3 ms·

Just because you personally weren't consulted on those regulations doesn't mean that they weren't come to by people who were democratically elected. And you agr

Just because you personally weren't consulted on those regulations doesn't mean that they weren't come to by people who were democratically elected. And you agreed to abide by the laws of a jurisdiction by living there. Otherwise, what's to stop you from saying, "I never agreed not to kill people"?

conanbatt 9y ago
> And you agreed to abide by the laws of a jurisdiction by living there. Otherwise, what's to stop you from saying, "I never agreed not to kill people"? Nobody agreed to not kill people either. Thats why killing is also legal in many circumstances. Also arguing that we all agreed to the rules there in would mean that if slavery were legal it would be ok, becase we all agreed to it. But thats another topic. The point is that if I believe in an institution without regulation the option between me and that institution is severed by an unrelated third party. I dont want to ask the SEC any permission to buy tethers.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  "Also arguing that we all agreed to the rules there in would mean that if slavery were legal it would be ok, becase we all agreed to it" No. That's a poor argument that, in this case, falsely equivocates slavery with financial regulation. "I dont want to ask the SEC any permission to buy tethers." That's not what's happening in the least. But if Tether is a scam, then it will be shut down, as it should be. And no amount of "freedom" will justify running a scam on other people.
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    > No. That's a poor argument that, in this case, falsely equivocates slavery with financial regulation. You say its a poor argument, but you dont say why. > That's not what's happening in the least. But if Tether is a scam, then it will be shut down, as it should be. And no amount of "freedom" will justify running a scam on other people. Tether will crash itself if it doesnt have the money its supposed to have, we don't need the sec for that ,the same way the SEC didnt start the 2008 meltdown or Enron's demise. Its even more egregious if you consider tether is not in the US and affects non-US citizens the most. So why has the SEC the power to intervene in other countries with people that haven't elected them? Its purely an act on a position of power, not on agreed rules, and thats some of the spirit that sorrounds crypto. Crypo will be more mature if it deals with this problems without government intervention.

conanbatt 9y ago

> And you agreed to abide by the laws of a jurisdiction by living there. Otherwise, what's to stop you from saying, "I never agreed not to kill people"? Nobody agreed to not kill people either. Thats why killing is also legal in many circumstances. Also arguing that we all agreed to the rules there in would mean that if slavery were legal it would be ok, becase we all agreed to it. But thats another topic. The point is that if I believe in an institution without regulation the option between me and that institution is severed by an unrelated third party. I dont want to ask the SEC any permission to buy tethers.

s73ver_ 9y ago
"Also arguing that we all agreed to the rules there in would mean that if slavery were legal it would be ok, becase we all agreed to it" No. That's a poor argument that, in this case, falsely equivocates slavery with financial regulation. "I dont want to ask the SEC any permission to buy tethers." That's not what's happening in the least. But if Tether is a scam, then it will be shut down, as it should be. And no amount of "freedom" will justify running a scam on other people.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  > No. That's a poor argument that, in this case, falsely equivocates slavery with financial regulation. You say its a poor argument, but you dont say why. > That's not what's happening in the least. But if Tether is a scam, then it will be shut down, as it should be. And no amount of "freedom" will justify running a scam on other people. Tether will crash itself if it doesnt have the money its supposed to have, we don't need the sec for that ,the same way the SEC didnt start the 2008 meltdown or Enron's demise. Its even more egregious if you consider tether is not in the US and affects non-US citizens the most. So why has the SEC the power to intervene in other countries with people that haven't elected them? Its purely an act on a position of power, not on agreed rules, and thats some of the spirit that sorrounds crypto. Crypo will be more mature if it deals with this problems without government intervention.