/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.55259124]

Are they actually protecting US investors?

[Anonymous No.55259132]

protecting the people from wealth because the avg normie can't really handle it

[Anonymous No.55259142]

>>55259124
they are protecting their masters.
the general public is the enemy, the general public is the cannon fodder, is the natural resource product from which they extract their riches

[Anonymous No.55259175]

It's math. Crypto leaves the US, what do people invest in? Stocks and bonds that accumulate more taxable income.

It will make the stock market go up.
That's the only reason. Crypto is in the way. They want that revenue in stocks and out of crypto where it does absolutely jack shit to help or progress much of anything.
I know that and I like crypto. Defend it all you want, it doesn't build ships.

[Anonymous No.55259181]

>>55259175
You're aware that Crypto marketcap is sub 1% that of the stock market right?

[Anonymous No.55259187]

>>55259175
former SEC chairman was clear in a recent interview; public blockchains are the future and asset tokenization will happen on them

[Anonymous No.55259206]

>>55259181
>>55259187
lol, you'll believe anything, won't you? Keep dreaming.

[Anonymous No.55259250]

>>55259124
Yes. They protect high and ultra high net worth investors in the finance industry from competition.

[Anonymous No.55259320]

>>55259124
They're not protecting investors who are already in crypto but they think they're protecting new people from entering the crypto market because they think it's all just "scams, frauds and ponzis" anyway. Basically suffocating the market by making it harder and harder for new people to enter.

[Anonymous No.55259911]

>>55259124
Glorified mafia. They shake down anyone they can who isn't paying enough juice up to the big man.

[Anonymous No.55260148]

>>55259175
>it doesn't build ships.
not our job

[Anonymous No.55260367]

>>55259124
Yes. Being wealthy is very dangerous, and the SEC is great at protecting us from that horror.

[Anonymous No.55260504]

>>55259124
Umm they’ve cut my NW in half so I’m going to say nope.

[Anonymous No.55260654]

>>55259124
yes
they're protecting the rich investors

[Anonymous No.55260714]

>>55259124
from making money, yes
all government financial 'protection' institutions exist to prevent upwards class mobility

[Anonymous No.55260787]

>>55259124
Does even a single person thing this is to "protect investors"? Lmao. So they what, sat on their ass for 10 years and then all of a sudden just decided one day that crypto exchanges are illegal. coincidentally at the exact same time the dollar's reserve status is threatened and inflation is happening?

This a desperate move made in bad faith to stop capital flight from fiat to crypto. SEC could not give a single fuck about "investors" or the public. Its to keep the public in fiat where the gov can continue to siphon their wealth through inflation and money printing.

[Anonymous No.55260937]

>>55259124
Sure, OP. The banks are the biggest investors. Remember how they protected them from the GameStop squeeze?

[Anonymous No.55260948]

>>55259124
no they are corrupt like every other US institution

[Anonymous No.55261012]

>>55259175
>Crypto leaves the US, what do people invest in? Stocks and bonds that accumulate more taxable income.
>It will make the stock market go up.
You got it backwards. The goal isn't to drive money from crypto to stocks and bonds. There's already hardly any real normie money in crypto.

We just saw the debt limit raised again. We've been printing more money (dollar supply) than ever at the same time oil (dollar demand) producers are signaling moves away from the USD.

What happens to a shitcoin when the demand suddenly disappears? Price collapses.

What do shitcoin ICO scammers do when they think demand will soon disappear? They sell as much as they can. If they could print more, they'd print as much as they could and keep selling it because they know demand will soon disappear. This is where the US is at.

Eventually the demand disappears and the whole fucking thing gets rugpulled and a government moves to prevent capital flight, starts seizing assets, and issues a new currency.

Right now they are moving to prevent capital flight.

[Anonymous No.55261051]

You can't play a game when you don't know the rules

[Anonymous No.55261064]

>>55259124
crypto is a scam so yeah

[Anonymous No.55262716]

yes, from grifters and rogue cia agents running eth validators

[Anonymous No.55263415]

>>55261064
Satoshis white paper isn't a scam
Its the solution to an old computer scientific problem
Altcoin grifters doing pre-ipos without registering, that is a scam yes

[Anonymous No.55263561]

Risk is how gains are made, anyone protecting you from risk is protecting you from being sucessful or being alive. I think we should protect the shit out of everyone in your REDACTED occupied government. Maybe there’s some kind of high security camp we can put them in to protect them.

[Anonymous No.55263629]

>>55263561
As a state Its normal to protect your subjects from criminals. Sur those criminals can act outside of the nice society, but they should not expect to grift without repercussions from the nice society.
And even among criminals there is competition, that is why alt coiners don't need to expect any support from btc maxis. We route for Gary doing his job, very well knowing that some other agency might come for us one day, but we know as well that btc cant be killed, because PoW, laws of gravity and human nature

[Anonymous No.55263736]

>>55263629
1. Speak English, Jonah.
2. The state are the “criminals,” a state becomes a state because it has access to the most violence to threaten the populace with, whoever can threaten with the greatest amount of violence becomes the state.

Your gay headcannon about the state “protecting the people” is fantasy, like star wars. Feudalism never ended, it just hides its face. There is no protection and there is no safety and there is no security on God’s green Earth; you will die free letting the human spirit soar by taking risks, or you will die a slave to people who shilled you a lie about increasing your “safety” while they starve you to death in a cell.

[Anonymous No.55263852]

>>55263629
Its one thing to arrest a criminal who robs a store. Its another thing for the government to shut the store down to "protect" them from being robbed and then gouging everyone as they are the monopoly over the market.

[Anonymous No.55263863]

>>55263852
>criminal who robs a store.
> shut the store down
Your analogy does not make sense Anon

[Anonymous No.55263894]

>>55263736
No, there are laws and the tech bruhs ignored those laws, worse they put suits on and knew very well that they broke the law with their capital raise grift and likely took it as a cost to bear while they rob as many idiots as possible
>>55263852
If I open a weed shop in the middle of city that considers weed illegal and have the smugness to advertise my weed shop on local park benches, not expecting that some day the authorities will come and kill my weed shop would be retarded; weed is the unregistered security emitted by altcoin grifters

[Anonymous No.55263896]

>>55263863
Exactly, the government preventing you from doing something isn't "protecting" you its just imprisoning you.

[Anonymous No.55263917]

>>55263896
then move to Somalia, and deal in Somalian-Schilling and sell to Somalians. I doubt the USA will have an issue with it, the local militias I cant speak for

[Anonymous No.55263919]

>>55263894
You act like all crypto is illegal. Crypto is a technology, its a tool. It can be used to do illegal things. But you shouldn't just shut down the whole thing because some people are criminals If you were consistent then you'd have to shut down all banks because they launder far more money fro drug dealers and terrorist. You'd have to ban all stocks because some tech IPOs were scams or some companies commit fraud occasional. You'd have to shut down everything.

[Anonymous No.55263932]

>>55263917
There is a difference between enforcing laws and preemptively taking away people's rights because they MIGHT commit a crime in the future. If you don't understand this you are an idiot.

[Anonymous No.55263944]

>>55263919
Crypto isn't illegal
what is illegal is emitting securities not registered with the sec
A security according to the Security laws form 1933 is in essence
>Common enterprise
in the case of crypto a bunch of developers that emit the token and develop the network, the marketing and so forth
>expectations of profit from investors
the idiots that buy the token from above common enterprise and expect a profit from the grifters developing the token network

Every altcoin with a dev team that sold that token for funding their operation is a security. Full stop

[Anonymous No.55263957]

>>55263932
You are just pissed that your grift in the USA gets killed
buhu, go cry somewhere else
you niggers have shitted up the crypto space since the first copy paste of btc and you deserve to be put to your place

[Anonymous No.55264037]

>>55263944
>Every altcoin with a dev team that sold that token for funding their operation is a security.
Yeah pretty much every legit project that funds themselves like this does actually legally register their offering and comply with all laws. ICOs or similar, where you take money before the protocol is even developed, and will give the tokens later, is a security and devs follow the law. No one is really contesting this, what the SEC is doing now is saying just selling goods people buy because they think the price goes up is a security in itself.

The token itself is never a security, its data in a decentralized database. A security is a contract, transaction, or other arrangement between people, its not the sheet of paper a stock certificate is written on, its no the computer components that store who owns what stock, its an agreement between people. Tokens themselves aren't securities because security ownership has to be maintained by a centralized entity, you can't bind ownership to tokens anymore, like paper bearer instruments.

Digital tokens are never securities, but the SEC is trying to say the act of selling non-securities without vetting whether the buyer is buying it for investments or not, that is a security. If they win in court, almost everything is a security. Especially with inflation, buying toilet paper in bulk because you think the price goes up is a security then. Walmart will have to limit you to only buying what you can immediately consume or they would be committing securities fraud as well. Scalping PS5s makes Sony liable for securities fraud. All collectable sales, video game money, etc. are securities then.

[Anonymous No.55264061]

>>55264037
Yeah, their definition of "expectation of profit" is absolutely absurd. By their own logic, USD itself is a security because I earn interest on my USD when I store it at the bank.

[Anonymous No.55264066]

>>55264037
>every legit project that funds themselves like this does actually legally register their offering and comply with all laws.
no. If they want to operate in the USA they need to register with the sec. The same goes btw for the Philippines and other countries that took their security laws from the USA

The rest of your paragraph reads like from an xrp shizoid seething
>Digital tokens are never securities
just because its a token and not a piece of paper, makes no difference
keep seething the grift in the USA and likely soon world wide is done, unless you register with the respective authority and sell your tokens through exchanges that are allowed to sell securities

[Anonymous No.55264101]

>>55264066
They DO register, retard. All the top projects in the last few years register.

The entire debate now is whether selling something that isn't a security, whether that becomes a security if the buyer is buying it as an investment. Which is fucking nuts.

[Anonymous No.55264135]

>>55263894
> No, there are laws and the tech bruhs ignored those laws, worse they put suits on and knew very well that they broke the law with their capital raise grift and likely took it as a cost to bear while they rob as many idiots as possible
Literally so what? USA did it first with USD. Who cares? You are arguing in bad faith because you are protecting your fake money scam from being diluted by our fake money scam. This is just a 1uck vs Monte discussion.

[Anonymous No.55264170]

>>55264066
>>55264101
to explain more, they register their ICO or w/e they do to fund, so the security is the exchange of money from ICO investors for future tokens, not the tokens themselves. Almost every project that isn't a complete scam and rug from the get go follows all the rules.

But the tokens of the protocol are commodities that they don't control. The peers in the network decide individually whether to run the dev's code or to accept or not accept any change or to make their own change. Peers could change aspects of the supply if they want, or how the protocol works. The original devs have no control over that, so have no ability to make any guarantees required to register.

[Anonymous No.55264224]

>>55264061
Its hilarious b/c the SEC's video on staking calls out tokens that pay staking APY with supply dilution yet that is the exact way the fed's interest on reserves and treasuries work right now and the US treasury definitely does not explain how treasury interest is in effect paid by printing more money. The SEC wants to hold experiment crypto start ups to higher standards than the US treasury.

[Anonymous No.55264226]

>>55264101
They didn't register with the sec to raise capital through token sales.
Devs that do blockchain development should go through go fund me instead, that would be smart, instead of selling unregistered securities

[Anonymous No.55264262]

>>55264226
No, only older projects like eth before anyone knew wtf was going on didn't register. Almost every legit project in the past few years has registered their initial funding and followed all the standard rules like restricting investments to accredited investors or just banning US investors. If you ever tried to contribute to an ICO or similar and they banned US investors, and used KYC to verify, then they followed all laws. If they verified your accredited investor status, then they have registered with the SEC.

What the SEC is saying now, is that simply selling tokens which themselves are not securities, selling them is a security if the buyer buys them for "investment purposes." This requirement has never existed or been done in the US for any asset ever before and is a completely new, made up rule by the SEC.

[Anonymous No.55264280]

>>55264262
I think the thread here has it perfectly
>>55263209
I am not going to further entertain a scammer that is salty his scam came to an end

[Anonymous No.55264411]

>>55264280
you could say that about any IPC or SPAC scam, its not crypto. Crypto just has a lower barrier to entry because its permissionless and allows everyone to be at the same level without special privileges and rules that only allow the established millionaires to scam and fleece people.

[Anonymous No.55264430]

>>55264411
do you know what disgusts me the most,
grifters that hide behind (((common goods))) and other moral arguments, like commies trying to grift saying "for da people". You deserve dead, plane and simple.

[Anonymous No.55264791]

>>55264037
>buying toilet paper in bulk because you think the price goes up is a security then. Walmart will have to limit you to only buying what you can immediately consume or they would be committing securities fraud as well. Scalping PS5s makes Sony liable for securities fraud. All collectable sales, video game money, etc. are securities then.
So do those things and then have an llm sue on your behalf when you lose money?

[Anonymous No.55264923]

>>55264791
Yes, if the SEC wins on that argument, then you could literally do that.

Like if you bought a PS5 to resell or if you bought some sneakers to resell, and you end up not selling them or taking a loss, you could sue Sony or Nike because they didn't ensure you were buying them for "non-investment" purposes. Its absurd.

Or buy a bunch of MTG cards and sell whatever you can at profit and then sue the MTG company for ones you took a loss on because they didn't check if you were buying them for investment purposes so according to the SEC they committed securities fraud.

[Anonymous No.55264953]

>>55259124
overall, yes
something like 90% of people who have ever bought crypto are down, and it could very easily go to 99%
those are not numbers seen in legitimate investments

[Anonymous No.55265114]

>>55264037
>what the SEC is doing now is saying just selling goods people buy because they think the price goes up is a security in itself.
Do you know where they came the closest to explicitly stating that?

[Anonymous No.55265132]

>>55264923
>Like if you bought a PS5 to resell or if you bought some sneakers to resell, and you end up not selling them or taking a loss, you could sue Sony or Nike
I'm trying to imagine how far this could go. Imagine mom and pop stores or thrift stores getting sued because you bought something and failed to resell it for more.

[Anonymous No.55265175]

>>55259175
>buying crypto does nothing
and what does buying stocks achieve exactly?

[Anonymous No.55265181]

>>55265114
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf

Paragraph 114
>Throughout the Relevant Period, Coinbase has made available for trading crypto assets that are being offered and sold as investment contracts, and thus as securities. This includes, but is not limited to, the units of each of the crypto asset securities further described below—with trading symbols SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, SAND, AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH, and NEXO—(the “Crypto Asset Securities”)

So there is a distinction here between "crypto assets" and "crypto asset securities" which this wording seems to imply the assets coinbase is selling are "crypto assets" but the way they are sold are "crypto asset securities"

Paragraph 119
>Coinbase makes these crypto assets available for trading without restricting transactions to those who might acquire or treat the asset as anything other than as an investment.

Then they list a bunch of reasons as to why the transactions are investments. One of the more interesting ones is paragraph 122 which describes purchase limits:
>Coinbase does not restrict how many units of a crypto asset, including but not
limited to each of the Crypto Asset Securities, any given investor may purchase. Moreover, investors are not required to purchase quantities tied to a purported non-investment “use” that may exist for the asset, if any. To the contrary, investors may and typically do purchase these assets in any amount.

They seem to imply a framework for selling these tokens in a way that supposedly wouldn't be a security, if they didn't do thinks like a live price feed, price history, and most importantly limiting users to only being able to buy small amounts.

[Anonymous No.55265182]

>>55265175
Pay back the debt the US accumulated. They have yields to pay

[Anonymous No.55265190]

>>55265181
Is this you Brian. Have you bought rope already?
You got told 7 months ago to gtfo of the USA. You didn't listen

[Anonymous No.55265213]

>>55261064
Has the SEC ever protected anyone from a scam? FTX, Celsius, Luna, Bitconnect, they missed all of these and didn't lift a finger until the scams had already been executed. Claiming certain coins are unregistered securities (after YEARS on the market no less) isn't the same as calling them scams, its just penalizing them for launching through improper channels. You would think pursuing actual scams and frauds would be a little more urgent than chastising alleged unregistered securities....

[Anonymous No.55265240]

>>55265213
The DOJ is going or went after those.

[Anonymous No.55265295]

>>55265240
Well my point stands, SEC never protects anyone from scams, and no one was successfully "protected" from the 4 scams I mentioned, by the DOJ or anyone. SEC is happy to allow scams to operate--as long as they pay their cut of protection money. Someone else will clean up the fallout.
SEC goes after people who don't pay them, not people who commit financial crimes.

[Anonymous No.55265307]

>>55265295
It is not the secs job to protect you from scams. It is one of the secs jobs to protect gullible fools from investing into perpetual pre-ipos

[Anonymous No.55265343]

>>55259124
Yes they're protecting US Investors (TM).

An Accredited Investor (TM) needs to be accredited to have certain rights like getting better rates and being allowed to invest in anything like new tech, start-ups, etc; besides normie stocks. So the more regulation the better because it favours a bigger disparity of rights and access towards Accredited Investors (TM).

[Anonymous No.55265389]

>>55265181
Nice. Thank you for laying it out so clearly. Wonder what the response would be to someone filing similar lawsuits against small businesses... Does the SEC'd argument fall apart if Coinbase or whoever can point to a case against someone reselling collector Nike shoes where the same logic failed? I thought precedent was an important thing in law so "no, that other court already said this argument is retarded" seems bad for the SEC.

[Anonymous No.55265403]

>>55259124
Yes they are trying to protect you from being rugged by scammers.

Also they will be opening their own exchanges

[Anonymous No.55265404]

>>55265307
Wrong.

[Anonymous No.55265426]

>>55265389
I'm not really sure if you can use stuff like that in a lawsuit, which is maybe the SEC's strategy. Because the SEC could have just released a framework for selling crypto with all those rules, if they really intended to push that, why wouldn't they. I believe they are doing it like this probably because its harder to challenge until the court case is complete which could take years.

[Anonymous No.55265444]

>>55265404
I don't take somebody serious that says usd is a security in the US. gtfo