3 ms·
I think there's a bit more nuance to this than a binary "does" or "does not" have authority. I'm not claiming it's unconstitutional to ban crypto, or that they
by thebean11 6y ago
I think there's a bit more nuance to this than a binary "does" or "does not" have authority. I'm not claiming it's unconstitutional to ban crypto, or that they literally don't have the authority.
I'm claiming it's a bad, authoritarian move that isn't in the interest of their constituents, and is not in the spirit of US laws.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoYou're free to your opinion, but I see little benefit in a technology for your average constituent that is more expensive than instant payments to move funds, has a highly volatile value (which is an anti pattern of a currency), and provides little to no recourse in the event there is fraud or theft (again, an anti-pattern crypto proponents champion as some sort of feature). One person's authoritarianism is another's properly functioning regulatory environment. If crypto is instead treated as a commodity (Bitcoin), than that and similar crypto tech can be regulated as a commodity by government (which the CFTC and IRS does today). The US government has the authority to regulate crypto's use as a currency and absolutely should exert that regulatory power.
- thebean11 6y ago> I see little benefit in a technology I disagree that this should ever be a cause for banning something. It's not the government's job to pick and choose which technologies or products will be successful or useful.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]