OT: Crypto, Stocks, Bonds, Real Estate, Investments, IRAs & Finances, etc.

[HarthorneWingo]

https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

You’re smart man go down the rabbit hole, think harder

I'm in the process of taking down Nassau County in a civil rights case right now. And at 63, I'm looking to simplify my life. Money doesn't mean that much to me anyhow.

[br7knicks]

Here come all the anti-crypto people. Just keep on selling, I'll happily buy at these great discounts!




PS: Buy The DIP

as i stated pages ago, i've been saving onto a bunch of my money so i can buy things at a discount.


here comes the discounts. let others continue to panic sell.

[br7knicks]

If you really dig deep enough, you could say anything that has monetary value is BS in some form.

That's why imo, I think you should just pick whichever one you think is the least BS lol.

I'm bought the tulip dip, just waiting for it to come back

same here.

i missed the last clearance sale. not gonna mess this up again

[br7knicks]

And it begins.

As I stated months ago, once the government gets involved in crypto, it's going to fall to ****.

That executive order is just the start. **** it

[F N 11]

Wtf is going on? The stock market is complete trash right now.

[moocow007]

https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

You’re smart man go down the rabbit hole, think harder

I'm in the process of taking down Nassau County in a civil rights case right now. And at 63, I'm looking to simplify my life. Money doesn't mean that much to me anyhow.

We can always go into the pimping business. Kinda like shrimping business but different.

[moocow007]

Here come all the anti-crypto people. Just keep on selling, I'll happily buy at these great discounts!




PS: Buy The DIP

as i stated pages ago, i've been saving onto a bunch of my money so i can buy things at a discount.


here comes the discounts. let others continue to panic sell.

Yep. Stay the course or up the ante. Don't bail.

[HarthorneWingo]

https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

You’re smart man go down the rabbit hole, think harder

I'm in the process of taking down Nassau County in a civil rights case right now. And at 63, I'm looking to simplify my life. Money doesn't mean that much to me anyhow.

We can always go into the pimping business. Kinda like shrimping business but different.

Pimping ain't easy either but I like that idea better. Self-regulated business ("What you got for me today, baby?"). All cash.

[SA37]

Well, I'm not interested in investing in it but I did want to see if some could explain in layman's terms what it is, what value it has to society in a short paragraph. So far, no one has yet to take me up on it. The point being, no one can explain what this is. Sounds like nothing more than a ponzi scheme that's going to come crashing down one day. Oh, and then there's the environmental implications.

I am not a pro, so take the following with many grains of salt:

Cryptocurrencies and NFTs don't make sense to me without the metaverse/Web3. My view is these are the first attempts to monetize the digital world in a way that everything in the real world has been monetized. The Blockchain could make it possible for people in the metaverse/Web3 to keep a ledger of exchanged goods and services or smart contracts without needing to go through traditional banks/payment services/3rd party entities, which would in theory cut out fees and would keep institutions from excluding certain groups from participating in the economy. (I don't see how the "owners" of different "areas" of the metaverse won't end up charging fees on these types of transactions and/or excluding people from different areas, but that is a different topic.)

How much this will creep into the real world is anyone's guess. So much of our lives continue to be digitized that it's hard to see that slowing down. I can see this system of crypto, NFTs, and blockchain being useful for big businesses that have their own ecosystem where consumers can basically redeem crypto (reward points/frequent flyer miles) and NFTs (coupons/trading cards) for good and services that can be bought from the company. This could potentially lead to every business having its own coins and NFTs that you would need to "redeem" or purchase items or services. It would be kind of like trading baseball cards and other collectibles in order to get real goods and services, except cryto can be divided into smaller units whereas as a baseball card or other collectible cannot. Most importantly, they could be used to create exclusivity that could be monetized. Think of something like the exclusivity of a Black American Express card, but with a limited number issued that the owner could then use to buy exclusive goods, but could increase in value like an asset, like a painting or a house; you could could sell the card if its value went up enough or you could pass down to your heirs.

Currently, crypto and NFTs are really only valuable because they can be converted into Dollars, Euros, or some other form of widely accepted money. The issue crypto will likely continue to face is wide acceptance. Bitcoin has a head start here, but there is no guarantee it will continue to hold that kind of value throughout the world. The biggest issue is whether or not governments will accept this as a form of tax payment.

Here is a really good article that explains a lot of the issues that currently exist around all of this. It is really long, but it gives you a very clear view of what is going on behind the scenes:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2022/01/cryptocurrency-scam-blockchain-bitcoin-economy-decentralization

[HarthorneWingo]

Well, I'm not interested in investing in it but I did want to see if some could explain in layman's terms what it is, what value it has to society in a short paragraph. So far, no one has yet to take me up on it. The point being, no one can explain what this is. Sounds like nothing more than a ponzi scheme that's going to come crashing down one day. Oh, and then there's the environmental implications.

I am not a pro, so take the following with many grains of salt:

Cryptocurrencies and NFTs don't make sense to me without the metaverse/Web3. My view is these are the first attempts to monetize the digital world in a way that everything in the real world has been monetized. The Blockchain could make it possible for people in the metaverse/Web3 to keep a ledger of exchanged goods and services or smart contracts without needing to go through traditional banks/payment services/3rd party entities, which would in theory cut out fees and would keep institutions from excluding certain groups from participating in the economy. (I don't see how the "owners" of different "areas" of the metaverse won't end up charging fees on these types of transactions and/or excluding people from different areas, but that is a different topic.)

How much this will creep into the real world is anyone's guess. So much of our lives continue to be digitized that it's hard to see that slowing down. I can see this system of crypto, NFTs, and blockchain being useful for big businesses that have their own ecosystem where consumers can basically redeem crypto (reward points/frequent flyer miles) and NFTs (coupons/trading cards) for good and services that can be bought from the company. This could potentially lead to every business having its own coins and NFTs that you would need to "redeem" or purchase items or services. It would be kind of like trading baseball cards and other collectibles in order to get real goods and services, except cryto can be divided into smaller units whereas as a baseball card or other collectible cannot. Most importantly, they could be used to create exclusivity that could be monetized. Think of something like the exclusivity of a Black American Express card, but with a limited number issued that the owner could then use to buy exclusive goods, but could increase in value like an asset, like a painting or a house; you could could sell the card if its value went up enough or you could pass down to your heirs.

Currently, crypto and NFTs are really only valuable because they can be converted into Dollars, Euros, or some other form of widely accepted money. The issue crypto will likely continue to face is wide acceptance. Bitcoin has a head start here, but there is no guarantee it will continue to hold that kind of value throughout the world. The biggest issue is whether or not governments will accept this as a form of tax payment.

Here is a really good article that explains a lot of the issues that currently exist around all of this. It is really long, but it gives you a very clear view of what is going on behind the scenes:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2022/01/cryptocurrency-scam-blockchain-bitcoin-economy-decentralization

Thanks for your response. Very helpful. What do you think about the regulation aspect of this? And how will disputes be resolved? In the federal courts?

[knickabocker88]

It's gonna be the unexpected .5 rate hike that's gonna make the bleeding stop. Might as well get it over with. It be a strong signal to investors that this how it's gonna be for the next few years. This death by a thousand paper cuts isn't fun.

Wouldn't surprise me if we had 3-4% savings rates next year.

So the markets are gonna suck until Spring / Summer. It would be healthy if the S&P dipped another 10% on top of this

[SA37]

Spoiler:

Well, I'm not interested in investing in it but I did want to see if some could explain in layman's terms what it is, what value it has to society in a short paragraph. So far, no one has yet to take me up on it. The point being, no one can explain what this is. Sounds like nothing more than a ponzi scheme that's going to come crashing down one day. Oh, and then there's the environmental implications.

I am not a pro, so take the following with many grains of salt:

Cryptocurrencies and NFTs don't make sense to me without the metaverse/Web3. My view is these are the first attempts to monetize the digital world in a way that everything in the real world has been monetized. The Blockchain could make it possible for people in the metaverse/Web3 to keep a ledger of exchanged goods and services or smart contracts without needing to go through traditional banks/payment services/3rd party entities, which would in theory cut out fees and would keep institutions from excluding certain groups from participating in the economy. (I don't see how the "owners" of different "areas" of the metaverse won't end up charging fees on these types of transactions and/or excluding people from different areas, but that is a different topic.)

How much this will creep into the real world is anyone's guess. So much of our lives continue to be digitized that it's hard to see that slowing down. I can see this system of crypto, NFTs, and blockchain being useful for big businesses that have their own ecosystem where consumers can basically redeem crypto (reward points/frequent flyer miles) and NFTs (coupons/trading cards) for good and services that can be bought from the company. This could potentially lead to every business having its own coins and NFTs that you would need to "redeem" or purchase items or services. It would be kind of like trading baseball cards and other collectibles in order to get real goods and services, except cryto can be divided into smaller units whereas as a baseball card or other collectible cannot. Most importantly, they could be used to create exclusivity that could be monetized. Think of something like the exclusivity of a Black American Express card, but with a limited number issued that the owner could then use to buy exclusive goods, but could increase in value like an asset, like a painting or a house; you could could sell the card if its value went up enough or you could pass down to your heirs.

Currently, crypto and NFTs are really only valuable because they can be converted into Dollars, Euros, or some other form of widely accepted money. The issue crypto will likely continue to face is wide acceptance. Bitcoin has a head start here, but there is no guarantee it will continue to hold that kind of value throughout the world. The biggest issue is whether or not governments will accept this as a form of tax payment.

Here is a really good article that explains a lot of the issues that currently exist around all of this. It is really long, but it gives you a very clear view of what is going on behind the scenes:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2022/01/cryptocurrency-scam-blockchain-bitcoin-economy-decentralization

Thanks for your response. Very helpful. What do you think about the regulation aspect of this? And how will disputes be resolved? In the federal courts?

Well, now you're starting to dig a bit deeper into my ignorance.

If the US can parlay this into continued dominance of the US dollar, it will make moves to do that, including pushing its allies (UK, EU, Australia) to not accept certain forms of payment. The biggest concerns seems to be the US dollar losing its status as the world's reserve currency, which gives it enormous political and financial power over the rest of the world...

Spoiler:

While securities trading and other financial transactions may appear instantaneous, many back-end processes still move at a snail’s pace in rigid sequences set decades ago. A mortgage payment isn’t completed when the funds leave the homeowner’s bank account. Those funds have many hands to go through before they come to rest, days or weeks later. Through tokenization, many of these cumbersome and costly processes can be streamlined with better market information, greater certainty and enhanced security.

The potential efficiency improvements to the current system are enormous, including billions of dollars annually in reduced frictions and increased consumer choice. End-to-end tokenization of sovereign currencies, securities, loans, real estate, mortgages, pledges, and related payments and credit is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for both entrepreneurs and nimble incumbents. It is also an existential threat to those who are slow to adapt.

What is government’s role? Regulation is essential to our financial markets, and there is no doubt that tokenized financial assets should be regulated to ensure financial stability, promote capital formation, prevent illicit activity, and protect consumers. But there is more the U.S. government must do. Innovators must have assurances that if they follow time-tested regulatory principles, they will be free to pursue the market opportunities provided by better functionality. The government should actively facilitate the adoption of technology in core U.S. dollar funding and payments markets. This is a matter of national security and financial stability.

The most important financial market in the world, the U.S. Treasury market, is a government market. Virtually all other financial markets, at home and abroad, have some tie to the U.S. Treasury market, including the cash in our wallets and the entries in our bank accounts. A central bank’s digital currency, or “digital dollar” is the tail of the dog. Financial regulators, in tandem with the private sector, should be focusing on the dog.

Dollar primacy and stability are critical to global economic development, financial stability and U.S. national security. In the face of broad technological change, primacy of the U.S. dollar is by no means certain. China views this technological shift as an opportunity not only to achieve operational efficiencies but to extend the reach and influence of yuan-based payments and lending. Chinese authorities are driving digitization and tokenization in their core payment and credit markets, allowing greater government monitoring and control. And there is no doubt Chinese leadership plans to extend similar practices to international trade and finance, expanding their influence over global commerce. The U.S. must recognize the reserve currency race is on, and winning is the only rational objective.

We have a head start in both traditional markets and new tokenized markets. More than 95% of stablecoins by value are based on the U.S. dollar. In other words, at the incipient stages of this global shift in financial technology, dollars—actually U.S. Treasury securities—have remained the preferred liquid store of value for new and traditional markets. But stability and leadership can erode quickly in times of technological change. Another nation seizing control of global credit and payment systems would not only affect our global standing but also could destabilize the global financial system.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-future-depends-on-blockchain-crypto-bitcoin-payments-transfers-federal-reserve-11639668586

...and the US's ability to have a continue to be the central hub of globalized finance through their banking sector:

Spoiler:

national digital currencies could make it harder for private cryptocurrencies to catch on. Because government e-cash would be operated, backed and controlled directly by central banks, it likely would be viewed as more reliable than privately created cryptocurrencies, which operate on decentralized networks of users and fluctuate wildly in value.

Perhaps most significantly, a world of competing national digital currencies could set up a new kind of currency war. The U.S. dollar has been the world’s dominant currency since the 1920s. But if national digital currencies allow for faster, cheaper money transfers across borders, viable alternatives to the U.S. dollar could emerge, embraced by nations and monetary officials concerned about the dollar’s outsize influence on the global economy.

“Technological developments provide the potential for such a world to emerge,” Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, said in an August speech at the Federal Reserve’s annual symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo. He highlighted the risks of the current dollar-dominant system, and sketched out an alternative where a new digital currency backed by a large group of nations, or even multiple currencies, vied with the dollar...

The one that might beat them all to the punch is the People’s Bank of China. The PBOC is expected to launch a digital version of China’s national currency, the yuan, later this year or early in 2020. If it does, it would be the first major global currency to become digitized.

The benefits of digitization could be myriad. In addition to faster and cheaper money transfers across borders, a survey conducted by the International Monetary Fund found that central banks are looking at benefits like lower costs, more efficient monetary policy, blunting competition from bitcoin and its peers, and offering a risk-free payment network to the public....

The total market capitalization of bitcoin, the most popular form of digital currency, has grown dramatically since its creation in 2009, but still lags far behind the total value of U.S. dollars in circulation.

U.S. cash in circulation continues to grow apace, as seen in the expansion of M1, a basic money supply gauge that measures funds that are readily available for spending, including checking accounts that pay interest and those that don't, and currency.

The result could be a sweeping change in the international financial system, affecting, among other things, how nations trade.

The country that is first to introduce a digital currency that is more easily stored and used abroad than its physical counterpart will have “a first-mover advantage to greater currency use, though not necessarily to reserve currency use,” says Tommaso Mancini Griffoli, deputy division chief of the IMF’s central bank operations division.

The increasing interest in national digital currencies dovetails with a changing marketplace. Developing nations increasingly make up a larger percentage of global gross domestic product while the U.S. share shrinks.

The dollar’s hegemony made sense after World War II, when the U.S. accounted for 28% of global exports. Now, the figure is just 8.8%, according to the IMF. Yet the dollar still dominates international trade. Around 40% of world trade is invoiced in dollars, roughly four times the U.S. share of world trade, according to data from Gita Gopinath, a Harvard University professor who is now the IMF’s chief economist. And the dollar is used in 88% of all foreign-exchange trades world-wide, according to the Bank for International Settlements.

The dollar isn’t going to lose its position overnight, Mr. Carney said at the August gathering. But bankers should be thinking about a post-dollar world now, he added, rather than waiting for the next crisis to force change.

The dollar’s status as the lingua franca of international business provides benefits: Companies in places like Argentina can export goods to Turkey, and get paid in dollars. Because those dollars are deposited in local banks, they can be lent to companies. In fact, because there are so many dollar deposits, it’s actually cheaper for overseas businesses to borrow in the U.S. currency, creating a feedback loop that maintains the greenback’s pre-eminence.

But as Mr. Carney noted last month, this convenience has a downside: When the dollar appreciates, debt denominated in dollars becomes more expensive for foreign businesses. At the same time, the price of those countries’ imports rises, which can feed inflation.

Because of the dollar’s status and the fact that economies are more interconnected than ever, dozens of countries are essentially beholden to U.S. fiscal and monetary policy. Fluctuations in the dollar’s value feed through credit markets, causing surges and withdrawals of capital that can cause financial crises in emerging markets.

“U.S. developments have significant spillovers onto both the trade performance and financial conditions of countries with even relatively limited direct exposure to the U.S. economy,” Mr. Carney said.

One countermeasure to that dynamic could be a “synthetic hegemonic currency,” as Mr. Carney called it, a fancier term for a global public cryptocurrency. The currency he proposed would be based on a basket of reliable currencies, including the dollar and China’s renminbi....

For the Chinese, digitizing the renminbi is a way to get out from under the U.S.’s thumb, says Eswar Prasad, an economics professor at Cornell University and former head of the IMF’s China Division. China’s goal isn’t necessarily to overthrow the dollar, he says. But they want to give their allies an alternative to the dollar and create a system that couldn’t be disrupted by the U.S.

“Would the Chinese like to be less vulnerable to American sanctions? Happier if they didn’t have to use the dollar for their imports and exports? The answer to that is unambiguously yes,” he says.

China‘s digital currency would differ significantly from the bitcoin model, with the central bank keeping control of the money supply and tracking users’ identities.

The people and companies behind private cryptocurrencies believe their assets will still have value even if countries move to digitize their national currencies. People around the world won’t want to give up the anonymity and privacy associated with cryptocurrency, they say, even if they are pushed into using solely electronic forms of cash.

“What you end up with is a situation where the government has potentially perfect surveillance into all the financial flows in the entire economy,” says Travis Scher, vice president of investments at Digital Currency Group, owner of the digital-currency trading firm Genesis Trading. “In a world where a country like China issues its own digital currency and tries to move the entire economy onto that, it actually will increase demand for cryptocurrencies and digital currencies that are more private and create the potential for more autonomy.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coming-currency-war-digital-money-vs-the-dollar-11569204540

Another big issue is that I don't think the government knows where it fits into all of this. My guess is that the US will create a digital US dollar that will become the only accepted stable coin. Companies and private entities will be able to create whatever cryptocurrencies they want, but there will only be government-approved cryptocurrencies that can be redeemed for digital US dollars, which will be the only accepted form of payment for taxes, property, government subsidies, salaries and other major expenses.

This is a problem of fungibility, aka exchangeability. Think of it the same way you'd have trouble exchanging any points from rewards programs that you might have into dollars. You can't pay fines, taxes, or salaries with your frequent flyer miles. However, you can trade certain collectibles, like comics, sports cards, or artwork, and "redeem" dollar, but that is only possible if others value your collectible. A middle ground there is something like a gift card, which you could get someone to buy from you for dollars, but the person would have to be committed to spending their money in that particular shop. What cryptocurrencies could do is make all those gift cards, frequent flyer miles, rewards programs points...etc more easily exchangeable. For example, maybe you have a bunch of Delta tokens (miles) built up, but only American flies to where you are going. You could exchange your Delta tokens with someone who has American Airlines tokens (miles) in order to purchase your flight.

All that said, you have this interesting article which shows the dangers of this converging of tech and finance:

The lines between banks and tech companies are blurring. And this makes it all the more confusing that tech companies and banks both refer to customers’ preferences when justifying their divergent corporate decisions about brick-and-mortar storefronts. Tech companies lack the waning public trust of retail banking institutions; however, they are delivering financial products and services over which banks are used to having exclusive control. Because tech companies and banks increasingly share a customer base, the apparent contradictions in corporate decisions to open and close retail stores can’t be explained away by within-industry changes in people’s preferences or consumption patterns.
One answer is that tech and finance industries are jockeying for control over new terrains and manipulating their economies of scale to extract new forms of value. This value extraction relies on and reifies a socially constructed racial hierarchy.

Since their inception, banks have relied on a racial hierarchy for generating profits and accumulating wealth. As Angela Glover Blackwell and Michael McAfee write, “Banks have been the underwriters of American racism.” Banks have financed the slave trade, funded local development to segregate cities, denied affordable mortgages to Black and brown borrowers, and charged Black and brown customers more for retail banking services.

Banks routinely compound the racialized costs of banking by refusing to make changes that would benefit their customers. For decades, banks have ignored people’s demands for the elimination of overdraft fees, free or low-cost checking accounts, and low-interest loans and mortgages that would have come at the expense of their bottom lines. While some banks have framed their recent decisions to discontinue overdraft fees as part of commitments to advance racial equity, these decisions coincide with competition from tech companies and threats of federal regulation and oversight. In actuality, retail banks spend about $60 million per year on lobbying efforts to avoid demands from public policymakers requiring them to offer affordable products and services...

The foreclosure of banking alternatives forces a reliance on technology that aids in the expansion of the surveillance state disproportionately into Black and brown communities. The prominence of tech companies in the virtual space, combined with the retraction of banks in the physical space, creates new conditions for extractive finance and predatory surveillance. Like payday lenders and check cashers that occupy communities exploited and abandoned by banks, tech companies capitalize on the vulnerabilities and truancies of our institutions.

Not only are tech companies expanding into brick-and-mortar retail stores; they are competing with banks in the delivery of financial products and services, such as by providing checking account and payment services and loan underwriting. Tech companies’ financial products and services activities comprise a growing share of their revenue—about 12 percent of revenue in 2019 among the largest companies, including Amazon and Meta. And there is every indication that tech companies will continue to increase their revenue from these activities....

Private companies operating under racial capitalism have always been able to find the regulatory loopholes, and tech companies’ operations are arguably much harder to scrutinize than retail banking institutions. Tech companies have already proven nimble at evading federal rules designed for retail banks, setting up the potential for similar conditions that have plagued payday-lending regulation for decades. And regulatory strategies have never fully redressed banks’ racial discrimination, which bodes ominous since tech companies knowingly rely on racist algorithms and data.

https://prospect.org/economy/banks-tech-companies-jockey-for-economic-control/


Here are some other articles that talk a bit about the regulation challenges:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/17/business/economy/federal-reserve-virtual-currency-stablecoin.html

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-central-banks-want-to-create-their-own-digital-currencies-like-bitcoin-11603291131

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/23/us/politics/cryptocurrency-regulators-rules.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/05/us/politics/cryptocurrency-banking-regulation.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/05/us/politics/cryptocurrency-explainer.html

[HarthorneWingo]

Spoiler:

I am not a pro, so take the following with many grains of salt:

Cryptocurrencies and NFTs don't make sense to me without the metaverse/Web3. My view is these are the first attempts to monetize the digital world in a way that everything in the real world has been monetized. The Blockchain could make it possible for people in the metaverse/Web3 to keep a ledger of exchanged goods and services or smart contracts without needing to go through traditional banks/payment services/3rd party entities, which would in theory cut out fees and would keep institutions from excluding certain groups from participating in the economy. (I don't see how the "owners" of different "areas" of the metaverse won't end up charging fees on these types of transactions and/or excluding people from different areas, but that is a different topic.)

How much this will creep into the real world is anyone's guess. So much of our lives continue to be digitized that it's hard to see that slowing down. I can see this system of crypto, NFTs, and blockchain being useful for big businesses that have their own ecosystem where consumers can basically redeem crypto (reward points/frequent flyer miles) and NFTs (coupons/trading cards) for good and services that can be bought from the company. This could potentially lead to every business having its own coins and NFTs that you would need to "redeem" or purchase items or services. It would be kind of like trading baseball cards and other collectibles in order to get real goods and services, except cryto can be divided into smaller units whereas as a baseball card or other collectible cannot. Most importantly, they could be used to create exclusivity that could be monetized. Think of something like the exclusivity of a Black American Express card, but with a limited number issued that the owner could then use to buy exclusive goods, but could increase in value like an asset, like a painting or a house; you could could sell the card if its value went up enough or you could pass down to your heirs.

Currently, crypto and NFTs are really only valuable because they can be converted into Dollars, Euros, or some other form of widely accepted money. The issue crypto will likely continue to face is wide acceptance. Bitcoin has a head start here, but there is no guarantee it will continue to hold that kind of value throughout the world. The biggest issue is whether or not governments will accept this as a form of tax payment.

Here is a really good article that explains a lot of the issues that currently exist around all of this. It is really long, but it gives you a very clear view of what is going on behind the scenes:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2022/01/cryptocurrency-scam-blockchain-bitcoin-economy-decentralization

Thanks for your response. Very helpful. What do you think about the regulation aspect of this? And how will disputes be resolved? In the federal courts?

Well, now you're starting to dig a bit deeper into my ignorance.

If the US can parlay this into continued dominance of the US dollar, it will make moves to do that, including pushing its allies (UK, EU, Australia) to not accept certain forms of payment. The biggest concerns seems to be the US dollar losing its status as the world's reserve currency, which gives it enormous political and financial power over the rest of the world...

Spoiler:

While securities trading and other financial transactions may appear instantaneous, many back-end processes still move at a snail’s pace in rigid sequences set decades ago. A mortgage payment isn’t completed when the funds leave the homeowner’s bank account. Those funds have many hands to go through before they come to rest, days or weeks later. Through tokenization, many of these cumbersome and costly processes can be streamlined with better market information, greater certainty and enhanced security.

The potential efficiency improvements to the current system are enormous, including billions of dollars annually in reduced frictions and increased consumer choice. End-to-end tokenization of sovereign currencies, securities, loans, real estate, mortgages, pledges, and related payments and credit is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for both entrepreneurs and nimble incumbents. It is also an existential threat to those who are slow to adapt.

What is government’s role? Regulation is essential to our financial markets, and there is no doubt that tokenized financial assets should be regulated to ensure financial stability, promote capital formation, prevent illicit activity, and protect consumers. But there is more the U.S. government must do. Innovators must have assurances that if they follow time-tested regulatory principles, they will be free to pursue the market opportunities provided by better functionality. The government should actively facilitate the adoption of technology in core U.S. dollar funding and payments markets. This is a matter of national security and financial stability.

The most important financial market in the world, the U.S. Treasury market, is a government market. Virtually all other financial markets, at home and abroad, have some tie to the U.S. Treasury market, including the cash in our wallets and the entries in our bank accounts. A central bank’s digital currency, or “digital dollar” is the tail of the dog. Financial regulators, in tandem with the private sector, should be focusing on the dog.

Dollar primacy and stability are critical to global economic development, financial stability and U.S. national security. In the face of broad technological change, primacy of the U.S. dollar is by no means certain. China views this technological shift as an opportunity not only to achieve operational efficiencies but to extend the reach and influence of yuan-based payments and lending. Chinese authorities are driving digitization and tokenization in their core payment and credit markets, allowing greater government monitoring and control. And there is no doubt Chinese leadership plans to extend similar practices to international trade and finance, expanding their influence over global commerce. The U.S. must recognize the reserve currency race is on, and winning is the only rational objective.

We have a head start in both traditional markets and new tokenized markets. More than 95% of stablecoins by value are based on the U.S. dollar. In other words, at the incipient stages of this global shift in financial technology, dollars—actually U.S. Treasury securities—have remained the preferred liquid store of value for new and traditional markets. But stability and leadership can erode quickly in times of technological change. Another nation seizing control of global credit and payment systems would not only affect our global standing but also could destabilize the global financial system.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-future-depends-on-blockchain-crypto-bitcoin-payments-transfers-federal-reserve-11639668586

...and the US's ability to have a continue to be the central hub of globalized finance through their banking sector:

Spoiler:

national digital currencies could make it harder for private cryptocurrencies to catch on. Because government e-cash would be operated, backed and controlled directly by central banks, it likely would be viewed as more reliable than privately created cryptocurrencies, which operate on decentralized networks of users and fluctuate wildly in value.

Perhaps most significantly, a world of competing national digital currencies could set up a new kind of currency war. The U.S. dollar has been the world’s dominant currency since the 1920s. But if national digital currencies allow for faster, cheaper money transfers across borders, viable alternatives to the U.S. dollar could emerge, embraced by nations and monetary officials concerned about the dollar’s outsize influence on the global economy.

“Technological developments provide the potential for such a world to emerge,” Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, said in an August speech at the Federal Reserve’s annual symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo. He highlighted the risks of the current dollar-dominant system, and sketched out an alternative where a new digital currency backed by a large group of nations, or even multiple currencies, vied with the dollar...

The one that might beat them all to the punch is the People’s Bank of China. The PBOC is expected to launch a digital version of China’s national currency, the yuan, later this year or early in 2020. If it does, it would be the first major global currency to become digitized.

The benefits of digitization could be myriad. In addition to faster and cheaper money transfers across borders, a survey conducted by the International Monetary Fund found that central banks are looking at benefits like lower costs, more efficient monetary policy, blunting competition from bitcoin and its peers, and offering a risk-free payment network to the public....

The total market capitalization of bitcoin, the most popular form of digital currency, has grown dramatically since its creation in 2009, but still lags far behind the total value of U.S. dollars in circulation.

U.S. cash in circulation continues to grow apace, as seen in the expansion of M1, a basic money supply gauge that measures funds that are readily available for spending, including checking accounts that pay interest and those that don't, and currency.

The result could be a sweeping change in the international financial system, affecting, among other things, how nations trade.

The country that is first to introduce a digital currency that is more easily stored and used abroad than its physical counterpart will have “a first-mover advantage to greater currency use, though not necessarily to reserve currency use,” says Tommaso Mancini Griffoli, deputy division chief of the IMF’s central bank operations division.

The increasing interest in national digital currencies dovetails with a changing marketplace. Developing nations increasingly make up a larger percentage of global gross domestic product while the U.S. share shrinks.

The dollar’s hegemony made sense after World War II, when the U.S. accounted for 28% of global exports. Now, the figure is just 8.8%, according to the IMF. Yet the dollar still dominates international trade. Around 40% of world trade is invoiced in dollars, roughly four times the U.S. share of world trade, according to data from Gita Gopinath, a Harvard University professor who is now the IMF’s chief economist. And the dollar is used in 88% of all foreign-exchange trades world-wide, according to the Bank for International Settlements.

The dollar isn’t going to lose its position overnight, Mr. Carney said at the August gathering. But bankers should be thinking about a post-dollar world now, he added, rather than waiting for the next crisis to force change.

The dollar’s status as the lingua franca of international business provides benefits: Companies in places like Argentina can export goods to Turkey, and get paid in dollars. Because those dollars are deposited in local banks, they can be lent to companies. In fact, because there are so many dollar deposits, it’s actually cheaper for overseas businesses to borrow in the U.S. currency, creating a feedback loop that maintains the greenback’s pre-eminence.

But as Mr. Carney noted last month, this convenience has a downside: When the dollar appreciates, debt denominated in dollars becomes more expensive for foreign businesses. At the same time, the price of those countries’ imports rises, which can feed inflation.

Because of the dollar’s status and the fact that economies are more interconnected than ever, dozens of countries are essentially beholden to U.S. fiscal and monetary policy. Fluctuations in the dollar’s value feed through credit markets, causing surges and withdrawals of capital that can cause financial crises in emerging markets.

“U.S. developments have significant spillovers onto both the trade performance and financial conditions of countries with even relatively limited direct exposure to the U.S. economy,” Mr. Carney said.

One countermeasure to that dynamic could be a “synthetic hegemonic currency,” as Mr. Carney called it, a fancier term for a global public cryptocurrency. The currency he proposed would be based on a basket of reliable currencies, including the dollar and China’s renminbi....

For the Chinese, digitizing the renminbi is a way to get out from under the U.S.’s thumb, says Eswar Prasad, an economics professor at Cornell University and former head of the IMF’s China Division. China’s goal isn’t necessarily to overthrow the dollar, he says. But they want to give their allies an alternative to the dollar and create a system that couldn’t be disrupted by the U.S.

“Would the Chinese like to be less vulnerable to American sanctions? Happier if they didn’t have to use the dollar for their imports and exports? The answer to that is unambiguously yes,” he says.

China‘s digital currency would differ significantly from the bitcoin model, with the central bank keeping control of the money supply and tracking users’ identities.

The people and companies behind private cryptocurrencies believe their assets will still have value even if countries move to digitize their national currencies. People around the world won’t want to give up the anonymity and privacy associated with cryptocurrency, they say, even if they are pushed into using solely electronic forms of cash.

“What you end up with is a situation where the government has potentially perfect surveillance into all the financial flows in the entire economy,” says Travis Scher, vice president of investments at Digital Currency Group, owner of the digital-currency trading firm Genesis Trading. “In a world where a country like China issues its own digital currency and tries to move the entire economy onto that, it actually will increase demand for cryptocurrencies and digital currencies that are more private and create the potential for more autonomy.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coming-currency-war-digital-money-vs-the-dollar-11569204540

Another big issue is that I don't think the government knows where it fits into all of this. My guess is that the US will create a digital US dollar that will become the only accepted stable coin. Companies and private entities will be able to create whatever cryptocurrencies they want, but there will only be government-approved cryptocurrencies that can be redeemed for digital US dollars, which will be the only accepted form of payment for taxes, property, government subsidies, salaries and other major expenses.

This is a problem of fungibility, aka exchangeability. Think of it the same way you'd have trouble exchanging any points from rewards programs that you might have into dollars. You can't pay fines, taxes, or salaries with your frequent flyer miles. However, you can trade certain collectibles, like comics, sports cards, or artwork, and "redeem" dollar, but that is only possible if others value your collectible. A middle ground there is something like a gift card, which you could get someone to buy from you for dollars, but the person would have to be committed to spending their money in that particular shop. What cryptocurrencies could do is make all those gift cards, frequent flyer miles, rewards programs points...etc more easily exchangeable. For example, maybe you have a bunch of Delta tokens (miles) built up, but only American flies to where you are going. You could exchange your Delta tokens with someone who has American Airlines tokens (miles) in order to purchase your flight.

All that said, you have this interesting article which shows the dangers of this converging of tech and finance:

The lines between banks and tech companies are blurring. And this makes it all the more confusing that tech companies and banks both refer to customers’ preferences when justifying their divergent corporate decisions about brick-and-mortar storefronts. Tech companies lack the waning public trust of retail banking institutions; however, they are delivering financial products and services over which banks are used to having exclusive control. Because tech companies and banks increasingly share a customer base, the apparent contradictions in corporate decisions to open and close retail stores can’t be explained away by within-industry changes in people’s preferences or consumption patterns.
One answer is that tech and finance industries are jockeying for control over new terrains and manipulating their economies of scale to extract new forms of value. This value extraction relies on and reifies a socially constructed racial hierarchy.

Since their inception, banks have relied on a racial hierarchy for generating profits and accumulating wealth. As Angela Glover Blackwell and Michael McAfee write, “Banks have been the underwriters of American racism.” Banks have financed the slave trade, funded local development to segregate cities, denied affordable mortgages to Black and brown borrowers, and charged Black and brown customers more for retail banking services.

Banks routinely compound the racialized costs of banking by refusing to make changes that would benefit their customers. For decades, banks have ignored people’s demands for the elimination of overdraft fees, free or low-cost checking accounts, and low-interest loans and mortgages that would have come at the expense of their bottom lines. While some banks have framed their recent decisions to discontinue overdraft fees as part of commitments to advance racial equity, these decisions coincide with competition from tech companies and threats of federal regulation and oversight. In actuality, retail banks spend about $60 million per year on lobbying efforts to avoid demands from public policymakers requiring them to offer affordable products and services...

The foreclosure of banking alternatives forces a reliance on technology that aids in the expansion of the surveillance state disproportionately into Black and brown communities. The prominence of tech companies in the virtual space, combined with the retraction of banks in the physical space, creates new conditions for extractive finance and predatory surveillance. Like payday lenders and check cashers that occupy communities exploited and abandoned by banks, tech companies capitalize on the vulnerabilities and truancies of our institutions.

Not only are tech companies expanding into brick-and-mortar retail stores; they are competing with banks in the delivery of financial products and services, such as by providing checking account and payment services and loan underwriting. Tech companies’ financial products and services activities comprise a growing share of their revenue—about 12 percent of revenue in 2019 among the largest companies, including Amazon and Meta. And there is every indication that tech companies will continue to increase their revenue from these activities....

Private companies operating under racial capitalism have always been able to find the regulatory loopholes, and tech companies’ operations are arguably much harder to scrutinize than retail banking institutions. Tech companies have already proven nimble at evading federal rules designed for retail banks, setting up the potential for similar conditions that have plagued payday-lending regulation for decades. And regulatory strategies have never fully redressed banks’ racial discrimination, which bodes ominous since tech companies knowingly rely on racist algorithms and data.

https://prospect.org/economy/banks-tech-companies-jockey-for-economic-control/


Here are some other articles that talk a bit about the regulation challenges:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/17/business/economy/federal-reserve-virtual-currency-stablecoin.html

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-central-banks-want-to-create-their-own-digital-currencies-like-bitcoin-11603291131

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/23/us/politics/cryptocurrency-regulators-rules.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/05/us/politics/cryptocurrency-banking-regulation.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/05/us/politics/cryptocurrency-explainer.html

Thanks. It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. I recently began taking an interest in it after I discovered that "crypto" was buying up many of the old abandoned manufacturing plants in Buffalo, a city I'm considering moving to. Then I read that new NYC Mayor Adams is a big crypto supporter and wants NYC to the be the crypto hub of the world. I don't trust his intellect or his moral character whatsoever.

You guys kicked our asses tonight. The Heat are very well coached and play like a championship caliber team.

[SA37]

Spoiler:

Thanks for your response. Very helpful. What do you think about the regulation aspect of this? And how will disputes be resolved? In the federal courts?

Well, now you're starting to dig a bit deeper into my ignorance.

If the US can parlay this into continued dominance of the US dollar, it will make moves to do that, including pushing its allies (UK, EU, Australia) to not accept certain forms of payment. The biggest concerns seems to be the US dollar losing its status as the world's reserve currency, which gives it enormous political and financial power over the rest of the world...

While securities trading and other financial transactions may appear instantaneous, many back-end processes still move at a snail’s pace in rigid sequences set decades ago. A mortgage payment isn’t completed when the funds leave the homeowner’s bank account. Those funds have many hands to go through before they come to rest, days or weeks later. Through tokenization, many of these cumbersome and costly processes can be streamlined with better market information, greater certainty and enhanced security.

The potential efficiency improvements to the current system are enormous, including billions of dollars annually in reduced frictions and increased consumer choice. End-to-end tokenization of sovereign currencies, securities, loans, real estate, mortgages, pledges, and related payments and credit is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for both entrepreneurs and nimble incumbents. It is also an existential threat to those who are slow to adapt.

What is government’s role? Regulation is essential to our financial markets, and there is no doubt that tokenized financial assets should be regulated to ensure financial stability, promote capital formation, prevent illicit activity, and protect consumers. But there is more the U.S. government must do. Innovators must have assurances that if they follow time-tested regulatory principles, they will be free to pursue the market opportunities provided by better functionality. The government should actively facilitate the adoption of technology in core U.S. dollar funding and payments markets. This is a matter of national security and financial stability.

The most important financial market in the world, the U.S. Treasury market, is a government market. Virtually all other financial markets, at home and abroad, have some tie to the U.S. Treasury market, including the cash in our wallets and the entries in our bank accounts. A central bank’s digital currency, or “digital dollar” is the tail of the dog. Financial regulators, in tandem with the private sector, should be focusing on the dog.

Dollar primacy and stability are critical to global economic development, financial stability and U.S. national security. In the face of broad technological change, primacy of the U.S. dollar is by no means certain. China views this technological shift as an opportunity not only to achieve operational efficiencies but to extend the reach and influence of yuan-based payments and lending. Chinese authorities are driving digitization and tokenization in their core payment and credit markets, allowing greater government monitoring and control. And there is no doubt Chinese leadership plans to extend similar practices to international trade and finance, expanding their influence over global commerce. The U.S. must recognize the reserve currency race is on, and winning is the only rational objective.

We have a head start in both traditional markets and new tokenized markets. More than 95% of stablecoins by value are based on the U.S. dollar. In other words, at the incipient stages of this global shift in financial technology, dollars—actually U.S. Treasury securities—have remained the preferred liquid store of value for new and traditional markets. But stability and leadership can erode quickly in times of technological change. Another nation seizing control of global credit and payment systems would not only affect our global standing but also could destabilize the global financial system.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-future-depends-on-blockchain-crypto-bitcoin-payments-transfers-federal-reserve-11639668586

...and the US's ability to have a continue to be the central hub of globalized finance through their banking sector:

national digital currencies could make it harder for private cryptocurrencies to catch on. Because government e-cash would be operated, backed and controlled directly by central banks, it likely would be viewed as more reliable than privately created cryptocurrencies, which operate on decentralized networks of users and fluctuate wildly in value.

Perhaps most significantly, a world of competing national digital currencies could set up a new kind of currency war. The U.S. dollar has been the world’s dominant currency since the 1920s. But if national digital currencies allow for faster, cheaper money transfers across borders, viable alternatives to the U.S. dollar could emerge, embraced by nations and monetary officials concerned about the dollar’s outsize influence on the global economy.

“Technological developments provide the potential for such a world to emerge,” Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, said in an August speech at the Federal Reserve’s annual symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyo. He highlighted the risks of the current dollar-dominant system, and sketched out an alternative where a new digital currency backed by a large group of nations, or even multiple currencies, vied with the dollar...

The one that might beat them all to the punch is the People’s Bank of China. The PBOC is expected to launch a digital version of China’s national currency, the yuan, later this year or early in 2020. If it does, it would be the first major global currency to become digitized.

The benefits of digitization could be myriad. In addition to faster and cheaper money transfers across borders, a survey conducted by the International Monetary Fund found that central banks are looking at benefits like lower costs, more efficient monetary policy, blunting competition from bitcoin and its peers, and offering a risk-free payment network to the public....

The total market capitalization of bitcoin, the most popular form of digital currency, has grown dramatically since its creation in 2009, but still lags far behind the total value of U.S. dollars in circulation.

U.S. cash in circulation continues to grow apace, as seen in the expansion of M1, a basic money supply gauge that measures funds that are readily available for spending, including checking accounts that pay interest and those that don't, and currency.

The result could be a sweeping change in the international financial system, affecting, among other things, how nations trade.

The country that is first to introduce a digital currency that is more easily stored and used abroad than its physical counterpart will have “a first-mover advantage to greater currency use, though not necessarily to reserve currency use,” says Tommaso Mancini Griffoli, deputy division chief of the IMF’s central bank operations division.

The increasing interest in national digital currencies dovetails with a changing marketplace. Developing nations increasingly make up a larger percentage of global gross domestic product while the U.S. share shrinks.

The dollar’s hegemony made sense after World War II, when the U.S. accounted for 28% of global exports. Now, the figure is just 8.8%, according to the IMF. Yet the dollar still dominates international trade. Around 40% of world trade is invoiced in dollars, roughly four times the U.S. share of world trade, according to data from Gita Gopinath, a Harvard University professor who is now the IMF’s chief economist. And the dollar is used in 88% of all foreign-exchange trades world-wide, according to the Bank for International Settlements.

The dollar isn’t going to lose its position overnight, Mr. Carney said at the August gathering. But bankers should be thinking about a post-dollar world now, he added, rather than waiting for the next crisis to force change.

The dollar’s status as the lingua franca of international business provides benefits: Companies in places like Argentina can export goods to Turkey, and get paid in dollars. Because those dollars are deposited in local banks, they can be lent to companies. In fact, because there are so many dollar deposits, it’s actually cheaper for overseas businesses to borrow in the U.S. currency, creating a feedback loop that maintains the greenback’s pre-eminence.

But as Mr. Carney noted last month, this convenience has a downside: When the dollar appreciates, debt denominated in dollars becomes more expensive for foreign businesses. At the same time, the price of those countries’ imports rises, which can feed inflation.

Because of the dollar’s status and the fact that economies are more interconnected than ever, dozens of countries are essentially beholden to U.S. fiscal and monetary policy. Fluctuations in the dollar’s value feed through credit markets, causing surges and withdrawals of capital that can cause financial crises in emerging markets.

“U.S. developments have significant spillovers onto both the trade performance and financial conditions of countries with even relatively limited direct exposure to the U.S. economy,” Mr. Carney said.

One countermeasure to that dynamic could be a “synthetic hegemonic currency,” as Mr. Carney called it, a fancier term for a global public cryptocurrency. The currency he proposed would be based on a basket of reliable currencies, including the dollar and China’s renminbi....

For the Chinese, digitizing the renminbi is a way to get out from under the U.S.’s thumb, says Eswar Prasad, an economics professor at Cornell University and former head of the IMF’s China Division. China’s goal isn’t necessarily to overthrow the dollar, he says. But they want to give their allies an alternative to the dollar and create a system that couldn’t be disrupted by the U.S.

“Would the Chinese like to be less vulnerable to American sanctions? Happier if they didn’t have to use the dollar for their imports and exports? The answer to that is unambiguously yes,” he says.

China‘s digital currency would differ significantly from the bitcoin model, with the central bank keeping control of the money supply and tracking users’ identities.

The people and companies behind private cryptocurrencies believe their assets will still have value even if countries move to digitize their national currencies. People around the world won’t want to give up the anonymity and privacy associated with cryptocurrency, they say, even if they are pushed into using solely electronic forms of cash.

“What you end up with is a situation where the government has potentially perfect surveillance into all the financial flows in the entire economy,” says Travis Scher, vice president of investments at Digital Currency Group, owner of the digital-currency trading firm Genesis Trading. “In a world where a country like China issues its own digital currency and tries to move the entire economy onto that, it actually will increase demand for cryptocurrencies and digital currencies that are more private and create the potential for more autonomy.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coming-currency-war-digital-money-vs-the-dollar-11569204540

Another big issue is that I don't think the government knows where it fits into all of this. My guess is that the US will create a digital US dollar that will become the only accepted stable coin. Companies and private entities will be able to create whatever cryptocurrencies they want, but there will only be government-approved cryptocurrencies that can be redeemed for digital US dollars, which will be the only accepted form of payment for taxes, property, government subsidies, salaries and other major expenses.

This is a problem of fungibility, aka exchangeability. Think of it the same way you'd have trouble exchanging any points from rewards programs that you might have into dollars. You can't pay fines, taxes, or salaries with your frequent flyer miles. However, you can trade certain collectibles, like comics, sports cards, or artwork, and "redeem" dollar, but that is only possible if others value your collectible. A middle ground there is something like a gift card, which you could get someone to buy from you for dollars, but the person would have to be committed to spending their money in that particular shop. What cryptocurrencies could do is make all those gift cards, frequent flyer miles, rewards programs points...etc more easily exchangeable. For example, maybe you have a bunch of Delta tokens (miles) built up, but only American flies to where you are going. You could exchange your Delta tokens with someone who has American Airlines tokens (miles) in order to purchase your flight.

All that said, you have this interesting article which shows the dangers of this converging of tech and finance:

The lines between banks and tech companies are blurring. And this makes it all the more confusing that tech companies and banks both refer to customers’ preferences when justifying their divergent corporate decisions about brick-and-mortar storefronts. Tech companies lack the waning public trust of retail banking institutions; however, they are delivering financial products and services over which banks are used to having exclusive control. Because tech companies and banks increasingly share a customer base, the apparent contradictions in corporate decisions to open and close retail stores can’t be explained away by within-industry changes in people’s preferences or consumption patterns.
One answer is that tech and finance industries are jockeying for control over new terrains and manipulating their economies of scale to extract new forms of value. This value extraction relies on and reifies a socially constructed racial hierarchy.

Since their inception, banks have relied on a racial hierarchy for generating profits and accumulating wealth. As Angela Glover Blackwell and Michael McAfee write, “Banks have been the underwriters of American racism.” Banks have financed the slave trade, funded local development to segregate cities, denied affordable mortgages to Black and brown borrowers, and charged Black and brown customers more for retail banking services.

Banks routinely compound the racialized costs of banking by refusing to make changes that would benefit their customers. For decades, banks have ignored people’s demands for the elimination of overdraft fees, free or low-cost checking accounts, and low-interest loans and mortgages that would have come at the expense of their bottom lines. While some banks have framed their recent decisions to discontinue overdraft fees as part of commitments to advance racial equity, these decisions coincide with competition from tech companies and threats of federal regulation and oversight. In actuality, retail banks spend about $60 million per year on lobbying efforts to avoid demands from public policymakers requiring them to offer affordable products and services...

The foreclosure of banking alternatives forces a reliance on technology that aids in the expansion of the surveillance state disproportionately into Black and brown communities. The prominence of tech companies in the virtual space, combined with the retraction of banks in the physical space, creates new conditions for extractive finance and predatory surveillance. Like payday lenders and check cashers that occupy communities exploited and abandoned by banks, tech companies capitalize on the vulnerabilities and truancies of our institutions.

Not only are tech companies expanding into brick-and-mortar retail stores; they are competing with banks in the delivery of financial products and services, such as by providing checking account and payment services and loan underwriting. Tech companies’ financial products and services activities comprise a growing share of their revenue—about 12 percent of revenue in 2019 among the largest companies, including Amazon and Meta. And there is every indication that tech companies will continue to increase their revenue from these activities....

Private companies operating under racial capitalism have always been able to find the regulatory loopholes, and tech companies’ operations are arguably much harder to scrutinize than retail banking institutions. Tech companies have already proven nimble at evading federal rules designed for retail banks, setting up the potential for similar conditions that have plagued payday-lending regulation for decades. And regulatory strategies have never fully redressed banks’ racial discrimination, which bodes ominous since tech companies knowingly rely on racist algorithms and data.

https://prospect.org/economy/banks-tech-companies-jockey-for-economic-control/


Here are some other articles that talk a bit about the regulation challenges:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/17/business/economy/federal-reserve-virtual-currency-stablecoin.html

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-central-banks-want-to-create-their-own-digital-currencies-like-bitcoin-11603291131

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/23/us/politics/cryptocurrency-regulators-rules.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/05/us/politics/cryptocurrency-banking-regulation.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/05/us/politics/cryptocurrency-explainer.html

Thanks. It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. I recently began taking an interest in it after I discovered that "crypto" was buying up many of the old abandoned manufacturing plants in Buffalo, a city I'm considering moving to. Then I read that new NYC Mayor Adams is a big crypto supporter and wants NYC to the be the crypto hub of the world. I don't trust his intellect or his moral character whatsoever.

You guys kicked our asses tonight. The Heat are very well coached and play like a championship caliber team.

Oh...that is probably not a good sign I hadn't heard about that happening, but given the amount of big players who have gotten into crypto and more and more news revealing that these big players own 90+% of all Bitcoin...etc, it makes sense.

I think your instincts on Adams are probably spot-on.

Appreciate comments. Miami has been outstanding this year despite a ton of injuries. I expected Strus to become a rotation player, but he has played better than anyone could have imagined. The guy who has been the most surprising is PJ Tucker.

It's a rough year for the Knicks. Hopefully Reddish will work out for you all.

[HarthorneWingo]

Spoiler:

Well, now you're starting to dig a bit deeper into my ignorance.

If the US can parlay this into continued dominance of the US dollar, it will make moves to do that, including pushing its allies (UK, EU, Australia) to not accept certain forms of payment. The biggest concerns seems to be the US dollar losing its status as the world's reserve currency, which gives it enormous political and financial power over the rest of the world...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-future-depends-on-blockchain-crypto-bitcoin-payments-transfers-federal-reserve-11639668586

...and the US's ability to have a continue to be the central hub of globalized finance through their banking sector:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coming-currency-war-digital-money-vs-the-dollar-11569204540

Another big issue is that I don't think the government knows where it fits into all of this. My guess is that the US will create a digital US dollar that will become the only accepted stable coin. Companies and private entities will be able to create whatever cryptocurrencies they want, but there will only be government-approved cryptocurrencies that can be redeemed for digital US dollars, which will be the only accepted form of payment for taxes, property, government subsidies, salaries and other major expenses.

This is a problem of fungibility, aka exchangeability. Think of it the same way you'd have trouble exchanging any points from rewards programs that you might have into dollars. You can't pay fines, taxes, or salaries with your frequent flyer miles. However, you can trade certain collectibles, like comics, sports cards, or artwork, and "redeem" dollar, but that is only possible if others value your collectible. A middle ground there is something like a gift card, which you could get someone to buy from you for dollars, but the person would have to be committed to spending their money in that particular shop. What cryptocurrencies could do is make all those gift cards, frequent flyer miles, rewards programs points...etc more easily exchangeable. For example, maybe you have a bunch of Delta tokens (miles) built up, but only American flies to where you are going. You could exchange your Delta tokens with someone who has American Airlines tokens (miles) in order to purchase your flight.

All that said, you have this interesting article which shows the dangers of this converging of tech and finance:



https://prospect.org/economy/banks-tech-companies-jockey-for-economic-control/


Here are some other articles that talk a bit about the regulation challenges:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/17/business/economy/federal-reserve-virtual-currency-stablecoin.html

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-central-banks-want-to-create-their-own-digital-currencies-like-bitcoin-11603291131

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/23/us/politics/cryptocurrency-regulators-rules.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/05/us/politics/cryptocurrency-banking-regulation.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/05/us/politics/cryptocurrency-explainer.html

Thanks. It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out. I recently began taking an interest in it after I discovered that "crypto" was buying up many of the old abandoned manufacturing plants in Buffalo, a city I'm considering moving to. Then I read that new NYC Mayor Adams is a big crypto supporter and wants NYC to the be the crypto hub of the world. I don't trust his intellect or his moral character whatsoever.

You guys kicked our asses tonight. The Heat are very well coached and play like a championship caliber team.

Oh...that is probably not a good sign I hadn't heard about that happening, but given the amount of big players who have gotten into crypto and more and more news revealing that these big players own 90+% of all Bitcoin...etc, it makes sense.

I think your instincts on Adams are probably spot-on.

Appreciate comments. Miami has been outstanding this year despite a ton of injuries. I expected Strus to become a rotation player, but he has played better than anyone could have imagined. The guy who has been the most surprising is PJ Tucker.

It's a rough year for the Knicks. Hopefully Reddish will work out for you all.

From the NYT today (headline) … like What Da Fck!

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/27/business/crypto-price-bubble.html

It’s Hard to Tell When the Crypto Bubble Will Burst, or If There Is One

Crypto prices are highly volatile, as this week’s sell-off showed. But die-hard enthusiasts believe prices will keep soaring in a world where traditional notions of value don’t apply.

By Emily FlitterGraphics by Karl Russell
Jan. 27, 2022
Updated 7:37 a.m. ET

Since late November, some of the world’s savviest cryptocurrency investors have been hooked on a game that has cartoon sheep, cartoon wolves, a digital currency called $wool — and the potential to make real money.

Graham Friedman, a self-described crypto evangelist, is among them. Mr. Friedman put up more than $20,000 of his own money to buy one wolf and one sheep — or, rather, unique digital images of them called nonfungible tokens.

“I’m like, dude, the narrative is so cool,” said Mr. Friedman, a director at Republic Crypto, a digital asset strategy company. “I’m here for the waltz.”

Wolf Game, as it is called, applies some familiar financial principles to a mysterious digital world. Players can buy sheep from the creator of the game, identified only as “the Shepherd,” and lend them back to “the barn” — essentially a storehouse — to earn interest. The payments are in $wool, a digital token that can be used as a form of payment anywhere on the Ethereum blockchain, on which the game is built. To get a sheep back from the barn, players must pay a 20 percent tax in $wool to those who bought digital images of cartoon wolves.

When Wolf Game’s creator discovered that the game was vulnerable to hackers and shut it down temporarily to fix its code, freezing everyone’s assets, players had little recourse. They simply had to wait and hope that the game would come back online and that they would be able to retrieve their holdings. This spooked some participants, who got out as fast as they could once the game was running again. But others, including Mr. Friedman, kept playing.

“Getting in there when it looked sort of damaged and reputationally unsure turned out to be very smart,” Mr. Friedman said. By essentially buying the dip, he had tripled his investment to $60,000 as of January.

-more-
.

[SA37]

Spoiler:

From the NYT today (headline) … like What Da Fck!

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/27/business/crypto-price-bubble.html

It’s Hard to Tell When the Crypto Bubble Will Burst, or If There Is One

Crypto prices are highly volatile, as this week’s sell-off showed. But die-hard enthusiasts believe prices will keep soaring in a world where traditional notions of value don’t apply.

By Emily FlitterGraphics by Karl Russell
Jan. 27, 2022
Updated 7:37 a.m. ET

Since late November, some of the world’s savviest cryptocurrency investors have been hooked on a game that has cartoon sheep, cartoon wolves, a digital currency called $wool — and the potential to make real money.

Graham Friedman, a self-described crypto evangelist, is among them. Mr. Friedman put up more than $20,000 of his own money to buy one wolf and one sheep — or, rather, unique digital images of them called nonfungible tokens.

“I’m like, dude, the narrative is so cool,” said Mr. Friedman, a director at Republic Crypto, a digital asset strategy company. “I’m here for the waltz.”

Wolf Game, as it is called, applies some familiar financial principles to a mysterious digital world. Players can buy sheep from the creator of the game, identified only as “the Shepherd,” and lend them back to “the barn” — essentially a storehouse — to earn interest. The payments are in $wool, a digital token that can be used as a form of payment anywhere on the Ethereum blockchain, on which the game is built. To get a sheep back from the barn, players must pay a 20 percent tax in $wool to those who bought digital images of cartoon wolves.

When Wolf Game’s creator discovered that the game was vulnerable to hackers and shut it down temporarily to fix its code, freezing everyone’s assets, players had little recourse. They simply had to wait and hope that the game would come back online and that they would be able to retrieve their holdings. This spooked some participants, who got out as fast as they could once the game was running again. But others, including Mr. Friedman, kept playing.

“Getting in there when it looked sort of damaged and reputationally unsure turned out to be very smart,” Mr. Friedman said. By essentially buying the dip, he had tripled his investment to $60,000 as of January.

-more-
.

A very interesting article. The end of it is just insane and goes to your question about regulation.

Here is an article from today's WSJ (you need a subscription, though) about how people who are involved one way or another with crypto are using Ether or Bitcoin to buy multi-million dollar homes:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/crypto-kings-are-the-real-estate-industrys-newest-whales-11643298936

[HarthorneWingo]

Spoiler:

From the NYT today (headline) … like What Da Fck!

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/27/business/crypto-price-bubble.html

It’s Hard to Tell When the Crypto Bubble Will Burst, or If There Is One

Crypto prices are highly volatile, as this week’s sell-off showed. But die-hard enthusiasts believe prices will keep soaring in a world where traditional notions of value don’t apply.

By Emily FlitterGraphics by Karl Russell
Jan. 27, 2022
Updated 7:37 a.m. ET

Since late November, some of the world’s savviest cryptocurrency investors have been hooked on a game that has cartoon sheep, cartoon wolves, a digital currency called $wool — and the potential to make real money.

Graham Friedman, a self-described crypto evangelist, is among them. Mr. Friedman put up more than $20,000 of his own money to buy one wolf and one sheep — or, rather, unique digital images of them called nonfungible tokens.

“I’m like, dude, the narrative is so cool,” said Mr. Friedman, a director at Republic Crypto, a digital asset strategy company. “I’m here for the waltz.”

Wolf Game, as it is called, applies some familiar financial principles to a mysterious digital world. Players can buy sheep from the creator of the game, identified only as “the Shepherd,” and lend them back to “the barn” — essentially a storehouse — to earn interest. The payments are in $wool, a digital token that can be used as a form of payment anywhere on the Ethereum blockchain, on which the game is built. To get a sheep back from the barn, players must pay a 20 percent tax in $wool to those who bought digital images of cartoon wolves.

When Wolf Game’s creator discovered that the game was vulnerable to hackers and shut it down temporarily to fix its code, freezing everyone’s assets, players had little recourse. They simply had to wait and hope that the game would come back online and that they would be able to retrieve their holdings. This spooked some participants, who got out as fast as they could once the game was running again. But others, including Mr. Friedman, kept playing.

“Getting in there when it looked sort of damaged and reputationally unsure turned out to be very smart,” Mr. Friedman said. By essentially buying the dip, he had tripled his investment to $60,000 as of January.

-more-
.

A very interesting article. The end of it is just insane and goes to your question about regulation.

Here is an article from today's WSJ (you need a subscription, though) about how people who are involved one way or another with crypto are using Ether or Bitcoin to buy multi-million dollar homes:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/crypto-kings-are-the-real-estate-industrys-newest-whales-11643298936

I don’t have a subscription to that. The big money grab is on.

[NYKinMIA]

Hey guys, would love the crypto enthusiasts here to pull up on the discord. We're a small group of professionals helping each other in this new asset space. /end promotion

But seriously if you want to chop it up and learn, https://discord.gg/RxYvksH3

Can you post another invite link bruh? Or pm it to me, please.
Thanks!

I thumbed up an anti-crypto post by accident on a previous page

I came for gains but stayed for the tech. So many people here are just ngmi, bye.

[Garbagelo]

Very wild day in crypto land

Afraid this might attract the most aggression from Congress and SEC

[NYKinMIA]

"National Security!?"

They're afraid now that Putin's down with mining and regulation they'll rule the hash rate and
and we'll fall way behind. Maybe



NOTE: for the uninitiated that haven't taken the time to ACTUALLY read, research, and learn about the space and feel like regurgitating "opinions" being passed off as truth, ask yourself this and then google it.

Why are the 1% of the world taking steps to secure billions in bitcoin in decommissioned military bunkers?
THAT shyt made me go "daaaaaaamn!" It's just one small sign that mass adoption IS looming and shyts gonna change,
and the rich still gonna rich.
But you do you.