Bitcoin Blasts Below $10K, Following Senate Hearing on

What A Day: Stitt Down And Shut Up by Sarah Lazarus & Crooked Media (07/15/20)

"If it’s Goya, it has to be good." - Ivanka Trump, violating federal ethics rules

Bean Here Before

With hospitals filling up and businesses shutting back down across wide swaths of the country, the Trump administration seems to have no pandemic strategy beyond sowing confusion and flogging beans.
Meanwhile, life comes at you fast.
The Trump administration condemned the country to a second surge of infections by refusing to coordinate a national response, leaving even the best state leaders to adopt piecemeal solutions by trial and error. Rather than try a different tack the second time around, Trump has committed to undermining widely trusted health experts and hiding the data that makes even those local decisions possible.

Look No Further Than The Crooked Media

Last week the Adopt a State program sent out our first Call to Action emails, and (without a hint of bias here) Florida crushed it. Team Florida has already raised upwards of $42k to support a Virtual Voter Registration Program—that will help reach 400,000 Floridians, which could cover Trump's margin of victory almost four times over.
We'll be sending each state team new calls to action every week via email, so keep checking your inbox and getting those actions done. And if you haven’t already signed up, head on over to https://votesaveamerica.com/adopt and join the thousands of volunteers looking to flip some swing states.

Under The Radar

The new head of the Postal Service has implemented major operational changes that could slow down mail delivery. Postmaster General and Trump donor Louis DeJoy instructed employees to leave mail behind at distribution centers as needed to avoid delaying mail carriers from completing their routes, a change from postal workers’ traditional mandate to not leave letters behind for the next day. DeJoy cited the agency’s need to cut costs, but the decision could chase away more customers and put the Postal Service in a deeper financial hole. It could also prove disastrous in November, when voters could lose access to mail-in ballots due to slow delivery. The Treasury Department has continued to hold a $10 billion emergency loan hostage until USPS gives in to Trump’s political agenda, and Congress has yet to provide additional funding.

What Else?

President Trump’s lawyers have renewed their efforts to block the release of his tax returns, and now plan to argue that the Manhattan district attorney’s subpoena was too broad and politically motivated. While the Supreme Court slapped down Trump’s first legal claim, it left the door open for him to keep the returns in limbo indefinitely with fake new arguments.
Trump’s also not above straight up ignoring Supreme Court decisions. The administration is still rejecting new DACA applicants, in violation of last month’s ruling.
Some of the most high-profile accounts on Twitter were compromised by bitcoin scammers. Hackers took control of the accounts of Barack Obama, Jeff Bezos, Joe Biden, Elon Musk, Apple, and many more.
The largest U.S. banks have started stockpiling billions of dollars, reflecting their assumption that the recession won’t be easing anytime soon.
Jeff Sessions lost his Alabama Senate primary runoff to Tommy Tuberville, crushed under the presidential boots he never stopped licking Trump’s former physician Dr. Ronny Jackson won his GOP primary runoff for a Texas congressional seat, and Sara Gideon won the Democratic nomination to challenge Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). In the grander scheme, there are now at least 11 GOP congressional nominees who support QAnon and Republican leaders are quietly backing them.
Gov. Mike Parson (R-MO) said Trump will be “getting involved” in the case of the McCloskeys, the St. Louis couple who pointed guns at Black Lives Matter protesters. Trump passionately defended them on Tuesday, and, in a separate interview, downplayed police violence against Black people and defended the Confederate flag.
Ghislaine Maxwell has a secret husband, according to prosecutors at her bail hearing. Maxwell pleaded not guilty and was denied release on bail.
ViacomCBS cut ties with Nick Cannon over antisemitic comments he made on a podcast.
Kanye West’s presidential campaign to help Donald Trump win re-election has come to end, according to his advisor, though he just made it onto the ballot in Oklahoma, so as with all Kanye news, who the heck knows.
Attn PBS millennials: A Wishbone movie is in development. Our generation has been saddled with two recessions, 9/11, and the worst public health crisis in 100 years, but by god, we still have a Jack Russell Terrier who loves to read.

Be Smarter

Fatal drug overdoses are likely surging during the pandemic. Drug deaths in the U.S. reached record numbers in 2019 after falling the year before, and the pandemic may be worsening the resurgence. A report in May found overdose rates have increased by an average of 20 percent across six states in 2020, and recent drug tests have found a substantial increase in illicit drug use, as well as a geographic spread of fentanyl. Overdoses were increasing before the pandemic, but it’s definitely not helping: Social isolation puts addicts at greater risk, treatment centers have been disrupted, and people who have overdosed are more likely to avoid emergency rooms out of fear of infection.

What A Sponsor

Eco-Friendly Flowers for All! Brighten up your summer with vibrant flowers from The Bouqs Co. Think farm-fresh bouquets, simplified. Plus plants, gifts and even subscriptions that can bring smiles for months! Perfect for birthdays, anniversaries, friendship day or just because you put on pants today! The best part? Flowers from The Bouqs stay fresher, longer. Save 25% with code VOTEBOUQS.

Is That Hope I Feel?

SHE’S OUT OF THE HOSPITAL.
Leaders in Asheville, NC, voted unanimously to provide reparations to the city’s Black residents.
Virginia has become the first state to adopt statewide emergency workplace safety standards in response to the coronavirus.
British artist Marc Quinn erected a statue of a Black Lives Matter protester in Bristol, on the plinth that used to hold a statue of slave trader Edward Colston.

Enjoy

XKCD Comics on Twitter: "COVID Risk Chart"
submitted by kittehgoesmeow to FriendsofthePod [link] [comments]

Binance us Phone Number 𝟭𝟴𝟰𝟰*𝟵𝟬𝟳*𝟬𝟱𝟴𝟯 get solution from avavava90

Binance us Phone Number 𝟭𝟴𝟰𝟰*𝟵𝟬𝟳*𝟬𝟱𝟴𝟯 get solution from avavava90.Zhao said Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 isn't a traditional company, more a large team of people "that works together for a common goal." He added: "To be honest, if we classified as a DAO, then there's going to be a lot of debate about why we're not a DAO. So I don't want to go there, either."
"I mean nobody would call you guys a DAO," Shin said, likely disappointed that this wasn't the interview where Zhao made his big reveal.
Time was up. For an easy question to close, Shin asked where Zhao was working from during the coronavirus pandemic.
"I'm in Asia," Zhao said. The blank white wall behind him didn't provide any clues about where in Asia he might be. Shin asked if he could say which country – after all, it's the Earth's largest continent.
"I prefer not to disclose that. I think that's my own privacy," he cut in, ending the interview.
It was a provocative way to start the biggest cryptocurrency and blockchain event of the year.
In the opening session of Consensus: Distributed this week, Lawrence Summers was asked by my co-host Naomi Brockwell about protecting people’s privacy once currencies go digital. His answer: “I think the problems we have now with money involve too much privacy.”
President Clinton’s former Treasury secretary, now President Emeritus at Harvard, referenced the 500-euro note, which bore the nickname “The Bin Laden,” to argue the un-traceability of cash empowers wealthy criminals to finance themselves. “Of all the important freedoms,” he continued, “the ability to possess, transfer and do business with multi-million dollar sums of money anonymously seems to me to be one of the least important.” Summers ended the segment by saying that “if I have provoked others, I will have served my purpose.”
You’re reading Money Reimagined, a weekly look at the technological, economic and social events and trends that are redefining our relationship with money and transforming the global financial system. You can subscribe to this and all of CoinDesk’s newsletters here.
That he did. Among the more than 20,000 registered for the weeklong virtual experience was a large contingent of libertarian-minded folks who see state-backed monitoring of their money as an affront to their property rights.
But with due respect to a man who has had prodigious influence on international economic policymaking, it’s not wealthy bitcoiners for whom privacy matters. It matters for all humanity and, most importantly, for the poor.
Now, as the world grapples with how to collect and disseminate public health information in a way that both saves lives and preserves civil liberties, the principle of privacy deserves to be elevated in importance.
Just this week, the U.S. Senate voted to extend the 9/11-era Patriot Act and failed to pass a proposed amendment to prevent the Federal Bureau of Investigation from monitoring our online browsing without a warrant. Meanwhile, our heightened dependence on online social connections during COVID-19 isolation has further empowered a handful of internet platforms that are incorporating troves of our personal data into sophisticated predictive behavior models. This process of hidden control is happening right now, not in some future "Westworld"-like existence.
Digital currencies will only worsen this situation. If they are added to this comprehensive surveillance infrastructure, it could well spell the end of the civil liberties that underpin Western civilization.
Yes, freedom matters
Please don’t read this, Secretary Summers, as some privileged anti-taxation take or a self-interested what’s-mine-is-mine demand that “the government stay away from my money.”
Money is just the instrument here. What matters is whether our transactions, our exchanges of goods and services and the source of our economic and social value, should be monitored and manipulated by government and corporate owners of centralized databases. It’s why critics of China’s digital currency plans rightly worry about a “panopticon” and why, in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, there was an initial backlash against Facebook launching its libra currency.
Writers such as Shoshana Zuboff and Jared Lanier have passionately argued that our subservience to the hidden algorithms of what I like to call “GoogAzonBook” is diminishing our free will. Resisting that is important, not just to preserve the ideal of “the self” but also to protect the very functioning of society.
Markets, for one, are pointless without free will. In optimizing resource allocation, they presume autonomy among those who make up the market. Free will, which I’ll define as the ability to lawfully transact on my own terms without knowingly or unknowingly acting in someone else’s interests to my detriment, is a bedrock of market democracies. Without a sufficient right to privacy, it disintegrates – and in the digital age, that can happen very rapidly.
Also, as I’ve argued elsewhere, losing privacy undermines the fungibility of money. Each digital dollar should be substitutable for another. If our transactions carry a history and authorities can target specific notes or tokens for seizure because of their past involvement in illicit activity, then some dollars become less valuable than other dollars.
The excluded
But to fully comprehend the harm done by encroachments into financial privacy, look to the world’s poor.
An estimated 1.7 billion adults are denied a bank account because they can’t furnish the information that banks’ anti-money laundering (AML) officers need, either because their government’s identity infrastructure is untrusted or because of the danger to them of furnishing such information to kleptocratic regimes. Unable to let banks monitor them, they’re excluded from the global economy’s dominant payment and savings system – victims of a system that prioritizes surveillance over privacy.
Misplaced priorities also contribute to the “derisking” problem faced by Caribbean and Latin American countries, where investment inflows have slowed and financial costs have risen in the past decade. America’s gatekeeping correspondent banks, fearful of heavy fines like the one imposed on HSBC for its involvement in a money laundering scandal, have raised the bar on the kind of personal information that regional banks must obtain from their local clients.
And where’s the payoff? Despite this surveillance system, the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that between $800 billion and $2 trillion, or 2%-5% of global gross domestic product, is laundered annually worldwide. The Panama Papers case shows how the rich and powerful easily use lawyers, shell companies, tax havens and transaction obfuscation to get around surveillance. The poor are just excluded from the system.
Caring about privacy
Solutions are coming that wouldn’t require abandoning law enforcement efforts. Self-sovereign identity models and zero-knowledge proofs, for example, grant control over data to the individuals who generate it, allowing them to provide sufficient proof of a clean record without revealing sensitive personal information. But such innovations aren’t getting nearly enough attention.
Few officials inside developed country regulatory agencies seem to acknowledge the cost of cutting off 1.7 billion poor from the financial system. Yet, their actions foster poverty and create fertile conditions for terrorism and drug-running, the very crimes they seek to contain. The reaction to evidence of persistent money laundering is nearly always to make bank secrecy laws even more demanding. Exhibit A: Europe’s new AML 5 directive.
To be sure, in the Consensus discussion that followed the Summers interview, it was pleasing to hear another former U.S. official take a more accommodative view of privacy. Former Commodities and Futures Trading Commission Chairman Christopher Giancarlo said that “getting the privacy balance right” is a “design imperative” for the digital dollar concept he is actively promoting.
But to hold both governments and corporations to account on that design, we need an aware, informed public that recognizes the risks of ceding their civil liberties to governments or to GoogAzonBook.
Let’s talk about this, people.
A missing asterisk
Control for all variables. At the end of the day, the dollar’s standing as the world’s reserve currency ultimately comes down to how much the rest of the world trusts the United States to continue its de facto leadership of the world economy. In the past, that assessment was based on how well the U.S. militarily or otherwise dealt with human- and state-led threats to international commerce such as Soviet expansionism or terrorism. But in the COVID-19 era only one thing matters: how well it is leading the fight against the pandemic.
So if you’ve already seen the charts below and you’re wondering what they’re doing in a newsletter about the battle for the future of money, that’s why. They were inspired by a staged White House lawn photo-op Tuesday, where President Trump was flanked by a huge banner that dealt quite literally with a question of American leadership. It read, “America Leads the World in Testing.” That’s a claim that’s technically correct, but one that surely demands a big red asterisk. When you’re the third-largest country by population – not to mention the richest – having the highest number of tests is not itself much of an achievement. The claim demands a per capita adjustment. Here’s how things look, first in absolute terms, then adjusted for tests per million inhabitants.
Binance support number 𝐈𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 has frozen funds linked to Upbit’s prior $50 million data breach after the hackers tried to liquidate a part of the gains. In a recent tweet, Whale Alert warned Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 that a transaction of 137 ETH (about $28,000) had moved from an address linked to the Upbit hacker group to its wallets.
Less than an hour after the transaction was flagged, Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 announced that the exchange had frozen the funds. He also added that Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 is getting in touch with Upbit to investigate the transaction. In November 2019, Upbit suffered an attack in which hackers stole 342,000 ETH, accounting for approximately $50 million. The hackers managed to take the
submitted by avavava90 to u/avavava90 [link] [comments]

Binance us Customer helpline 𝟭𝟴𝟰𝟰*𝟵𝟬𝟳*𝟬𝟱𝟴𝟯 avavava90 from us dial now

Binance us Customer helpline 𝟭𝟴𝟰𝟰*𝟵𝟬𝟳*𝟬𝟱𝟴𝟯 avavava90 from us dial now.Zhao said Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 isn't a traditional company, more a large team of people "that works together for a common goal." He added: "To be honest, if we classified as a DAO, then there's going to be a lot of debate about why we're not a DAO. So I don't want to go there, either."
"I mean nobody would call you guys a DAO," Shin said, likely disappointed that this wasn't the interview where Zhao made his big reveal.
Time was up. For an easy question to close, Shin asked where Zhao was working from during the coronavirus pandemic.
"I'm in Asia," Zhao said. The blank white wall behind him didn't provide any clues about where in Asia he might be. Shin asked if he could say which country – after all, it's the Earth's largest continent.
"I prefer not to disclose that. I think that's my own privacy," he cut in, ending the interview.
It was a provocative way to start the biggest cryptocurrency and blockchain event of the year.
In the opening session of Consensus: Distributed this week, Lawrence Summers was asked by my co-host Naomi Brockwell about protecting people’s privacy once currencies go digital. His answer: “I think the problems we have now with money involve too much privacy.”
President Clinton’s former Treasury secretary, now President Emeritus at Harvard, referenced the 500-euro note, which bore the nickname “The Bin Laden,” to argue the un-traceability of cash empowers wealthy criminals to finance themselves. “Of all the important freedoms,” he continued, “the ability to possess, transfer and do business with multi-million dollar sums of money anonymously seems to me to be one of the least important.” Summers ended the segment by saying that “if I have provoked others, I will have served my purpose.”
You’re reading Money Reimagined, a weekly look at the technological, economic and social events and trends that are redefining our relationship with money and transforming the global financial system. You can subscribe to this and all of CoinDesk’s newsletters here.
That he did. Among the more than 20,000 registered for the weeklong virtual experience was a large contingent of libertarian-minded folks who see state-backed monitoring of their money as an affront to their property rights.
But with due respect to a man who has had prodigious influence on international economic policymaking, it’s not wealthy bitcoiners for whom privacy matters. It matters for all humanity and, most importantly, for the poor.
Now, as the world grapples with how to collect and disseminate public health information in a way that both saves lives and preserves civil liberties, the principle of privacy deserves to be elevated in importance.
Just this week, the U.S. Senate voted to extend the 9/11-era Patriot Act and failed to pass a proposed amendment to prevent the Federal Bureau of Investigation from monitoring our online browsing without a warrant. Meanwhile, our heightened dependence on online social connections during COVID-19 isolation has further empowered a handful of internet platforms that are incorporating troves of our personal data into sophisticated predictive behavior models. This process of hidden control is happening right now, not in some future "Westworld"-like existence.
Digital currencies will only worsen this situation. If they are added to this comprehensive surveillance infrastructure, it could well spell the end of the civil liberties that underpin Western civilization.
Yes, freedom matters
Please don’t read this, Secretary Summers, as some privileged anti-taxation take or a self-interested what’s-mine-is-mine demand that “the government stay away from my money.”
Money is just the instrument here. What matters is whether our transactions, our exchanges of goods and services and the source of our economic and social value, should be monitored and manipulated by government and corporate owners of centralized databases. It’s why critics of China’s digital currency plans rightly worry about a “panopticon” and why, in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, there was an initial backlash against Facebook launching its libra currency.
Writers such as Shoshana Zuboff and Jared Lanier have passionately argued that our subservience to the hidden algorithms of what I like to call “GoogAzonBook” is diminishing our free will. Resisting that is important, not just to preserve the ideal of “the self” but also to protect the very functioning of society.
Markets, for one, are pointless without free will. In optimizing resource allocation, they presume autonomy among those who make up the market. Free will, which I’ll define as the ability to lawfully transact on my own terms without knowingly or unknowingly acting in someone else’s interests to my detriment, is a bedrock of market democracies. Without a sufficient right to privacy, it disintegrates – and in the digital age, that can happen very rapidly.
Also, as I’ve argued elsewhere, losing privacy undermines the fungibility of money. Each digital dollar should be substitutable for another. If our transactions carry a history and authorities can target specific notes or tokens for seizure because of their past involvement in illicit activity, then some dollars become less valuable than other dollars.
The excluded
But to fully comprehend the harm done by encroachments into financial privacy, look to the world’s poor.
An estimated 1.7 billion adults are denied a bank account because they can’t furnish the information that banks’ anti-money laundering (AML) officers need, either because their government’s identity infrastructure is untrusted or because of the danger to them of furnishing such information to kleptocratic regimes. Unable to let banks monitor them, they’re excluded from the global economy’s dominant payment and savings system – victims of a system that prioritizes surveillance over privacy.
Misplaced priorities also contribute to the “derisking” problem faced by Caribbean and Latin American countries, where investment inflows have slowed and financial costs have risen in the past decade. America’s gatekeeping correspondent banks, fearful of heavy fines like the one imposed on HSBC for its involvement in a money laundering scandal, have raised the bar on the kind of personal information that regional banks must obtain from their local clients.
And where’s the payoff? Despite this surveillance system, the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that between $800 billion and $2 trillion, or 2%-5% of global gross domestic product, is laundered annually worldwide. The Panama Papers case shows how the rich and powerful easily use lawyers, shell companies, tax havens and transaction obfuscation to get around surveillance. The poor are just excluded from the system.
Caring about privacy
Solutions are coming that wouldn’t require abandoning law enforcement efforts. Self-sovereign identity models and zero-knowledge proofs, for example, grant control over data to the individuals who generate it, allowing them to provide sufficient proof of a clean record without revealing sensitive personal information. But such innovations aren’t getting nearly enough attention.
Few officials inside developed country regulatory agencies seem to acknowledge the cost of cutting off 1.7 billion poor from the financial system. Yet, their actions foster poverty and create fertile conditions for terrorism and drug-running, the very crimes they seek to contain. The reaction to evidence of persistent money laundering is nearly always to make bank secrecy laws even more demanding. Exhibit A: Europe’s new AML 5 directive.
To be sure, in the Consensus discussion that followed the Summers interview, it was pleasing to hear another former U.S. official take a more accommodative view of privacy. Former Commodities and Futures Trading Commission Chairman Christopher Giancarlo said that “getting the privacy balance right” is a “design imperative” for the digital dollar concept he is actively promoting.
But to hold both governments and corporations to account on that design, we need an aware, informed public that recognizes the risks of ceding their civil liberties to governments or to GoogAzonBook.
Let’s talk about this, people.
A missing asterisk
Control for all variables. At the end of the day, the dollar’s standing as the world’s reserve currency ultimately comes down to how much the rest of the world trusts the United States to continue its de facto leadership of the world economy. In the past, that assessment was based on how well the U.S. militarily or otherwise dealt with human- and state-led threats to international commerce such as Soviet expansionism or terrorism. But in the COVID-19 era only one thing matters: how well it is leading the fight against the pandemic.
So if you’ve already seen the charts below and you’re wondering what they’re doing in a newsletter about the battle for the future of money, that’s why. They were inspired by a staged White House lawn photo-op Tuesday, where President Trump was flanked by a huge banner that dealt quite literally with a question of American leadership. It read, “America Leads the World in Testing.” That’s a claim that’s technically correct, but one that surely demands a big red asterisk. When you’re the third-largest country by population – not to mention the richest – having the highest number of tests is not itself much of an achievement. The claim demands a per capita adjustment. Here’s how things look, first in absolute terms, then adjusted for tests per million inhabitants.
Binance support number 𝐈𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 has frozen funds linked to Upbit’s prior $50 million data breach after the hackers tried to liquidate a part of the gains. In a recent tweet, Whale Alert warned Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 that a transaction of 137 ETH (about $28,000) had moved from an address linked to the Upbit hacker group to its wallets.
Less than an hour after the transaction was flagged, Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 announced that the exchange had frozen the funds. He also added that Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 is getting in touch with Upbit to investigate the transaction. In November 2019, Upbit suffered an attack in which hackers stole 342,000 ETH, accounting for approximately $50 million. The hackers managed to take the
submitted by avavava90 to u/avavava90 [link] [comments]

Binance Phone Number 𝟏𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 vibhgdshgd Call us

Binance Phone Number 𝟏𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 vibhgdshgd Call Us
Zhao said Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 isn't a traditional company, more a large team of people "that works together for a common goal." He added: "To be honest, if we classified as a DAO, then there's going to be a lot of debate about why we're not a DAO. So I don't want to go there, either."
"I mean nobody would call you guys a DAO," Shin said, likely disappointed that this wasn't the interview where Zhao made his big reveal.
Time was up. For an easy question to close, Shin asked where Zhao was working from during the coronavirus pandemic.
"I'm in Asia," Zhao said. The blank white wall behind him didn't provide any clues about where in Asia he might be. Shin asked if he could say which country – after all, it's the Earth's largest continent.
"I prefer not to disclose that. I think that's my own privacy," he cut in, ending the interview.
It was a provocative way to start the biggest cryptocurrency and blockchain event of the year.
In the opening session of Consensus: Distributed this week, Lawrence Summers was asked by my co-host Naomi Brockwell about protecting people’s privacy once currencies go digital. His answer: “I think the problems we have now with money involve too much privacy.”
President Clinton’s former Treasury secretary, now President Emeritus at Harvard, referenced the 500-euro note, which bore the nickname “The Bin Laden,” to argue the un-traceability of cash empowers wealthy criminals to finance themselves. “Of all the important freedoms,” he continued, “the ability to possess, transfer and do business with multi-million dollar sums of money anonymously seems to me to be one of the least important.” Summers ended the segment by saying that “if I have provoked others, I will have served my purpose.”
You’re reading Money Reimagined, a weekly look at the technological, economic and social events and trends that are redefining our relationship with money and transforming the global financial system. You can subscribe to this and all of CoinDesk’s newsletters here.
That he did. Among the more than 20,000 registered for the weeklong virtual experience was a large contingent of libertarian-minded folks who see state-backed monitoring of their money as an affront to their property rights.
But with due respect to a man who has had prodigious influence on international economic policymaking, it’s not wealthy bitcoiners for whom privacy matters. It matters for all humanity and, most importantly, for the poor.
Now, as the world grapples with how to collect and disseminate public health information in a way that both saves lives and preserves civil liberties, the principle of privacy deserves to be elevated in importance.
Just this week, the U.S. Senate voted to extend the 9/11-era Patriot Act and failed to pass a proposed amendment to prevent the Federal Bureau of Investigation from monitoring our online browsing without a warrant. Meanwhile, our heightened dependence on online social connections during COVID-19 isolation has further empowered a handful of internet platforms that are incorporating troves of our personal data into sophisticated predictive behavior models. This process of hidden control is happening right now, not in some future "Westworld"-like existence.
Digital currencies will only worsen this situation. If they are added to this comprehensive surveillance infrastructure, it could well spell the end of the civil liberties that underpin Western civilization.
Yes, freedom matters
Please don’t read this, Secretary Summers, as some privileged anti-taxation take or a self-interested what’s-mine-is-mine demand that “the government stay away from my money.”
Money is just the instrument here. What matters is whether our transactions, our exchanges of goods and services and the source of our economic and social value, should be monitored and manipulated by government and corporate owners of centralized databases. It’s why critics of China’s digital currency plans rightly worry about a “panopticon” and why, in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, there was an initial backlash against Facebook launching its libra currency.
Writers such as Shoshana Zuboff and Jared Lanier have passionately argued that our subservience to the hidden algorithms of what I like to call “GoogAzonBook” is diminishing our free will. Resisting that is important, not just to preserve the ideal of “the self” but also to protect the very functioning of society.
Markets, for one, are pointless without free will. In optimizing resource allocation, they presume autonomy among those who make up the market. Free will, which I’ll define as the ability to lawfully transact on my own terms without knowingly or unknowingly acting in someone else’s interests to my detriment, is a bedrock of market democracies. Without a sufficient right to privacy, it disintegrates – and in the digital age, that can happen very rapidly.
Also, as I’ve argued elsewhere, losing privacy undermines the fungibility of money. Each digital dollar should be substitutable for another. If our transactions carry a history and authorities can target specific notes or tokens for seizure because of their past involvement in illicit activity, then some dollars become less valuable than other dollars.
The excluded
But to fully comprehend the harm done by encroachments into financial privacy, look to the world’s poor.
An estimated 1.7 billion adults are denied a bank account because they can’t furnish the information that banks’ anti-money laundering (AML) officers need, either because their government’s identity infrastructure is untrusted or because of the danger to them of furnishing such information to kleptocratic regimes. Unable to let banks monitor them, they’re excluded from the global economy’s dominant payment and savings system – victims of a system that prioritizes surveillance over privacy.
Misplaced priorities also contribute to the “derisking” problem faced by Caribbean and Latin American countries, where investment inflows have slowed and financial costs have risen in the past decade. America’s gatekeeping correspondent banks, fearful of heavy fines like the one imposed on HSBC for its involvement in a money laundering scandal, have raised the bar on the kind of personal information that regional banks must obtain from their local clients.
And where’s the payoff? Despite this surveillance system, the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that between $800 billion and $2 trillion, or 2%-5% of global gross domestic product, is laundered annually worldwide. The Panama Papers case shows how the rich and powerful easily use lawyers, shell companies, tax havens and transaction obfuscation to get around surveillance. The poor are just excluded from the system.
Caring about privacy
Solutions are coming that wouldn’t require abandoning law enforcement efforts. Self-sovereign identity models and zero-knowledge proofs, for example, grant control over data to the individuals who generate it, allowing them to provide sufficient proof of a clean record without revealing sensitive personal information. But such innovations aren’t getting nearly enough attention.
Few officials inside developed country regulatory agencies seem to acknowledge the cost of cutting off 1.7 billion poor from the financial system. Yet, their actions foster poverty and create fertile conditions for terrorism and drug-running, the very crimes they seek to contain. The reaction to evidence of persistent money laundering is nearly always to make bank secrecy laws even more demanding. Exhibit A: Europe’s new AML 5 directive.
To be sure, in the Consensus discussion that followed the Summers interview, it was pleasing to hear another former U.S. official take a more accommodative view of privacy. Former Commodities and Futures Trading Commission Chairman Christopher Giancarlo said that “getting the privacy balance right” is a “design imperative” for the digital dollar concept he is actively promoting.
But to hold both governments and corporations to account on that design, we need an aware, informed public that recognizes the risks of ceding their civil liberties to governments or to GoogAzonBook.
Let’s talk about this, people.
A missing asterisk
Control for all variables. At the end of the day, the dollar’s standing as the world’s reserve currency ultimately comes down to how much the rest of the world trusts the United States to continue its de facto leadership of the world economy. In the past, that assessment was based on how well the U.S. militarily or otherwise dealt with human- and state-led threats to international commerce such as Soviet expansionism or terrorism. But in the COVID-19 era only one thing matters: how well it is leading the fight against the pandemic.
So if you’ve already seen the charts below and you’re wondering what they’re doing in a newsletter about the battle for the future of money, that’s why. They were inspired by a staged White House lawn photo-op Tuesday, where President Trump was flanked by a huge banner that dealt quite literally with a question of American leadership. It read, “America Leads the World in Testing.” That’s a claim that’s technically correct, but one that surely demands a big red asterisk. When you’re the third-largest country by population – not to mention the richest – having the highest number of tests is not itself much of an achievement. The claim demands a per capita adjustment. Here’s how things look, first in absolute terms, then adjusted for tests per million inhabitants.
Binance support number 𝐈𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 has frozen funds linked to Upbit’s prior $50 million data breach after the hackers tried to liquidate a part of the gains. In a recent tweet, Whale Alert warned Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 that a transaction of 137 ETH (about $28,000) had moved from an address linked to the Upbit hacker group to its wallets.
Less than an hour after the transaction was flagged, Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 announced that the exchange had frozen the funds. He also added that Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 is getting in touch with Upbit to investigate the transaction. In November 2019, Upbit suffered an attack in which hackers stole 342,000 ETH, accounting for approximately $50 million. The hackers managed to take the funds by transferring the ETH from Upbit’s hot wallet to an anonymous crypto address.
To kick off ConsenSys' Ethereal Summit on Thursday, Unchained Podcast host Laura Shin held a cozy fireside chat with Zhao who, to mark the occasion, was wearing a personalized football shirt emblazoned with the Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 brand. 𝐈𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑
Scheduled for 45 minutes, Zhao spent most of it explaining how libra and China's digital yuan were unlikely to be competitors to existing stablecoin providers; how Binance support number 1800-561-8025's smart chain wouldn't tread on Ethereum's toes – "that depends on the definition of competing," he said – and how Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑had an incentive to keep its newly acquired CoinMarketCap independent from the exchange.
There were only five minutes left on the clock. Zhao was looking confident; he had just batted away a thorny question about an ongoing lawsuit. It was looking like the home stretch.
Then it hit. Shin asked the one question Zhao really didn't want to have to answer, but many want to know: Where is Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 headquarters?
This seemingly simple question is actually more complex. Until February, Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 was considered to be based in Malta. That changed when the island European nation announced that, no, Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 is not under its jurisdiction. Since then Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 has not said just where, exactly, it is now headquartered.
Little wonder that when asked Zhao reddened; he stammered. He looked off-camera, possibly to an aide. "Well, I think what this is is the beauty of the blockchain, right, so you don't have to ... like where's the Bitcoin office, because Bitcoin doesn't have an office," he said.
The line trailed off, then inspiration hit. "What kind of horse is a car?" Zhao asked. Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 has loads of offices, he continued, with staff in 50 countries. It was a new type of organization that doesn't need registered bank accounts and postal addresses.
"Wherever I sit, is going to be the Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 office. Wherever I need somebody, is going to be the Binance support number 𝟖𝟒𝟒*𝟗𝟎𝟕*𝟎𝟓𝟖𝟑 office," he said.
Zhao may have been hoping the host would move onto something easier. But Shin wasn't finished: "But even to do things like to handle, you know, taxes for your employees, like, I think you need a registered business entity, so like why are you obfuscating it, why not just be open about it like, you know, the headquarters is registered in this place, why not just say that?"
Zhao glanced away again, possibly at the person behind the camera. Their program had less than two minutes remaining. "It's not that we don't want to admit it, it's not that we want to obfuscate it or we want to kind of hide it. We're not hiding, we're in the open," he said.
submitted by vibhgdshgd to u/vibhgdshgd [link] [comments]

Our COO @czhuling will join the #Binance 'Off the Charts' Live Panel

Our COO @czhuling will join the #Binance 'Off the Charts' Live Panel
Register here to view it live: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/binance-off-the-charts-virtual-conference-tickets-108855951080

Gold Sponsors: aelf, VITE, Elrond Network, Alchemy, IOST

https://preview.redd.it/qleatsyvnma51.png?width=1102&format=png&auto=webp&s=2eabbe1439f2140f871f7eecdf883305a8a9fc06
Binance presents the “Off the Charts!” Virtual Conference, on July 14, 2020, from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM (UTC).

About this Event

On July 14, 2020, join Binance as we kick off our third anniversary with one of the biggest blockchain events of the year.
Get the latest news and updates on all things blockchain and crypto, and take an exclusive look at what’s coming next at our “Off the Charts!” Virtual Conference, a blockbuster 10-hour live event with multi-regional programming that brings together 80+ influential speakers, including leading blockchain and crypto innovators, business and technology leaders, influential academics, and key policymakers.
Expect to hear the latest insights on the blockchain ecosystem from some of the industry’s most prominent leaders and visionaries. Join our can’t-miss event with powerful talks, breakthrough panels, opportunities to win prizes, and much more.
The “Off the Charts!” Virtual Conference will feature five segments with spotlights on regions making a significant impact in the space: Europe & the UK, Asia-Pacific, Russia & CIS, Africa & Middle East, and North America & LATAM.
Discover an array of keynotes, panels, and fireside chats, on these following themes and more:
  • Powering Crypto Growth: Local blockchain trends and evolving technologies that are transforming crypto awareness and adoption.
  • Crypto Meets Traditional Finance: Exploring opportunities for integrated and parallel development.
  • Blockchain and Global Health: Crypto’s appeal in today’s volatile environment.
  • Policy and Regulation: Spearheading community initiatives through cooperation and investment.
  • Trading Strategies and Technical Analysis: Training and insights to improve your trading.
Hear from these speakers and more:
  • Akon - Chairman & Co-Founder, Akoin
  • Cliff Liang - Director of Solutions Architecture, Amazon
  • David Ferrer Canosa - Secretary for Digital Policies, Government of Catalonia
  • Don Tapscott - Executive Chairman, The Blockchain Research Institute
  • Oleksandr Bornyakov - Deputy Minister, Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine
  • Perianne Boring - Founder and President, Chamber of Digital Commerce
  • Changpeng Zhao (CZ) - Founder & CEO, Binance
  • He Yi - Co-Founder & CMO, Binance
  • Aarón Olmos - Economist, Olmos Group Venezuela
  • Alex Saunders - CEO & Founder, Nugget's News
  • Anna Baydakova - Reporter, CoinDesk
  • Anton Mozgovoy - Head of Product, Jthereum
  • Apolline Blandin - Research Lead, Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance
  • Beniamin Mincu - CEO, Elrond
  • Bobby Ong - Co-founder, CoinGecko
  • Brendan Eich - CEO & Co-founder, Brave Software
  • Bruno Diniz - Managing Partner, Spiralem Innovation Consulting
  • Calvin Liu - Strategy Lead, Compound Labs
  • Camila Russo - Founder, The Defiant
  • Carlos Rischioto - Client Technical Leader & Blockchain SME, IBM
  • Carylyne Chan - Interim CEO, CoinMarketCap
  • Catherine Coley - CEO, Binance.US
  • Charles Hayter - CEO, CryptoCompare
  • Charles Hoskinson - Founder, Cardano
  • Charlie Shrem - Host, UntoldStories.Com
  • Chimezie Chuta - Founder, Blockchain Nigeria User Group
  • Darius Sit - Partner, QCP Capital
  • David Ferrer Canosa - Secretary for Digital Policies, Government of Catalonia
  • Denis Efremov - Investment Director, Da Vinci Capital
  • Don Tapscott - Executive Chairman, The Blockchain Research Institute
  • Eric Turner - VP, Market Intelligence, Messari
  • Erick Pinos - Americas Ecosystem Lead, Ontology
  • Ernesto Contreras Escalona - Head of Business Development, Dash Core Group
  • Eugene Mutai - CTO, Raise
  • Genping Liu - Partner, Vertex Ventures
  • Hany Rashwan - CEO, 21Shares AG
  • Harry Halpin - CEO, Nym Technologies
  • Hongfei Da - Founder, Neo
  • Igor Runets - CEO, BitRiver
  • İsmail Hakkı Polat - Cryptocurrency & Blockchain Lecturer, Istanbul Kadir Has University
  • Jamie Burke - CEO, Outlier Ventures
  • Jiho Kang - CEO, Binance.KR
  • John Izaguirre - Europe Ecosystem Lead, Ontology
  • John Khenneth Parungao - COO, SwipeWallet, Inc.
  • Jon Karas - President & Co-Founder, Akoin
  • Jorge Farias - CEO, Cryptobuyer
  • Joseph Hung - Director of Market Strategy, Klaytn
  • Joseph Lubin - CEO, ConsenSys
  • Juan Otero - CEO, Travala.com
  • Justin Sun - Founder, TRON & CEO, BitTorrent
  • Kristina Lucrezia Cornèr - Managing Editor & Head of Features, Cointelegraph
  • Ken Nakamura - CEO, GMO-Z.com Trust Company
  • Konstantin Goldstein - Principal Technical Evangelist, Microsoft
  • Kyle Samani - Managing Director, Multicoin Capital
  • Lucas Nuzzi - Head of Network Data, Coin Metrics
  • Mai Fujimoto "Miss Bitcoin" - Founder, KIZUNA
  • Matt Marx - Co-Founder, PhishFort
  • Meltem Demirors - Chief Strategy Officer, CoinShares
  • Mengdie Wang - CEO, Odaily
  • Michael Feng - CEO, Hummingbot
  • Michael Gu - Founder, Boxmining
  • Michelle Chivunga - Founder, Global Policy House
  • Mo Dong - Co-founder, Celer Network
  • Munachi Ogueke - Chief Business Officer, YellowCard Financial
  • Naveen Surya - Chairman, Fintech Convergence Council
  • Navin Gupta - MD MENA and South East Asia, Ripple
  • Nick White - Co-founder, Harmony
  • Nischal Shetty - CEO, WazirX
  • Pang Xue Kai - CEO, Tokocrypto
  • Paul Veradittakit - Partner, Pantera Capital
  • Perianne Boring - Founder and President, Chamber of Digital Commerce
  • Patrick Dai - CEO, Qtum Chain Foundation
  • Patrick Heusser - Senior Trader, Crypto Broker AG
  • Peter DeMeo - Global Market Development Leader, IBM
  • Priscila Yazbek - Editora de Finanças, InfoMoney
  • Rachel-Rose O'Leary - Researcher, Dark Renaissance Technologies
  • Rich Teo - Co-founder & CEO Asia, Paxos
  • Richard Yan - COO, Vite Labs
  • Robert Kopitsch - Secretary General, Blockchain for Europe
  • Roei Levav - CEO, Efficient Frontier
  • Rune Christensen - Co-founder, MakerDAO
  • Sam Bankman-Fried - CEO, FTX
  • Sandeep Nailwal - COO, Matic Network
  • Sean Rolland - Director of Product, BitPay
  • Senator Ihenyen - Lead Partner, Infusion Lawyers
  • Sergej Kunz - CEO, 1inch.exchange
  • Sergey Shayakhmetov - CBDO, Sberbank Blockchain Lab
  • Shi Shawn - Co-founder, Alchemy Pay
  • Sonya Kuhnel - COO, Xago & Co-Founder, Bitcoin Events & Blockchain Academy
  • Terry Wang - Co-founder, IOST
  • Thaise Saeter - CMO, Convex Research
  • Thamim Ahmed - Researcher, University College London
  • Tom Lee - Head of Research, Fundstrat Global Advisors
  • Tyler Spalding - CEO, Flexa
  • Veronica Wong - CEO, SafePal
  • Viktor Radchenko - Founder, Trust Wallet
  • Winpro Yan - Chief Editor, Mars Finance
  • Yele Bademosi - CEO, Bundle Africa
  • Zhuling Chen - COO, Aelf Blockchain
Stay tuned as speakers and more themes are announced in the coming weeks! For more details, read our blog post here and visit our event website here.
During the livestream, we will be holding special #BinanceTurns3 activities for viewers and giving away limited-edition prizes, swag, and collectible NFTs at various points throughout the livestream. Availability is limited! Register today!
Binance Awards 2020
Join Binance as we celebrate the standout innovators and businesses that have made sizable contributions, both to our community and to our blockchain ecosystem. Winners will be announced during our live event, and results will be published on our blog afterwards.
Register on Eventbrite today and tune in to the “Off the Charts” Virtual Conference on July 14, 2020, from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM (UTC).
--------
Thank you to our partners for helping make this event possible!
submitted by Floris-Jan to aelfofficial [link] [comments]

r/Bitcoin recap - December 2017

Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the twelfth monthly Bitcoin news recap. (Yes I'll keep doing these in 2018)
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best), memeless overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
You can find recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com
A recap of Bitcoin in December 2017
Thanks all for being part of the ride, it's been a great year for Bitcoin. Happy new year to you and I hope we can make 2018 even better!
submitted by SamWouters to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

US Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses – by Michael Hudson • 23 July 2019

https://outline.com/VM2DEM • 5,400 Words •
Today’s world is at war on many fronts. The rules of international law and order put in place toward the end of World War II are being broken by U.S. foreign policy escalating its confrontation with countries that refrain from giving its companies control of their economic surpluses. Countries that do not give the United States control of their oil and financial sectors or privatize their key sectors are being isolated by the United States imposing trade sanctions and unilateral tariffs giving special advantages to U.S. producers in violation of free trade agreements with European, Asian and other countries.
This global fracture has an increasingly military cast. U.S. officials justify tariffs and import quotas illegal under WTO rules on “national security” grounds, claiming that the United States can do whatever it wants as the world’s “exceptional” nation. U.S. officials explain that this means that their nation is not obliged to adhere to international agreements or even to its own treaties and promises. This allegedly sovereign right to ignore on its international agreements was made explicit after Bill Clinton and his Secretary of State Madeline Albright broke the promise by President George Bush and Secretary of State James Baker that NATO would not expand eastward after 1991. (“You didn’t get it in writing,” was the U.S. response to the verbal agreements that were made.)
Likewise, the Trump administration repudiated the multilateral Iranian nuclear agreement signed by the Obama administration, and is escalating warfare with its proxy armies in the Near East. U.S. politicians are waging a New Cold War against Russia, China, Iran, and oil-exporting countries that the United States is seeking to isolate if cannot control their governments, central bank and foreign diplomacy.
The international framework that originally seemed equitable was pro-U.S. from the outset. In 1945 this was seen as a natural result of the fact that the U.S. economy was the least war-damaged and held by far most of the world’s monetary gold. Still, the postwar trade and financial framework was ostensibly set up on fair and equitable international principles. Other countries were expected to recover and grow, creating diplomatic, financial and trade parity with each other.
But the past decade has seen U.S. diplomacy become one-sided in turning the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, SWIFT bank-clearing system and world trade into an asymmetrically exploitative system. This unilateral U.S.-centered array of institutions is coming to be widely seen not only as unfair, but as blocking the progress of other countries whose growth and prosperity is seen by U.S. foreign policy as a threat to unilateral U.S. hegemony. What began as an ostensibly international order to promote peaceful prosperity has turned increasingly into an extension of U.S. nationalism, predatory rent-extraction and a more dangerous military confrontation.
Deterioration of international diplomacy into a more nakedly explicit pro-U.S. financial, trade and military aggression was implicit in the way in which economic diplomacy was shaped when the United Nations, IMF and World Bank were shaped mainly by U.S. economic strategists. Their economic belligerence is driving countries to withdraw from the global financial and trade order that has been turned into a New Cold War vehicle to impose unilateral U.S. hegemony. Nationalistic reactions are consolidating into new economic and political alliances from Europe to Asia.
We are still mired in the Oil War that escalated in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq, which quickly spread to Libya and Syria. American foreign policy has long been based largely on control of oil. This has led the United States to oppose the Paris accords to stem global warming. Its aim is to give U.S. officials the power to impose energy sanctions forcing other countries to “freeze in the dark” if they do not follow U.S. leadership.
To expand its oil monopoly, America is pressuring Europe to oppose the Nordstream II gas pipeline from Russia, claiming that this would make Germany and other countries dependent on Russia instead of on U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG). Likewise, American oil diplomacy has imposed unilateral sanctions against Iranian oil exports, until such time as a regime change opens up that country’s oil reserves to U.S., French, British and other allied oil majors.
U.S. control of dollarized money and credit is critical to this hegemony. As Congressman Brad Sherman of Los Angeles told a House Financial Services Committee hearing on May 9, 2019: “An awful lot of our international power comes from the fact that the U.S. dollar is the standard unit of international finance and transactions. Clearing through the New York Fed is critical for major oil and other transactions. It is the announced purpose of the supporters of cryptocurrency to take that power away from us, to put us in a position where the most significant sanctions we have against Iran, for example, would become irrelevant.”[1]
The U.S. aim is to keep the dollar as the transactions currency for world trade, savings, central bank reserves and international lending. This monopoly status enables the U.S. Treasury and State Department to disrupt the financial payments system and trade for countries with which the United States is at economic or outright military war.
Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly responded by describing how “the degeneration of the universalist globalization model [is] turning into a parody, a caricature of itself, where common international rules are replaced with the laws… of one country.”[2] That is the trajectory on which this deterioration of formerly open international trade and finance is now moving. It has been building up for a decade. On June 5, 2009, then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev cited this same disruptive U.S. dynamic at work in the wake of the U.S. junk mortgage and bank fraud crisis.
Those whose job it was to forecast events … were not ready for the depth of the crisis and turned out to be too rigid, unwieldy and slow in their response. The international financial organisations – and I think we need to state this up front and not try to hide it – were not up to their responsibilities, as has been said quite unambiguously at a number of major international events such as the two recent G20 summits of the world’s largest economies.
Furthermore, we have had confirmation that our pre-crisis analysis of global economic trends and the global economic system were correct. The artificially maintained uni-polar system and preservation of monopolies in key global economic sectors are root causes of the crisis. One big centre of consumption, financed by a growing deficit, and thus growing debts, one formerly strong reserve currency, and one dominant system of assessing assets and risks – these are all factors that led to an overall drop in the quality of regulation and the economic justification of assessments made, including assessments of macroeconomic policy. As a result, there was no avoiding a global crisis.[3]
That crisis is what is now causing today’s break in global trade and payments.
Warfare on many fronts, with Dollarization being the main arena
Dissolution of the Soviet Union 1991 did not bring the disarmament that was widely expected. U.S. leadership celebrated the Soviet demise as signaling the end of foreign opposition to U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism and even as the End of History. NATO expanded to encircle Russia and sponsored “color revolutions” from Georgia to Ukraine, while carving up former Yugoslavia into small statelets. American diplomacy created a foreign legion of Wahabi fundamentalists from Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, Syria and Libya in support of Saudi Arabian extremism and Israeli expansionism.
The United States is waging war for control of oil against Venezuela, where a military coup failed a few years ago, as did the 2018-19 stunt to recognize an unelected pro-American puppet regime. The Honduran coup under President Obama was more successful in overthrowing an elected president advocating land reform, continuing the tradition dating back to 1954 when the CIA overthrew Guatemala’s Arbenz regime.
U.S. officials bear a special hatred for countries that they have injured, ranging from Guatemala in 1954 to Iran, whose regime it overthrew to install the Shah as military dictator. Claiming to promote “democracy,” U.S. diplomacy has redefined the word to mean pro-American, and opposing land reform, national ownership of raw materials and public subsidy of foreign agriculture or industry as an “undemocratic” attack on “free markets,” meaning markets controlled by U.S. financial interests and absentee owners of land, natural resources and banks.
A major byproduct of warfare has always been refugees, and today’s wave fleeing ISIS, Al Qaeda and other U.S.-backed Near Eastern proxies is flooding Europe. A similar wave is fleeing the dictatorial regimes backed by the United States from Honduras, Ecuador, Colombia and neighboring countries. The refugee crisis has become a major factor leading to the resurgence of nationalist parties throughout Europe and for the white nationalism of Donald Trump in the United States.
Dollarization as the vehicle for U.S. nationalism
The Dollar Standard – U.S. Treasury debt to foreigners held by the world’s central banks – has replaced the gold-exchange standard for the world’s central bank reserves to settle payments imbalances among themselves. This has enabled the United States to uniquely run balance-of-payments deficits for nearly seventy years, despite the fact that these Treasury IOUs have little visible likelihood of being repaid except under arrangements where U.S. rent-seeking and outright financial tribute from other enables it to liquidate its official foreign debt.
The United States is the only nation that can run sustained balance-of-payments deficits without having to sell off its assets or raise interest rates to borrow foreign money. No other national economy in the world can could afford foreign military expenditures on any major scale without losing its exchange value. Without the Treasury-bill standard, the United States would be in this same position along with other nations. That is why Russia, China and other powers that U.S. strategists deem to be strategic rivals and enemies are looking to restore gold’s role as the preferred asset to settle payments imbalances.
The U.S. response is to impose regime change on countries that prefer gold or other foreign currencies to dollars for their exchange reserves. A case in point is the overthrow of Libya’s Omar Kaddafi after he sought to base his nation’s international reserves on gold. His liquidation stands as a military warning to other countries.
Thanks to the fact that payments-surplus economies invest their dollar inflows in U.S. Treasury bonds, the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit finances its domestic budget deficit. This foreign central-bank recycling of U.S. overseas military spending into purchases of U.S. Treasury securities gives the United States a free ride, financing its budget – also mainly military in character – so that it can taxing its own citizens.
Trump is forcing other countries to create an alternative to the Dollar Standard
The fact that Donald Trump’s economic policies are proving ineffective in restoring American manufacturing is creating rising nationalist pressure to exploit foreigners by arbitrary tariffs without regard for international law, and to impose trade sanctions and diplomatic meddling to disrupt regimes that pursue policies that U.S. diplomats do not like.
There is a parallel here with Rome in the late 1st century BC. It stripped its provinces to pay for its military deficit, the grain dole and land redistribution at the expense of Italian cities and Asia Minor. This created foreign opposition to drive Rome out. The U.S. economy is similar to Rome’s: extractive rather than productive, based mainly on land rents and money-interest. As the domestic market is impoverished, U.S. politicians are seeking to take from abroad what no longer is being produced at home.
What is so ironic – and so self-defeating of America’s free global ride – is that Trump’s simplistic aim of lowering the dollar’s exchange rate to make U.S. exports more price-competitive. He imagines commodity trade to be the entire balance of payments, as if there were no military spending, not to mention lending and investment. To lower the dollar’s exchange rate, he is demanding that China’s central bank and those of other countries stop supporting the dollar by recycling the dollars they receive for their exports into holdings of U.S. Treasury securities.
This tunnel vision leaves out of account the fact that the trade balance is not simply a matter of comparative international price levels. The United States has dissipated its supply of spare manufacturing capacity and local suppliers of parts and materials, while much of its industrial engineering and skilled manufacturing labor has retired. An immense shortfall must be filled by new capital investment, education and public infrastructure, whose charges are far above those of other economics.
Trump’s infrastructure ideology is a Public-Private Partnership characterized by high-cost financialization demanding high monopoly rents to cover its interest charges, stock dividends and management fees. This neoliberal policy raises the cost of living for the U.S. labor force, making it uncompetitive. The United States is unable to produce more at any price right now, because its has spent the past half-century dismantling its infrastructure, closing down its part suppliers and outsourcing its industrial technology.
The United States has privatized and financialized infrastructure and basic needs such as public health and medical care, education and transportation that other countries have kept in their public domain to make their economies more cost-efficient by providing essential services at subsidized prices or freely. The United States also has led the practice of debt pyramiding, from housing to corporate finance. This financial engineering and wealth creation by inflating debt-financed real estate and stock market bubbles has made the United States a high-cost economy that cannot compete successfully with well-managed mixed economies.
Unable to recover dominance in manufacturing, the United States is concentrating on rent-extracting sectors that it hopes monopolize, headed by information technology and military production. On the industrial front, it threatens to disrupt China and other mixed economies by imposing trade and financial sanctions.
The great gamble is whether these other countries will defend themselves by joining in alliances enabling them to bypass the U.S. economy. American strategists imagine their country to be the world’s essential economy, without whose market other countries must suffer depression. The Trump Administration thinks that There Is No Alternative (TINA) for other countries except for their own financial systems to rely on U.S. dollar credit.
To protect themselves from U.S. sanctions, countries would have to avoid using the dollar, and hence U.S. banks. This would require creation of a non-dollarized financial system for use among themselves, including their own alternative to the SWIFT bank clearing system. Table 1 lists some possible related defenses against U.S. nationalistic diplomacy.
As noted above, what also is ironic in President Trump’s accusation of China and other countries of artificially manipulating their exchange rate against the dollar (by recycling their trade and payments surpluses into Treasury securities to hold down their currency’s dollar valuation) involves dismantling the Treasury-bill standard. The main way that foreign economies have stabilized their exchange rate since 1971 has indeed been to recycle their dollar inflows into U.S. Treasury securities. Letting their currency’s value rise would threaten their export competitiveness against their rivals, although not necessarily benefit the United States.
Ending this practice leaves countries with the main way to protect their currencies from rising against the dollar is to reduce dollar inflows by blocking U.S. lending to domestic borrowers. They may levy floating tariffs proportioned to the dollar’s declining value. The U.S. has a long history since the 1920s of raising its tariffs against currencies that are depreciating: the American Selling Price (ASP) system. Other countries can impose their own floating tariffs against U.S. goods.
Trade dependency as an aim of the World Bank, IMF and US AID
The world today faces a problem much like what it faced on the eve of World War II. Like Germany then, the United States now poses the main threat of war, and equally destructive neoliberal economic regimes imposing austerity, economic shrinkage and depopulation. U.S. diplomats are threatening to destroy regimes and entire economies that seek to remain independent of this system, by trade and financial sanctions backed by direct military force.
Dedollarization will require creation of multilateral alternatives to U.S. “front” institutions such as the World Bank, IMF and other agencies in which the United States holds veto power to block any alternative policies deemed not to let it “win.” U.S. trade policy through the World Bank and U.S. foreign aid agencies aims at promoting dependency on U.S. food exports and other key commodities, while hiring U.S. engineering firms to build up export infrastructure to subsidize U.S. and other natural-resource investors.[4] The financing is mainly in dollars, providing risk-free bonds to U.S. and other financial institutions. The resulting commercial and financial “interdependency” has led to a situation in which a sudden interruption of supply would disrupt foreign economies by causing a breakdown in their chain of payments and production. The effect is to lock client countries into dependency on the U.S. economy and its diplomacy, euphemized as “promoting growth and development.”
U.S. neoliberal policy via the IMF imposes austerity and opposes debt writedowns. Its economic model pretends that debtor countries can pay any volume of dollar debt simply by reducing wages to squeeze more income out of the labor force to pay foreign creditors. This ignores the fact that solving the domestic “budget problem” by taxing local revenue still faces the “transfer problem” of converting it into dollars or other hard currencies in which most international debt is denominated. The result is that the IMF’s “stabilization” programs actually destabilize and impoverish countries forced into following its advice.
IMF loans support pro-U.S. regimes such as Ukraine, and subsidize capital flight by supporting local currencies long enough to enable U.S. client oligarchies to flee their currencies at a pre-devaluation exchange rate for the dollar. When the local currency finally is allowed to collapse, debtor countries are advised to impose anti-labor austerity. This globalizes the class war of capital against labor while keeping debtor countries on a short U.S. financial leash.
U.S. diplomacy is capped by trade sanctions to disrupt economies that break away from U.S. aims. Sanctions are a form of economic sabotage, as lethal as outright military warfare in establishing U.S. control over foreign economies. The threat is to impoverish civilian populations, in the belief that this will lead them to replace their governments with pro-American regimes promising to restore prosperity by selling off their domestic infrastructure to U.S. and other multinational investors.
chart hudson
There are alternatives, on many fronts
Militarily, today’s leading alternative to NATO expansionism is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), along with Europe following France’s example under Charles de Gaulle and withdrawing. After all, there is no real threat of military invasion today in Europe. No nation can occupy another without an enormous military draft and such heavy personnel losses that domestic protests would unseat the government waging such a war. The U.S. anti-war movement in the 1960s signaled the end of the military draft, not only in the United States but in nearly all democratic countries. (Israel, Switzerland, Brazil and North Korea are exceptions.)
The enormous spending on armaments for a kind of war unlikely to be fought is not really military, but simply to provide profits to the military industrial complex. The arms are not really to be used. They are simply to be bought, and ultimately scrapped. The danger, of course, is that these not-for-use arms actually might be used, if only to create a need for new profitable production.
Likewise, foreign holdings of dollars are not really to be spent on purchases of U.S. exports or investments. They are like fine-wine collectibles, for saving rather than for drinking. The alternative to such dollarized holdings is to create a mutual use of national currencies, and a domestic bank-clearing payments system as an alternative to SWIFT. Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela already are said to be developing a crypto-currency payments to circumvent U.S. sanctions and hence financial control.
In the World Trade Organization, the United States has tried to claim that any industry receiving public infrastructure or credit subsidy deserves tariff retaliation in order to force privatization. In response to WTO rulings that U.S. tariffs are illegally imposed, the United States “has blocked all new appointments to the seven-member appellate body in protest, leaving it in danger of collapse because it may not have enough judges to allow it to hear new cases.”[5] In the U.S. view, only privatized trade financed by private rather than public banks is “fair” trade.
An alternative to the WTO (or removal of its veto privilege given to the U.S. bloc) is needed to cope with U.S. neoliberal ideology and, most recently, the U.S. travesty claiming “national security” exemption to free-trade treaties, impose tariffs on steel, aluminum, and on European countries that circumvent sanctions on Iran or threaten to buy oil from Russia via the Nordstream II pipeline instead of high-cost liquified “freedom gas” from the United States.
In the realm of development lending, China’s bank along with its Belt and Road initiative is an incipient alternative to the World Bank, whose main role has been to promote foreign dependency on U.S. suppliers. The IMF for its part now functions as an extension of the U.S. Department of Defense to subsidize client regimes such as Ukraine while financially isolating countries not subservient to U.S. diplomacy.
To save debt-strapped economies suffering Greek-style austerity, the world needs to replace neoliberal economic theory with an analytic logic for debt writedowns based on the ability to pay. The guiding principle of the needed development-oriented logic of international law should be that no nation should be obliged to pay foreign creditors by having to sell of the public domain and rent-extraction rights to foreign creditors. The defining character of nationhood should be the fiscal right to tax natural resource rents and financial returns, and to create its own monetary system.
The United States refuses to join the International Criminal Court. To be effective, it needs enforcement power for its judgments and penalties, capped by the ability to bring charges of war crimes in the tradition of the Nuremberg tribunal. U.S. to such a court, combined with its military buildup now threatening World War III, suggests a new alignment of countries akin to the Non-Aligned Nations movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Non-aligned in this case means freedom from U.S. diplomatic control or threats.
Such institutions require a more realistic economic theory and philosophy of operations to replace the neoliberal logic for anti-government privatization, anti-labor austerity, and opposition to domestic budget deficits and debt writedowns. Today’s neoliberal doctrine counts financial late fees and rising housing prices as adding to “real output” (GDP), but deems public investment as deadweight spending, not a contribution to output. The aim of such logic is to convince governments to pay their foreign creditors by selling off their public infrastructure and other assets in the public domain.
Just as the “capacity to pay” principle was the foundation stone of the Bank for International Settlements in 1931, a similar basis is needed to measure today’s ability to pay debts and hence to write down bad loans that have been made without a corresponding ability of debtors to pay. Without such an institution and body of analysis, the IMF’s neoliberal principle of imposing economic depression and falling living standards to pay U.S. and other foreign creditors will impose global poverty.
The above proposals provide an alternative to the U.S. “exceptionalist” refusal to join any international organization that has a say over its affairs. Other countries must be willing to turn the tables and isolate U.S. banks, U.S. exporters, and to avoid using U.S. dollars and routing payments via U.S. banks. To protect their ability to create a countervailing power requires an international court and its sponsoring organization.
Summary
The first existential objective is to avoid the current threat of war by winding down U.S. military interference in foreign countries and removing U.S. military bases as relics of neocolonialism. Their danger to world peace and prosperity threatens a reversion to the pre-World War II colonialism, ruling by client elites along lines similar to the 2014 Ukrainian coup by neo-Nazi groups sponsored by the U.S. State Department and National Endowment for Democracy. Such control recalls the dictators that U.S. diplomacy established throughout Latin America in the 1950s. Today’s ethnic terrorism by U.S.-sponsored Wahabi-Saudi Islam recalls the behavior of Nazi Germany in the 1940s.
Global warming is the second major existentialist threat. Blocking attempts to reverse it is a bedrock of American foreign policy, because it is based on control of oil. So the military, refugee and global warming threats are interconnected.
The U.S. military poses the greatest immediate danger. Today’s warfare is fundamentally changed from what it used to be. Prior to the 1970s, nations conquering others had to invade and occupy them with armies recruited by a military draft. But no democracy in today’s world can revive such a draft without triggering widespread refusal to fight, voting the government out of power. The only way the United States – or other countries – can fight other nations is to bomb them. And as noted above, economic sanctions have as destructive an effect on civilian populations in countries deemed to be U.S. adversaries as overt warfare. The United States can sponsor political coups (as in Honduras and Pinochet’s Chile), but cannot occupy. It is unwilling to rebuild, to say nothing of taking responsibility for the waves of refugees that our bombing and sanctions are causing from Latin America to the Near East.
U.S. ideologues view their nation’s coercive military expansion and political subversion and neoliberal economic policy of privatization and financialization as an irreversible victory signaling the End of History. To the rest of the world it is a threat to human survival.
The American promise is that the victory of neoliberalism is the End of History, offering prosperity to the entire world. But beneath the rhetoric of free choice and free markets is the reality of corruption, subversion, coercion, debt peonage and neofeudalism. The reality is the creation and subsidy of polarized economies bifurcated between a privileged rentier class and its clients, their debtors and renters. America is to be permitted to monopolize trade in oil and food grains, and high-technology rent-yielding monopolies, living off its dependent customers. Unlike medieval serfdom, people subject to this End of History scenario can choose to live wherever they want. But wherever they live, they must take on a lifetime of debt to obtain access to a home of their own, and rely on U.S.-sponsored control of their basic needs, money and credit by adhering to U.S. financial planning of their economies. This dystopian scenario confirms Rosa Luxemburg’s recognition that the ultimate choice facing nations in today’s world is between socialism and barbarism.
Keynote Paper delivered at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy, July 21, 2019.
Notes
[1] Billy Bambrough, “Bitcoin Threatens To ‘Take Power’ From The U.S. Federal Reserve,” Forbes, May 15, 2019. https://www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/05/15/a-u-s-congressman-is-so-scared-of-bitcoin-and-crypto-he-wants-it-banned/#36b2700b6405.
[2] Vladimir Putin, keynote address to the Economic Forum, June 5-6 2019. Putin went on to warn of “a policy of completely unlimited economic egoism and a forced breakdown.” This fragmenting of the global economic space “is the road to endless conflict, trade wars and maybe not just trade wars. Figuratively, this is the road to the ultimate fight of all against all.”
[3] Address to St Petersburg International Economic Forum’s Plenary Session, St Petersburg, Kremlin.ru, June 5, 2009, from Johnson’s Russia List, June 8, 2009, #8,
[4] https://www.rt.com/business/464013-china-russia-cryptocurrency-dollar-dethrone/ . Already in the late 1950s the Forgash Plan proposed a World Bank for Economic Acceleration. Designed by Terence McCarthy and sponsored by Florida Senator Morris Forgash, the bank would have been a more truly development-oriented institution to guide foreign development to create balanced economies self-sufficient in food and other essentials. The proposal was opposed by U.S. interests on the ground that countries pursuing land reform tended to be anti-American. More to the point, they would have avoided trade and financial dependency on U.S. suppliers and banks, and hence on U.S. trade and financial sanctions to prevent them from following policies at odds with U.S. diplomatic demands.
[5] Don Weinland, “WTO rules against US in tariff dispute with China,” Financial Times, July 17, 2019.
https://xenagoguevicene.wordpress.com/2019/07/29/u-s-economic-warfare-and-likely-foreign-defenses-by-michael-hudson-%e2%80%a2-23-july-2019/
submitted by finnagains to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Charts, emotions, and crystal balls

We see a lot of "technical analysis" on here concerning the market. I don't need to beat a dead horse and point out that much of it is emotional. As in:
We also see a TON of:
Often we get an analysis based on current news and world events. The central bank of China debacle, Silk Road, Senate hearings, that website with naked cleaning ladies, etc. (the important stuff).
I feel that the above three analyses (plural form of analysis, who knew?) constitute the bulk of the discussion on here. I think most people agree that the first example where people predict markets based on what they hope will happen is neither cool nor helpful to anyone. These comments usually get called out or downvoted to oblivion so they don't warrant much more discussion.
The second example seems to have become the majority of analysis on here. Every day this sub is flooded with pictures of charts showing different trends and geometric shapes that spell doom. Understand, I'm excluding EMA's from this type of analysis because they are used to make different points and I typically don't see the same person discussing EMA's and hamburger vs hotdog shaped graphs. It seemed that a month ago when people posted different charts and associated their resemblance of the bat-signal with an inevitable crash or rise, they got downvoted or discouraged from posting those. Have those downvoters been overrun by the volume of newcomers? Have those downvoters changed their mind? Am I high? My intention here isn't to pick a fight with people posting these things, but I would really appreciate it if someone could provide some real life examples of how the "hamburger" graph consistently means death. The fact that someone named it and wrote about it on investopedia doesn't really instill any confidence in me. My knee jerk reaction is that this type of analysis is wildly inconsistent. Were people right about the crash this weekend? Yes. Was that because the graph looked like two boobs and they knew it would happen? I don't think so. I think it was because of the ambiguous China news/panic selling/general overdueness of simmering down.
Most of us probably agree that BTC and cryptocurrencies in general are an entirely new beast. Comparing them to other markets’ trends/patterns seems futile. Even then, I’d be really interested to see the real world application where graph types “A,B,C or D,” are consistently used with success.
With all of this being said, discussing the effect world news, regulations, changes, exchange upgrades or problems has (Edit) on the price of Bitcoin seems by far the most logical. These discussions are what I’ve paid the most attention to and found to be the most consistent when predicting the movement of the market. EMA's seem to work nicely too.
Disclaimer:
TL:DR; What’s your favorite pokemon?
EDIT2 Didn't realize I formatted something wonky. Durp.
EDIT3 Great discussion my friends. I really love that some peoples Pokemon selections are being downvoted. Hysterical!
submitted by LibertyFive3000 to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] r/Bitcoin recap - December 2017

The following post by SamWouters is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been silently removed.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/7nebna
The original post's content was as follows:
Hi Bitcoiners!
I’m back with the twelfth monthly Bitcoin news recap. (Yes I'll keep doing these in 2018)
For those unfamiliar, each day I pick out the most popularelevant/interesting stories in bitcoin and save them. At the end of the month I release them in one batch, to give you a quick (but not necessarily the best), memeless overview of what happened in bitcoin over the past month.
You can find recaps of the previous months on Bitcoinsnippets.com
A recap of Bitcoin in December 2017
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

Is there a “face” of Bitcoin?

I’m relatively new to the crypto world, but I have been immersed in recent weeks on as deep a level as is possible without my body shutting down from lack of sleep and nourishment. I’ve read Satoshi’s White Paper and watched tons of videos from different sources, covering all aspects of Blockchain, Bitcoin, alt coins, and the response to cryptocurrencies of global citizens, governments, and financial institutions. I’m still in need of so much knowledge and this subreddit has been a great help, so thank you.
Now to my question posed in the title. There may be an easy answer to this that I’m not aware of. If so it’s probably unnecessary to read on.
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how having a Steve Jobs-like visionary bridging the gap between believers like us and the general public is key. I’ve come across two familiar faces in all of the research I’ve done that seem to be doing this to a degree. Those two being Andreas Antonopolous and Mike Novogratz. I’ve loved both. Andreas is an amazing speaker and brilliant man. Watching him educate the Canadian Senate on Bitcoin was enlightening and his Bubble Boy, Sewer Rat metaphor is killer. However I see him more as a missionary/diplomat of sorts, not as the actual face of BTC. As far as Mike, he’s got a legit finance/Wall Street background and is pumped up and a big believer in BTC. He is a good spokesman for BTC especially since he has legitimacy in the financial world. However, he admits that he has a lack of technical acumen.
I settled on four factors that I think are key for a potential face of BTC to possess. In order of importance, they are:
(1) Stage presence. I think whoever the face is must be a strong speaker, possessing not only intelligence, but charisma, a like-able demeanor, and vision that he or she can relate to the public. Also they need to be normal. That Mcafee guy comes across as a total tin hat wearing looney.
(2) Legitimacy in the finance world. Let’s be honest, the tsunami of attention BTC is getting from normal people right now isn’t because people see the amazing global ramifications of blockchain technology. People are flocking to buy because the television is telling them it has the potential to make them lots of money. That is the majority’s main concern, money. I think it is essential for a face of BTC to have some type of considerable past or present connection to the finance world. The public isn’t going to believe a YouTuber who may in fact devote everything he or she has to understanding BTC, they are going to believe the rich hedge fund manager who tells them this is real.
(3) Invests in BTC. The face has to have some skin in the game.
(4) The last factor is that I think the face of BTC needs to be somebody who is interested in teaching the world about the tech. The financial possibilities speak for themselves. Show people a chart of BTC price and they will be interested. I think it is important that the message brought to members of the public is that BTC isn’t some pointless bullshit commodity that is just a money making scheme. It’s real and it’s the future.
Sorry for the long post, but it would be sweet to hear thoughts on this, get some recommendations as to a potential face of BTC so I can watch/read his or her content, and most of all to get an answer to this question if there is a face and o just wasted my time writing this. Keep riding that $12k wave friends. The tsunami is getting bigger.
submitted by MemePeasant25 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Peer into my Crystal Ball

TL;DR There is verification backlogs at the exchanges and this will contribute to a more consistent value and more experienced new traders for the short term.
I'm Canadian and I've been using CAVirtex as my exchange since May of this year. I'm not interested in hearing people's criticisms of exchanges; however, some people are pretty frustrated with them due to the delays in getting verified since the price of BTC started to explode after the latest media frenzy.
CAVirtex, in response, has committed to informing clients about the status of their backlog. You can view it on their updates here. In summary, they are slammed with verification requests and have been since the beginning of November. They've been continually hiring new people to try and keep up with requests and they are getting through about 60 per day with close to 1500 outstanding.
Now consider that for a second. CAVirtex is a Canadian exchange and most likely one of the smallest ones currently in the world (compared to the likes of Gox and BTCChina). I could be wrong, but my guess is this is the case (at least somewhat) of the bigger exchanges (this post supports this theory).
These verification delays are not only revealing, but they are good for the future of bitcoin. All these people sitting on the sidelines are becoming more and more eager to acquire their bitcoin, having watched the latest price movements, and will most likely be glued to the charts while they await approval. This is great because I believe the ones trying to get rich quick (due to the gains) will become much more familiar with the latest, and natural, price movements of bitcoin (see volatility, crashes, bubbles, to the moon, etc). These people will also have more time to educate (hopefully) themselves about the technology and fundamentals of bitcoin.
All of this, I believe, will contribute to a more steady and sustainable rise of the value, while alleviating some of the uncertainty and panic in the future price fluctuations due to newbs bitcoin users.
The recent announcement in China of the tightening of AML (anti-money laundering) laws will create the same backlogs in current and future exchanges in that country. I find the recent news hysteria surrounding this quite funny as China essentially did/said the exact same thing as the US Senate hearing, and I wouldn't be surprised if we see further gains in the future once people fully realize this.
Finally, once people become verified at an exchange, they are not going to use their account one time only (especially after a long process). While they will still have to deal with bank delays in funding their exchange accounts with fiat, they will still be joining and contributing to a more diverse and liquid market.
Discuss!
submitted by doctorrecommendedmus to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Senate Testimony On Cryptocurrencies Historic Support for Bitcoin 2018 Bitcoin Senate panel looks at Bitcoin, regulating block chain virtual currency Senate Hearing on Cryptocurrency Highlights Using Bitcoin Legally (Senate Hearing) - Andreas Antonopoulos

More on Facebook’s Libra here: Calibra wallet to protect users against fraud: Facebook’s David Marcus at the U.S. Senate hearing. Meanwhile, Bitcoin is trading at $9,612 after recording double During a hearing on the potential introduction of a digital dollar, Senator Tom Cotton claimed whatever the United States comes up with, it has to “be better than Bitcoin.”. He also asserts it must be better than China’s digital yuan, which is currently in its pilot phase in the country. If it doesn’t, the dollar’s place in the “global payments system” may be at risk. Bitcoin Noticeably Absent From Senate Hearing on Facebook’s Libra For a panel about a proposed cryptocurrency, Tuesday’s Senate Banking Committee hearing was notably light on crypto talk. BTCUSD Bitcoin Tech Like CBDCs Central to Senate Hearing on China-US Competition Senate looks at tech and innovation, including CBDC development, as critical area within rising tensions with China Three metrics show a bull trend is brewing, according to CryptoQuant CEO, as fewer investors are seemingly compelled to sell BTC. According to Ki Young-Ju, the CEO of market research firm CryptoQuant, three key on-chain indicators are currently signaling a Bitcoin (BTC) price uptrend. Metrics that hint at a bull market are less selling pressure… More The post Data Analyst: 3 Key Metrics Show

[index] [15589] [7045] [2730] [27420] [28784] [23001] [27786] [21405] [12704] [27026]

Senate Testimony On Cryptocurrencies Historic Support for Bitcoin 2018

An Israeli Blockchain Startup Claims They’ve Invented an ‘Undo’ Button for Bitcoin Transactions. Digital Dollars Take Center Stage in Hearing Before US Senate. Indian Crypto Banks and ... Senate hearing on Cryptocurrency is surprisingly positive. Innovation of Crypto seems to be completely embraced, but negativity towards ICO's and scam coins are obvious. Using Bitcoin Legally (Senate Hearing) - Andreas Antonopoulos Crypto Current. ... and one of the world’s foremost bitcoin and open blockchain experts. ... United States Restricted Mode: Off ... Bitcoin: Beyond The Bubble ... Senate holds hearing addressing 2020 census - Duration: ... United States Restricted Mode: Off History Help About ... Senate panel looks at Bitcoin, regulating block chain virtual currency ... Senate hearing to review Justice Department's FBI findings - Duration: ... United States Restricted Mode: Off History Help

Flag Counter