Jump to content
MOONWALKER

Ether & Ripple Doomed As Securities According to Regulation Exper

Recommended Posts

Do you remember Nathaniel Popper?  Here we go, again. Price goes UP and new FUD hit the fan. We are not banking, scam coin anymore, but we are most popular crypto. 

"

Former Obama CFTC head Gary Gensler told The New York Times, “I would be surprised if 10 years from now this isn’t somewhere in the financial system in a meaningful way. But so much of the stuff that is being promoted now will not be around.” The ‘this’ he’s speaking of is cryptocurrencies, and as part of his appointment to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Mr. Gensler is weighing in on the phenomenon’s future with regard to regulation.

In particular, he’s focusing upon two of the most popular cryptos, ether and ripple, as potentially very susceptible to future designation as securities. Should that happen, many experts believe it would herald the decline of both. Securities regulation imposes a host of legal burdens upon registrants, and costs to comply are often prohibitive and burdensome.

"

Full story here: https://news.bitcoin.com/ether-ripple-doomed-as-securities-according-to-regulation-expert/

 

Edited by tomxcs
Edited for copyright

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't fall for those Bitcoin oriented fabricated news articles and get scared. We need regulation which can possibly destroy coins like bitcoin and others like XRP and Ethereum can flourish.

Don't believe Central Banks will let them classify XRP as a security because it destroys the meaning for which XRP is developed "being a bridge currency".

I am not worried....maybe a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This just proves the fear in the Bitcoin Maximalist lobby. Saying that Ether and XRP are Securities , and that BTC isn’t is laughable.

If XRP and Ether do get more regulated, and BTC fails to comply, then frankly BTC will die and go to zero. 

The BTC lobby keep going on about decentralisation, but they are terribly centralised in 3 mining pools and the Lightning Network.

My gut feeling is that Bitcoin is heading to its grave. A technical collapse is coming due to dwindling mining incentives and people won’t want to buy small amounts of BTC when it cost $200 minimum to make a Wallet withdrawal.

At some point people are going to stop seeing crypto as a speculative investment and will say why do I want to use this stuff- if the answer is convenience of payments, speed of cross border and inter ledger payments then Bitcoin is dead!

My prediction is we’ll see XRP at the top of the pile underpinning  the whole financial system, with Ether and Neo vying for second in a more automated systems role. There may be a few under  the radar privacy coins that can sustain themselves in niche roles, like Verge, ByteCoin and BitCoinPrivate, but BITCOIN itself is heading to the Bar as a washed up old soak reminiscing about when it was King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regulation is fine, even exchanges work with the sec "Circle plans to work with the SEC to register Poloniex"  (so is Coinbase) regulators will probably create a new category or something along those lines; edit: btw we already discussed this tons of time

Edited by kenrino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
1 hour ago, Mikhail_Liebenstein said:

A technical collapse is coming

There's also the problem of tainted inputs. A balance at an XRP address is a number of drops, plain and simple. But a balance at a BTC address is made up of inputs, and the blockchain analytics industry wants to track each input, which will cause the economy to value clean inputs more highly than tainted inputs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
6 minutes ago, Sporticus said:

As a lawyer, who has worked in securities law, I am qualified to research and give opinions on whether XRP is a security.  In fact, early on both my wife, who is a law professor experienced in securities law, and I researched the XRP as securities topic thoroughly.   The definition of securities in the Act of 1933 nowhere comes near to including XRP as a security. There are no regulations or case law that remotely include an asset like XRP as a security.  XRP has been determined by an agency of the US Government as a commodity, as such, it is analogous to the status of an Apple.  Just because I buy an Apple at the supermarket does not give me an interest in the supermarket, the wholesaler or the Apple orchard.  Essentially, this is the conclusion we must reach if we are to accept Mr. Gensler, a bought off, washed-up bureaucrat’s,  shoot-from-the-hip nonsense.  Michael Arrington, who is likewise a securities expert, who actually understands XRP and Ripple,  has likewise given the opinion that XRP is not a security. Mr. Gensler is an ignorant FUDSTER slinging lies for the Beast-coin mafia. 

Great post and appreciate the insight given your personal experience!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nathanial Popper has proven himself time and time again to be a huge Bitcoin fan and XRP hater. He wrote a book about the history and beginnings of Bitcoin. Any opportunity he gets he like to try to sink the boot into Ripple because it is a major competitor to Bitcoin’s dominance. He is extremely jealous of XRP and protective of BTC.

This article is another example of his XRP FUD. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sporticus said:

As a lawyer, who has worked in securities law, I am qualified to research and give opinions on whether XRP is a security.  In fact, early on both my wife, who is a law professor experienced in securities law, and I researched the XRP as securities topic thoroughly.   The definition of securities in the Act of 1933 nowhere comes near to including XRP as a security. There are no regulations or case law that remotely include an asset like XRP as a security.  XRP has been determined by an agency of the US Government as a commodity, as such, it is analogous to the status of an Apple.  Just because I buy an Apple at the supermarket does not give me an interest in the supermarket, the wholesaler or the Apple orchard.  Essentially, this is the conclusion we must reach if we are to accept Mr. Gensler, a bought off, washed-up bureaucrat’s,  shoot-from-the-hip nonsense.  Michael Arrington, who is likewise a securities expert, who actually understands XRP and Ripple,  has likewise given the opinion that XRP is not a security. Mr. Gensler is an ignorant FUDSTER slinging lies for the Beast-coin mafia. 

Awesome post, and many thanks!  I will now go buy some apples at the store and make an apple pie to enjoy in your honor... Although the allergies are still acting up and have me pretty loopy from the drugs, so I might just buy a pie... Either way I am eating an apple pie today! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sporticus said:

As a lawyer, who has worked in securities law, I am qualified to research and give opinions on whether XRP is a security.  In fact, early on both my wife, who is a law professor experienced in securities law, and I researched the XRP as securities topic thoroughly.   The definition of securities in the Act of 1933 nowhere comes near to including XRP as a security. There are no regulations or case law that remotely include an asset like XRP as a security.  XRP has been determined by an agency of the US Government as a commodity, as such, it is analogous to the status of an Apple.  Just because I buy an Apple at the supermarket does not give me an interest in the supermarket, the wholesaler or the Apple orchard.  Essentially, this is the conclusion we must reach if we are to accept Mr. Gensler, a bought off, washed-up bureaucrat’s,  shoot-from-the-hip nonsense.  Michael Arrington, who is likewise a securities expert, who actually understands XRP and Ripple,  has likewise given the opinion that XRP is not a security. Mr. Gensler is an ignorant FUDSTER slinging lies for the Beast-coin mafia. 

Do you feel that the courts will revisit existing laws to update them seeing how the technology obviously wasn't around when the original laws were written or do you feel that they will still strive toward staying with the intent and spirit of the law as they were written originally?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...