The SEC Is Going To Try And Step Up Regulation
(Edited)
As expected, the SEC is going to try and increase the regulation on the crypto industry. Gary Gensler, the new chair was making the media rounds and believes that many cryptocurrencies are securities. This means that the SEC is going to look to regulate them. It is likely will lead to the exchanges being put under the thumb.
In this video I discuss how this is an example of how government was designed in a different era and is not trying to control something it is not made for.
▶️ 3Speak
0
0
0.000
Once more and more money gets involved and they start losing control of course they try and step in. What we need to remember is the government is not in control we fought wars for that shit many times. We know who abusive the government can be to it's population and how wasteful they are with money that is sent to them. Less taxes, less mega corps and we would all be in a better spot right now. Crypto is changing this and they seriously fear it.
There are for sure many new projects yet again though launching ICOs which directly makes them a security. I know of one that just recently launched and I'm just sitting over here like how the F are they getting away with this right now...
Well if they do it small, they fly under the radar. Plus, if enough are doing it they have to justify their time so they got after the big cases like Block.One where they can get a nice check out of the deal.
I agree. Crypto is allowing us to take control and basically tell them to kiss off. The more stuff that is decentralized, the harder it is for the government to step in.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
EXACTLY! The ONLY time the SEC gets involved to "investigate" something is when there is enough money that they and make their lawyers get paid as well as taking a huge cut for themselves. The investors hardly ever see any of it. The SEC is not there to protect people anymore instead it's another arm of the government to generate funds.
It is the same with the IRS.
They dont mess, typically, with the mega wealthy because those accounts and attorneys will tie things up forever. Nor do they go after the poor since there is no blood in a turnip.
But those with a few dollars, but not enough to hire the best legal beagles, they are targeted.
It is all about the bucks.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Like you said if its decentralized and people just make a ton of it, then they can't fight them fast enough. The only issue is whether or not the threats of law suits would scare off potential investors and creators. All you need to know is how Lbry and XRP were hit to see how they are trying to scare people off. But they are centralized entities so it is much easier for them to be targetted.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yes they were centralized. There is still effectiveness to what they do, there is no doubt about that. But as we see with India and Nigeria, there are enough people who do not care what their governments say. Thus, that is where the big crypto thrust will come from in my opinion.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I think it’s a money grab in the guise of regulation. It doesn’t benefit the people they are supposed to be protecting. It makes little difference to the hodler if a blockchain is a security or not. Well, actually, it does. CEL token, for example, is a registered security. Consequently, a US citizen has to buy it from DeFi exchanges. XRP is in that limbo, which makes buying it iffy. EOS, for the longest time was difficult to buy in the USA. BNB would be considered a security.
I just don’t see what advantage SEC protection gives the investor.
The SEC protects the establishment which, in this case, is the likes of Goldman Sachs.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
The sooner the better. Crypto is full of scams, fake exchanges that take the money and run and plenty of fake projects.
It's either they go full China and they try to regulate every little thing in your life or they will only succeed in eliminating the centralized weak points and end up with decentralized entities they can't control
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
It does appear they eliminated all middle ground.
Sad to see but that is what happens when entities are trying to stay relevant.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yup. You pretty much hit the nail on the head.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I wonder if this will lead to more companies creating separate entities for the American market, sort of like how Binance does it right now.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
My understanding is they (IRS) secured subpoena's for two US crypto exchanges. The exchanges have to hand over the information to the owners of the accounts. If the owners use fake names they said they have the tools to track them, they said one thing about crypto holders is they think they are untraceable but they said there is nothing further from the truth in that regard. What they are looking at is when a crypto is sold and the gains on the crypto's sold. So you can hold crypto's it's when you go to sell them.
Summary:
In this video, Task discusses the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and its role in regulating cryptocurrencies. He expresses skepticism towards the SEC's intentions, arguing that they primarily protect the interests of the rich and powerful rather than the investing public. Task highlights the decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies and how this challenges traditional regulatory bodies like the SEC. He emphasizes the limitations of regulators in controlling decentralized data stored on the blockchain, making it difficult for them to enforce regulations effectively. Task concludes by suggesting that the future advancements in technology will continue to outpace regulatory efforts in the cryptocurrency space.
Detailed Article:
The video focuses on Task's viewpoint on the SEC and their approach to regulating cryptocurrencies. He starts by mentioning the new head of the SEC, Gary Gensler, who Task believes is pushing for more regulation in the cryptocurrency space. Task expresses his distrust towards government regulators like the SEC, claiming that their primary allegiance lies with protecting established industries rather than individual investors.
Task emphasizes that cryptocurrencies, specifically Bitcoin, enable peer-to-peer transactions, which contrasts with traditional financial systems controlled by centralized entities like banks. He argues that the SEC's attempts to regulate cryptocurrencies stem from a desire to maintain control over the flow of financial data and protect investors, despite cryptocurrencies' decentralized and peer-to-peer nature.
The discussion then shifts towards the ineffectiveness of the SEC in truly protecting investors, as Task highlights the prevalence of fraud and scams in the cryptocurrency space. While acknowledging the necessity to combat fraudulent activities, Task criticizes the SEC's blanket classification of cryptocurrencies as securities and the ensuing restrictions on who can distribute them.
Task underscores the power of decentralization in cryptocurrencies, noting the difficulty regulators face in controlling data stored on blockchains without centralized servers. He predicts that the SEC's efforts to regulate the cryptocurrency industry will ultimately be futile due to the decentralized and constantly evolving nature of blockchain technology.
In conclusion, Task suggests that the SEC's endeavors to regulate cryptocurrencies will be challenged by the rapid advancements in technology, making it difficult for regulators to keep up with emerging trends like NFTs and DeFi. Task's overarching message is that decentralized technologies will continue to disrupt traditional regulatory structures, posing challenges for entities like the SEC in the years to come.