swift_post Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 It's from Elenor Terrett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swift_post Posted January 28, 2022 Author Share Posted January 28, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69GTOjudge Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 I'm from the government and I'm here to help you? woodman_73 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montoya Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 I distinctly remember all the assurances that Ripple was going to be safe from ham-fisted and corrosive gov regulations because they were "working with the regulators" and how "regulation is a good thing!". We see how that worked out. Chickens cheerleading for the foxes still get eaten, they are just the only ones surprised when it happens. tricky1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 49 minutes ago, Montoya said: I distinctly remember all the assurances that Ripple was going to be safe from ham-fisted and corrosive gov regulations because they were "working with the regulators" and how "regulation is a good thing!". We see how that worked out. Chickens cheerleading for the foxes still get eaten, they are just the only ones surprised when it happens. Ripple was trying to work with the regulators, but Ripple holds a large amount of XRP. As much as they wanted regulatory clarity, the regulators want to control the asset class and picked them as a target, since not targeting them and their stash comes with the risk of Ripple becoming excessively powerful. On top of that and they were giving ether a free pass, while lining their pockets and in public view lol. Brad was even quoted in court docs saying they were, "in purgatory". The regulators should have made this simple. XRP in the secondary market, which is out of reach of Ripple and not a stock in the private company equals not a security. Period. What's in escrow can then be sold to accredited investors and institutions. Also not a security, but their digital asset manuevering has limits. They pay a fine and everyone wins. The US can keeps it's golden goose. Yet, here we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
princesultan Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 i can't see this executive order being anything but negative for crypto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CryptoPitbull Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 1 hour ago, princesultan said: i can't see this executive order being anything but negative for crypto. Have we seen Brad tweet anything about this, either for or against? I know he was calling on Congress to step in around the holidays, but haven't heard anything since. There could be something behind his silence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlanK Posted January 28, 2022 Share Posted January 28, 2022 BCB did a story about this story today. A news analysis rather than a market analysis. It's a different take, I think a more sensible approach compared the 'sky is falling' type of headline that sells media stories. BCByootoob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now