[Mezzie]

I'm pro cryptocurrency (the idea) and anti cryptocurrency (the practice).

> Thankfully crypto isn't a democracy. Money market funds, banks, stock exchanges, and every other financial institution can be frozen instantaneously by the U.S. President to "prevent another financial collapse". Those who are OK with that much power being concentrated in one person, can continue avoiding crypto. But no amount of public outcry can ban, shut down or criminalize crypto, same as you can't ban IMAP or AES.

I find this a funny argument. First of all, there's basically no understanding of civics in it. That's not how it works. The President can't just call up banks and tell them not to give people their own money, or shut down every stock market in the world.

Now you have a point if you're talking about control resting with a small number of people: Those in the highest echelons of finance and government. But on the other hand, this is also a problem with crypto as it is: Because it relies on things most people don't understand (the math and computer science), the people who do understand it have the power. It seems to me this argument is just 'No, we don't want that small group of people in charge; put OUR small group in charge instead.'

If so, be honest and make an argument as to why we should trust you more.

I've worked in politics and done tech and I don't trust either further than I could throw them, and I'm a tiny lady cripple.

Also, you can absolutely ban IMAP or AES, it just requires more effort.

[eric-hu]

> That's not how it works. The President can't just call up banks and tell them not to give people their own money, or shut down every stock market in the world.

Isn’t this what Biden is doing this week with Russian nationals tied to the invasion of Ukraine? I agree with you it’s more complicated than just a phone call, but for the opposing parties they don’t need to think about those details. Those people and companies who will be heavily economically sanctioned—-they’ll be eyeing crypto as a way to sidestep these sanctions.

(And to be clear, I do not agree with Russia is in this situations, but I’m looking at it from a supply/demand perspective. Events such as this are clear demand signals to me.)

[Mezzie]

Yes, but he only can do that to American companies/companies that do business here. He can't tell, say, the Swiss to keep the Russians' money.

There's a difference between "Money market funds, banks, stock exchanges, and every other financial institution can be frozen instantaneously by the U.S. President to 'prevent another financial collapse'" as thread OP mentioned and what you're talking about. I was addressing only systematic action for the sake of averting economic problems, not financial uses of national security power.

For INDIVIDUALS, you're absolutely correct.

Which is why I'm a large proponent of local currencies.

(Trust me, I understand. I'm a very confused Ukranian-American who would like to go back to not being relevant.)

[eric-hu]

Ok thanks for repeating those details of the GP comment. I have to agree with you that some facts in there are fundamentally wrong. The U.S. government can do things to restrict uses of USD but they aren’t _that_ arbitrary.