janie1984

There should definitely be some concern that Venezuelans are buying so much cryptocurrency, as it might add to the continued downward spiral of the country. It's good that they're looking for stable ways to protect their money (American dollars are considered a stable currency) that are more electronic. Potentially Venezuelans are looking to cryptocurrency as a way to take their money with them when leaving the country, as there is currently a massive exodus of peopel trying to flee from the chaotic nightmare their home country has become.

I don't think it will be taxed like capital or stocks, more likely it will be taxed like currency held for investment purposes. In this style, the currency is taxed based on the realized gains. As an example, if you buy BitCoin at $3,000 USD and then it increased in value to $5,000 USD, you would be taxed on that $2,000 gained. The tax itself is the regular income tax, based on whatever bracket you fall into. Also, of course the government is going to require the value of your cryptocurrency wallet. Based on the current usage of secret banks accounts, however, I think that the amount of people who will disclose their cryptocurrency wallets will be minimal.

Green cryptocurrencies are best just currencies designed to spur growth in solar and wind farms. The point is to create currencies that aren't as power-intensive as BItcoin and are more sustainable. Rather than proof-of-work it relies on proof-of-stake, or basically that rather than fighting each other for the currency everyone must come together. Think of it like a commons almost. In this case we will call the cyrptocurrency a park. Rather than fighting each other for use of a park and using up all the land in the procress, in green cryptocurrency people come together to use the park and in return are rewarded for working together and limiting the amount of resources needed in the park.

I think they're doing the right thing and shame on those investors who aren't reporting their earnings. This is the problem with today's society, rich individuals think it's okay to not fairly report their earnings. It not only hurts ocal citizens who would otherwise benefit from public goods and services, but decreases the trust people have in each other. Isreal is just trying to do right by their citizens.

I think cryptocurrencies work best in a globalized society, which is what the world is becoming. It's easier to spend money around the world when you don't have to worry about being hit with foreign transaction fees and other nonsense. Plus, you don't have to worry about switching between currencies.

This is such a good idea! It brings Bitcoin into the very prestigious and well-appreciated area of charity. Most big businesses and corporations have charitable wings, so by using cryptocurrency for good, it helps to shed a positive light on the currency while benefitting less fortunate people!! As someone who works in the CSR field, I can tell you that doing a good deed like this definitely helps raise awareness. People like to see good being done in the world and will retain those memories of seeing it be done by cryptocurrency.

I think this is an interesting and innovative new idea but I'm not sure about how it will play out over the long-term. BitCoin is still so volitile that it seems a little presumptuous to start issuing loans worth thousands of dollars before the currency has had a chance to cool down and become more stable. It is a good starter method, though, for bringing cryptocurrencies into the real world and become a part of the mainstream financial system.

Whiel it would be nice to start using bitcoin and limit the amount of money being taken from me through bank fees, I dont think it's a ery realitistic option yet. Maybe inmajor metropolitan areas where many people use electronic methods of paying for goods and services aleady, but in developing countries and rural areas of developed countries the idea of using cryptocurrency is laughable. Also, the relaince of electronic methods of payment is very classist and dissaudes people who are less well off from participating in society. If one can't afford a bank account how could they afford to use cryptocurrency when it's so unstable and could put thousands of dollars at risk? The only way to transition to cryptocurrency is for them to become stable first and then offer ways to bring customers who currently don't have bank accounts into the fold.

Based on the latest news developing in the crytpocurrency world, I think South Korea will be the first to create regulation regarding the currency and also be the first ones to use it. They're another country that tends to be ahead of the technological trends and they're very competitive with Japan. Plus they're country has been going through some tumoltuous times so a major change of branding and refocusing people's attention is needed.

Cryptocurrency had a bubble when it really didn't deserve one. Unfortunately, I don't think people have learned anything since 2008 which you can really see in how stock markets and housing markets are trending these days. Bitcoin just happened to be the first of what will be many bubbles popping.

If Bitcoin crashes there won't really be anything to do. Maybe buy some bitcoin just to see if the prices go up again? But in reality if it crashes, it's dead there's no money to be made and anyone who invested in it will be out their investment.

Yes, cryptocurrencies are more of an investment than an actual currency as of right now. When an individual or corporation is making money, they have to pay income or business taxes. Governments also need to tax cryptocurrencies because of the pressure mining operations puts on utilities, people cannot just generate money without having to pay what they owe the government. It's a contribution to society and not something that should be avoided by anyone in the first place.

Honestly, I am not surprised at all that Switzerland has taken a step forward in allowing crypto startups to handle that much in assets. It falls right in line with the Swiss menatlity of protecting rich individual and corporations' interests more than anything else. Look at how much money is being hidden in Swiss bank accounts and it makes so much more sense that Finma would make said decision. These crypto start=ups are just another way for people to hide money from their respective governments and if the Swiss government can make money off of it, of course they'll let it happen.

I think it's very interesting that such a large percentage of freelancers are interested in being paid with crytpocurrencies. It would be very interesting if they had asked some more questions to determine why there's so many people who want to be paid in cryptocurrencies. Is this the beginning of a shift in payments? Do people just view it as a wise investment? Or has crytpocurrencies become such a hot topic that everyone wants to be part of it? There's a lot more to be learned in the freelancers' reponses.

Yes, it reminds me of the global crisis in 2008. That was a major part of my formative years and has made me very skeptical with investing at all to be honest. My family weathered the storm pretty well, but it makes me worry a lot about others and the financial setbacks they face. The volitile nature of BItCoin is making everyone uneasy. I'm a new investor to it and while I think the coin will go up over the long term again, probably settling more around $4500 there's peope who bought it back at like $16,000 and theyre never making that money back.

Cashless societies are 100% discriminatory and elitist. Most individuals who come from a lower socioeconomic class do not have the ability to afford or use a bank account. Almost all bank accounts have a minimum balance to avoid a monthly account free and those that don't, often rely on the person being able to access the internet on a regular basis or be able to accept direct deposit with no means for depositing cash. It's also discriminatory against countries that can mostly cash-based, creating a negative perception as backwards or not as developed which only perputautes their own lower-class status.

If the banks can make money off of it, of course they'll accept the currency. Banks will literally do anything to make money- i.e. the global financial crisis that almost destroyed the world's economy. Banks are also not beholden to the wishes of government and routinely do business with criminals, so accpeting a cryptocurrency is probably very low on the spectrum of things they do that are shady.

No, the SEC and FTC have both been going after celebrities who endorse products but don't admit to being paid which is a violation of American law. This has also happened with celebrities who were advertising products on Instagram without admiting that it was an ad and that they were being paid to promote said product. I think that the actions by the SEC and FTC are now occuring due to the government finally recognizing the power of the internet and how strong celebrities' influence can be. It's dangerous for these people to be promoting products that they themselves probably aren't using, the government should crack down on celebrity endorsements because it puts consumers and investors at risk if there isn't a full information disclosure.

I'm not disappointed in the currency, so much as I feel bad for people who invested when it was really high, now they're going to be lucky if they see a postive return ever. It's been so all-over-the-place that it would be nice for the currency to just maintain a stable value for once and not put so many people's financial healths at risk.

My wish for bitcoin is for it to go back over $5000 so I can sell my coin and pay off some student loans. I bought some and now that it's on the up and up again, seling the coins would help me wipe out a decent amount of student loan debt. My other wish for Christmas, is that bitcoin stabilizes and stops causing so many people so much anxiety.

It's interesting that they've released this study saying that bitcoin mining operations mostly use renewable energy but I'm not convinced just yet that bitcoin isn't going to directly contribute to global warming. Just because 78% of users are using renewable energy doesnt make the remaining 22% less dangerous or potent, cryptocurrency mining still does require a lot of energy. The using of household appliances to model mining operations does make a bit of sense because both can require intensive amounts of energy; it may seem as though modeling the survey after the banking sector would make more sense but most of those operations are highy professional and household appliences probably a similar energy loss and operation style that's closer to the reality of a cryptocurrency mining operation. Coinshares may have a point to their report but given that they are invested in cryptocurrencies succeding, it would be beneficial to them for an independent and non-biased organzation to release a report or study showing a similar conclusion.

I think regulators are going after crypto because they need to crack down on the money laundering. The two are intimately tied together, as crypto has been used for illegal purposes and if governments want to force banks to shape up and stop committing crimes as if it was not a moral stain on society, going after crypto shows that they mean business and are coming to fix the problem. The Federal Reserve, and Bafin know that there's more secret money being illegally hidden away than even what's being shown on paper so by targeting cryptocurrencies specifically, they can learn from their experiences and use it when going after other banks for illegal practies.

I am not sure treating it as an actual currency is an option yet, it's limited to too few people and most businesses don't know how to handle it. Also, currency speculation and investment is a legitimate form of making money that people use but I wouldn't call it the smartest way to make money. If anything, the way bitcoin is being treated right now is pretty much on par with how people trade money- waiting to see if it gains or loses a few cents over the long run. Though with bitcoin, it has been thousands and that's not really the making of a stable currency or investment.

I think that the only way a cryptocurrency could surpass bitcoin was if it became a currency accepted by businesses and governments as a legitimate form of payment. Given that bitcoin is currently being accepted and used around the world, I highly doubt it but if one were to become more main stream and accessable than bitcoin currently is (to the average person) then I could see it happening. The cryptocurrency would need to find a way to bypass alot of the hydrances that bitcoin has encountered with government policy and the overall distaste many feel towards to currency type.

It is also affected by what's occuring with other crytocurrencies. For example, in November bitcoin cash spilt into two and currency exchanges warned about trading bitcoin cash SV because it didn't meet their security requirements. Since people started selling off this one type of cryptocurrency it had an effect on others as well, as people worried about how sound of an investment cryptocurrency is. Coupled with the fact that some bank heads aren't fans of the currency whenever backlash occurs, people tend to sell off the coin before they lose even more money creating a downward spiral.