0]

That happens anyway but on a more piecemeal basis (I've read the Twitter threads related to the Luna crash). Perhaps it's better to get all the pain over and done with in one go.

It is one thing to lose your money to a shonky merchant or an investment that goes wrong but it is quite another to have the government take it all away from you.

Because they are not good for anything that's legal, but they are good for fleecing people of their life's savings and they are incredibly wasteful in energy terms.

That is mostly hogwash. There is nothing illegal about speculating on cryptos nor buying, selling or bartering with them. That some criminals might get into the act is not a good enough reason to ban them.

 

[jeremyp]

It is one thing to lose your money to a shonky merchant or an investment that goes wrong but it is quite another to have the government take it all away from you.

The government won't be taking the money away. The person who took your money away was the person that sold you the cryptocurrency.

Edit: If the government makes cryptocurrency illegal, all it will do is prevent the most recently duped cryptocurrency owners from duping other people into buying it off them.

That is mostly hogwash. There is nothing illegal about speculating on cryptos nor buying, selling or bartering with them. That some criminals might get into the act is not a good enough reason to ban them.

I didn't claim buying and selling cryptocurrency is illegal. I was talking about what it is good for. It's good for nothing that is legal. There's nothing I can do with crypto that I can't do more easily and more efficiently with money.

 

[gnome]

It is one thing to lose your money to a shonky merchant or an investment that goes wrong but it is quite another to have the government take it all away from you.


That is mostly hogwash. There is nothing illegal about speculating on cryptos nor buying, selling or bartering with them. That some criminals might get into the act is not a good enough reason to ban them.

You skipped a reason.

 

[ponderingturtle]

It is one thing to lose your money to a shonky merchant or an investment that goes wrong but it is quite another to have the government take it all away from you.

Why freeing slaves is immoral. Or outlawing asbestos, think of the owners of asbestos mines people!

 

[Roger Ramjets]

It is one thing to lose your money to a shonky merchant or an investment that goes wrong but it is quite another to have the government take it all away from you.

Which government is taking all of your money away from you?

That is mostly hogwash. There is nothing illegal about speculating on cryptos nor buying, selling or bartering with them. That some criminals might get into the act is not a good enough reason to ban them.

People aren't just buying, selling or bartering them. They are also making them. But Bitcoin isn't an official currency, it's fake money. Despite being being heavily promoted as 'the future of money' it has consistently failed to live up to that promise. Bitcoin is exactly the kind of 'money' you would print to use in a scam designed to make yourself rich at the expense of new 'investors'. It has fraud written all over it.

People are also using them for speculation, and there are rules about how you can do that. 'Cryptocurrencies' aren't exempt from those rules.

Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX Hit With $258 Billion Dogecoin Lawsuit

Dogecoin was originally designed in 2013 as a joke and to poke fun at Bitcoin. But it went from being an obscure “meme coin” to arguably the most talked about digital asset in the space during 2020 and 2021.

This is mainly because Tesla CEO Musk would post memes about it on Twitter and, in turn, pump its price. It’s now the 11th biggest digital asset, with a market cap of $7.5 billion. At one point, that figure was as high as $88 billion—bigger than the market cap of many companies on the S&P 500...

“Defendants falsely and deceptively claim that Dogecoin is a legitimate investment when it has no value at all,” Keith Johnson, who filed the lawsuit, said in the complaint. Johnson is seeking class-action status for the suit and aims to represent other allegedly harmed investors.

 

[Samson]

Which government is taking all of your money away from you?


People aren't just buying, selling or bartering them. They are also making them. But Bitcoin isn't an official currency, it's fake money. Despite being being heavily promoted as 'the future of money' it has consistently failed to live up to that promise. Bitcoin is exactly the kind of 'money' you would print to use in a scam designed to make yourself rich at the expense of new 'investors'. It has fraud written all over it.

People are also using them for speculation, and there are rules about how you can do that. 'Cryptocurrencies' aren't exempt from those rules.

Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX Hit With $258 Billion Dogecoin Lawsuit

I figured game over when there was a futures contract through long authenticated exchanges, this should never have happened. I agree with Michael Saylor that it is most like a commodity, and therefore if you can successfully argue it is not a commodity, then it will end being nothing.

 

[psionl0]

The government won't be taking the money away. The person who took your money away was the person that sold you the cryptocurrency.

It is the government that is making your holding worthless legislatively. This is after they permitted you to legally speculate (invest) in the crypto in the first place. There should be no place for such ex post facto actions.

I didn't claim buying and selling cryptocurrency is illegal. I was talking about what it is good for. It's good for nothing that is legal. There's nothing I can do with crypto that I can't do more easily and more efficiently with money.

"I don't think it is useful for me therefore it should be banned" is the worst form of totalitarianism.

 

[psionl0]

Why freeing slaves is immoral. Or outlawing asbestos, think of the owners of asbestos mines people!

False equivalence. You are effectively saying that asbestos is harmful therefore bitcoin is harmful.

 

[psionl0]

Bitcoin is exactly the kind of 'money' you would print to use in a scam designed to make yourself rich at the expense of new 'investors'. It has fraud written all over it.

Wow. This is the first time that somebody has ever pointed out that the originators and early adopters of bitcoin were psychic and KNEW that its price would take off.

Any other stupid arguments you want to rip off from 2011?

 

[jeremyp]

It is the government that is making your holding worthless legislatively.

Another way to look at it is that they are preventing the people to whom you would otherwise sell the cryptocurrency from being scammed. Just because you got scammed doesn't give you the right to scam other people to make your losses good.

"I don't think it is useful for me therefore it should be banned" is the worst form of totalitarianism.

Which is not what I said. If you read my post, you'll see I said it is good for nothing legal. I did write a sentence that was in the first person but it was really the royal "I". You could replace it with "anybody" and the qualifier "legally".

There's nothing anybody can do with crypto legally that they can't do more easily and more efficiently with money.

Now instead of spouting spurious arguments form fallacies, why not refute my point by coming up with a use-case for cryptocurrency that cannot be fulfilled with actual money?