4 ms·
> Now it's hurting pensioners, not just a bunch of degenerate gamblers and moonbois. No, that's your public institution making degenerate gambles on late-stage
by tyrfing 4y ago
> Now it's hurting pensioners, not just a bunch of degenerate gamblers and moonbois.
No, that's your public institution making degenerate gambles on late-stage startups. The largest venture capital investor in Canada isn't some poor victim, they are the perpetrators, the owners. It's completely laughable to paint them as a victim of some crypto-ecosystem heist.
- arcticbull 4y agoThe pensioners are the victims of both the fund and Celsius. Neither should the fund be allowed to invest in Ponzi schemes, nor should the so-called investments be permitted to run them in the open. [edit] I'd have the same criticism of both if they'd invested in Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC.
- lupire 4y agoIt should be illegal for fiduciaries to invest client funds in crypto schemes without client consent, not illegal for individuals to speculate.
- arcticbull 4y agoI take the position that cryptos are clearly securities under the Howey test. It's pretty self-evident. As such, they must be registered in order to be traded by anyone other than an accredited investor. To be clear, this is the law of the land today. All that's missing is regulatory enforcement action.
- anonymousab 4y agoThe victim is the pensioners, not necessarily the gambling fund. "regulator action" can refer to simply preventing sensitive/prison funds from going into certain classes of risky ventures, and not regulation against crypto itself.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]