Jump to content

The latest f**k up news from the senate :(


HAL1000
 Share

Recommended Posts

Senator Cynthia Lummis tweets:-

Our effort to get a vote on a digital asset fix failed because other senators refused to set aside their disagreements to support something they could actually agree on. Thanks @SenToomey for explaining this at the end of our effort on the floor. There are some important lessons from this about the antics in Washington. First: This is what happens when bills are drafted behind closed doors without input from experts and stakeholders. This is why we started @FinancialCaucus to educate those who are going to make decisions that affect this industry. If we keep pressing forward without understanding the implications of our actions, we are going to fall further and further behind China in financial innovation.

We will continue to look for ways to fix the digital asset language in this bill. It might not be today, but we won’t give up.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, kanaas said:

Can someone tell me what exactly is negative about this bill, specifically for XRP and Ripple ???

Which version, there is a lot of re-writes and sides to this, but basically the first draft was bad, it would have required almost everyone in crypto to become a snitch for the IRS (technically not possible for many reasons), so another amendment basically says, nope that's a bad idea and not possible.

Ted Cruz nailed it, hands up, "who here voting has any clue what blockchain is about!", he even said ignorant people voting on things they don't understand is basically a recipe for disaster, YEP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HAL1000 said:

Which version, there is a lot of re-writes and sides to this, but basically the first draft was bad, it would have required almost everyone in crypto to become a snitch for the IRS (technically not possible for many reasons), so another amendment basically says, nope that's a bad idea and not possible.

Ted Cruz nailed it, hands up, "who here voting has any clue what blockchain is about!", he even said ignorant people voting on things they don't understand is basically a recipe for disaster, YEP.

Ignorant people voting for things they don't understand is the definition of democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kanaas said:

Can someone tell me what exactly is negative about this bill, specifically for XRP and Ripple ???

As far as I understood the biggest issue is the definition of "brokers" (who are required with tax reporting obligations) is expanded to include non-brokers like software developers, miners, stakers, validators 

This would mean those non-brokers are required to collect personal information from users of blockchain networks just as centralized exchanges are required to... what technically would be impossible... 

As explained in the letter to all representatives in the house (see below)

There has been a few amendments to this bill which excluded the non-brokers from this tax obligations but failed to receive unanimus consent therefore no amendment made it into the bill - afaik

But there`s still hope read the thread

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, brianwalden said:

Ignorant people voting for things they don't understand is the definition of democracy.

However the states not being a pure democracy and rather a democratic republic would suggest that the elected representatives who are to decide these matters have some level of understanding. At least that would be the aim. 

Edited by Pterolycus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pterolycus said:

However the states not being a pure democracy and rather a democratic republic would suggest that the elected representatives who are to decide these matters have some level of understanding. At least that would be the aim. 

I think you make a big logical jump with no premise to support it by claiming that direct democracy is somehow a more pure form of democracy than representative democracy. I would call them two forms of democracy without making a qualitative judgement between them.

If America is still a republic today, it is certainly much less of a republic than it was, and the current trajectory doesn't look promising. Each passing decade the federal government takes more and more control from the states. Local governments have become almost powerless and totally dependant on their state and federal governments.

Are you an American? Have you seen the competency and understanding of our elected officials in action? What about the huge numbers of appointed officials whom the public has absolutely no recourse to. The situation as it actually exists isn't what we were taught in history class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, brianwalden said:

I think you make a big logical jump with no premise to support it by claiming that direct democracy is somehow a more pure form of democracy than representative democracy. I would call them two forms of democracy without making a qualitative judgement between them.

If America is still a republic today, it is certainly much less of a republic than it was, and the current trajectory doesn't look promising. Each passing decade the federal government takes more and more control from the states. Local governments have become almost powerless and totally dependant on their state and federal governments.

Are you an American? Have you seen the competency and understanding of our elected officials in action? What about the huge numbers of appointed officials whom the public has absolutely no recourse to. The situation as it actually exists isn't what we were taught in history class.

We are spiraling, and it couldn't be more obvious. I think we are desperate for truth in the media so that we have some voices that we believe in and that we know our neighbors believe in too. They're playing us for idiots everywhere we turn. 

And much like Garlinghouse called Gensler an alcoholic in denial, we have too many politicians and heads of institutions in denial over the problems we need to address. 

I am only 35, but I am almost hopeless that America can reverse course now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, brianwalden said:

I think you make a big logical jump with no premise to support it by claiming that direct democracy is somehow a more pure form of democracy than representative democracy. I would call them two forms of democracy without making a qualitative judgement between them.

If America is still a republic today, it is certainly much less of a republic than it was, and the current trajectory doesn't look promising. Each passing decade the federal government takes more and more control from the states. Local governments have become almost powerless and totally dependant on their state and federal governments.

Are you an American? Have you seen the competency and understanding of our elected officials in action? What about the huge numbers of appointed officials whom the public has absolutely no recourse to. The situation as it actually exists isn't what we were taught in history class.

Nope I'm not, I'm a wannabe, a Canadian. I wasn't intending to disparage your remarks if that's how you took it. My use of the word pure was not in the 'untainted/wholesome/unadulterated' sense of the word. It was mean in the 'not mixed with anything' sense. 'Direct democracy' may have been a better description. 

 I was simply trying to make clear the intent of the US system whereby it's supposed to be more than just "ignorant people voting for things they don't understand"  It's why I believe Senator Cruz has a point when he argues that topically ignorant politicians should not be charting a course on issues they don't begin to grasp.

That said, I can certainly see that the current state of things is nothing like what it was intended to be.. but like I said, I'm a wannabe, your guardrails and fail-safes are better in my opinion than what we have in the commonwealth. 

Edited by Pterolycus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, brianwalden said:

Ignorant people voting for things they don't understand is the definition of democracy.

Understand and agreed, but I'm still trying to figure out how hard it can hurt small staffed or even individual #XRPL devs and/or apps...
Also in what way will/can it affect development @Ripple ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Pterolycus said:

Nope I'm not, I'm a wannabe, a Canadian. I wasn't intending to disparage your remarks if that's how you took it. My use of the word pure was not in the 'untainted/wholesome/unadulterated' sense of the word. It was mean in the 'not mixed with anything' sense. 'Direct democracy' may have been a better description. 

 I was simply trying to make clear the intent of the US system whereby it's supposed to be more than just "ignorant people voting for things they don't understand"  It's why I believe Senator Cruz has a point when he argues that topically ignorant politicians should not be charting a course on issues they don't begin to grasp.

That said, I can certainly see that the current state of things is nothing like what it was intended to be.. but like I said, I'm a wannabe, your guardrails and fail-safes are better in my opinion than what we have in the commonwealth. 

But you've got poutine, so I think you guys come out ahead in that deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McHenry Statement on Gensler Power Grab Over Digital Asset Exchanges

https://republicans-financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=408074

Washington, August 11, 2021 -

Today, the top Republican on the House Financial Services Committee, Patrick McHenry (NC-10), released the following statement in response to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Gary Gensler asking for jurisdiction of all exchanges of digital assets—not all of which are securities—in a letter to Senator Elizabeth Warren:

“Chairman Gensler’s latest move to ask Congress for jurisdiction over non-securities exchanges is a blatant power grab that will hurt American innovation,” said Republican Leader McHenry. “Given the distinct nature of digital assets, policymakers must be thoughtful and deliberative in legislating in this space. That’s why I introduced H.R. 1602, the Eliminate Barriers to Innovation Act, to bring regulatory certainty to market participants and regulators. We need smart policy, made through a transparent process, to ensure innovation and job creation continue in the U.S. We don’t need another backroom deal between Gensler and Elizabeth Warren.”

On April 20, 2021, the House passed Republican Leader McHenry’s H.R. 1602, the Eliminate Barriers to Innovation Act, a bipartisan bill to create a digital asset working group comprised of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the SEC, and market participants to bring much needed regulatory clarity to the digital asset ecosystem. H.R. 1602 awaits Senate action.

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.