Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Federal regulators working on the cause behind the next financial crisis   (finance.yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Unlikely, Balance sheet, top U.S. bank regulator, Asset, Jelena McWilliams, Deposit insurance, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, McWilliams' comments, team of U.S. bank regulators  
•       •       •

675 clicks; posted to Business » on 26 Oct 2021 at 9:18 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



14 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-10-26 10:32:19 PM  
Golf clap subby.
The banks want to wet their beaks after seeing amateurs at Coinbase take 10% transaction fees for crypto trades.  That's $100,000 for every $million traded.
 
2021-10-26 11:31:40 PM  
That could include clearer rules over ... using them as collateral for loans ...

It's purportedly a currency, not an investment or property. I could see accounting for the value of crypto holdings as a positive for a signature loan - if I have a chunk of money, whether in dollars, yen, bits, or euros, it should make borrowing some unsecured money easier. Would cash being formally used as collateral have to go into escrow?  I don't know that I see the purpose of putting aside one pile of money already possessed to obtain a loan of another pile of money.  Maybe I could see it if I was going to guarantee someone else's loan or something...

Assuming that it's really a currency and not a speculative investment. But since we're not really sure what it is, or even why it has value beyond that it costs resources to create and people are willing to pay for it at the moment, maybe we had ought to hold off on putting effort into legitimizing it. Maybe it's the future of money. Or maybe in 5 years people will have set their blockchain wallet on the basement shelf next to their Beanie Baby portfolio.
 
2021-10-27 12:14:36 AM  

Northern: Golf clap subby.
The banks want to wet their beaks after seeing amateurs at Coinbase take 10% transaction fees for crypto trades.  That's $100,000 for every $million traded.


With more competition, that will drive that ratio down. Banks will still be able to make money off of sheer volume, but it will drive out all the little guys except for people mining with botnets of people's poorly-secured IoT light switches and refrigerators.
I suppose if "legitimate" cryptocoin mining were relegated to major businesses, you might see people trying to build mining server farms powered by renewables. But it's not a charity. Maybe someday UNICEF will get into the crypto mining business.
 
2021-10-27 12:29:42 AM  
"If we don't bring this activity inside the banks, it is going to develop outside of the banks. ... The federal regulators won't be able to regulate it."

Yeah, that's the farking POINT.
 
2021-10-27 3:08:20 AM  
Yeah..... kind of thinking that extending FDIC protection to something that is entirely unregulated, ungoverned, non-quantifiable, and I guess I can just call it   ILLEGITIMATE  is not what we want the FDIC to be doing.

And just offhand, I would not be in favor, nor would I accept, bitcoin as collateral or as payment or certainly not as legal tender. It is beanie babies if beanie babies were suddenly trading like Rembrandts and not as plush toys.

If the FDIC does not guarantee corporate or even municipal bonds, it should not be touching crypto with a pole.
 
2021-10-27 3:51:22 AM  

lizyrd: That could include clearer rules over ... using them as collateral for loans ...

It's purportedly a currency, not an investment or property. I could see accounting for the value of crypto holdings as a positive for a signature loan - if I have a chunk of money, whether in dollars, yen, bits, or euros, it should make borrowing some unsecured money easier. Would cash being formally used as collateral have to go into escrow?  I don't know that I see the purpose of putting aside one pile of money already possessed to obtain a loan of another pile of money.  Maybe I could see it if I was going to guarantee someone else's loan or something...

Assuming that it's really a currency and not a speculative investment. But since we're not really sure what it is, or even why it has value beyond that it costs resources to create and people are willing to pay for it at the moment, maybe we had ought to hold off on putting effort into legitimizing it. Maybe it's the future of money. Or maybe in 5 years people will have set their blockchain wallet on the basement shelf next to their Beanie Baby portfolio.


The issue with collatoral is that is has a fixed or known value.

Property, vechicles, pr stable stock is collatoral.  Bitcoin...  is a highly speculative consumer driven nightmare.  It is not collatoral, especially al the varients that are spun up to laundry cash before the varient disappears.
 
2021-10-27 3:57:35 AM  
Short answer- Republicans.
 
2021-10-27 4:20:24 AM  

GrogSmash: lizyrd: That could include clearer rules over ... using them as collateral for loans ...

It's purportedly a currency, not an investment or property. I could see accounting for the value of crypto holdings as a positive for a signature loan - if I have a chunk of money, whether in dollars, yen, bits, or euros, it should make borrowing some unsecured money easier. Would cash being formally used as collateral have to go into escrow?  I don't know that I see the purpose of putting aside one pile of money already possessed to obtain a loan of another pile of money.  Maybe I could see it if I was going to guarantee someone else's loan or something...

Assuming that it's really a currency and not a speculative investment. But since we're not really sure what it is, or even why it has value beyond that it costs resources to create and people are willing to pay for it at the moment, maybe we had ought to hold off on putting effort into legitimizing it. Maybe it's the future of money. Or maybe in 5 years people will have set their blockchain wallet on the basement shelf next to their Beanie Baby portfolio.

The issue with collatoral is that is has a fixed or known value.

Property, vechicles, pr stable stock is collatoral.  Bitcoin...  is a highly speculative consumer driven nightmare.  It is not collatoral, especially al the varients that are spun up to laundry cash before the varient disappears.


Japanese banks are very wary, at least when dealing with small fry, of accepting collateral. I will say that they accept almost nothing. Pretty much residences or structures in cities, and that is all. Once you get out into the country, homes are essentially... can I say worthless? Well, they aren't of course. Some can be expensive, but you can't borrow against them without some acrobatics.

It is almost exactly like bitcoin. No matter how valuable it might be, it does not belong on the books of a freaking bank. No bank wants to be holding a ranch, a castle, a Rembrandt, and a hot spring when the economy goes south. And I sure do not want to be holding bitcoin when every computer in the hemisphere gets shut down by a sunspot or when my neighbors want something to eat.
 
2021-10-27 6:40:04 AM  

Madman drummers bummers: "If we don't bring this activity inside the banks, it is going to develop outside of the banks. ... The federal regulators won't be able to regulate it."

Yeah, that's the farking POINT.


Yeah, isn't the whole point a decentralized system?
 
2021-10-27 4:31:35 PM  

Northern: Golf clap subby.
The banks want to wet their beaks after seeing amateurs at Coinbase take 10% transaction fees for crypto trades.  That's $100,000 for every $million traded.


the smart money uses decentralized exchanges and/or hard wallets.

unless you trust someone else's servers with your private keys.

not your keys, not your crypto.
 
2021-10-27 4:34:51 PM  

skybird659: Short answer- Republicans.


Regulating crypto by the Feds will only further legitimize it.
 
2021-10-27 4:36:33 PM  

sprgrss: Madman drummers bummers: "If we don't bring this activity inside the banks, it is going to develop outside of the banks. ... The federal regulators won't be able to regulate it."

Yeah, that's the farking POINT.

Yeah, isn't the whole point a decentralized system?


yes it is.
but your Friendly Bankster wants to avoid decentralization because then he can't steal from you.  he loses control and can't be the middle guy milking you any more.
 
2021-10-27 4:38:05 PM  

sprgrss: Madman drummers bummers: "If we don't bring this activity inside the banks, it is going to develop outside of the banks. ... The federal regulators won't be able to regulate it."

Yeah, that's the farking POINT.

Yeah, isn't the whole point a decentralized system?


both Ethereum and Bitcoin are decentralized, peer to peer, open source Blockchains.
 
2021-10-27 4:41:19 PM  

Madman drummers bummers: "If we don't bring this activity inside the banks, it is going to develop outside of the banks. ... The federal regulators won't be able to regulate it."

Yeah, that's the farking POINT.


Decentralized, open source, peer to peer, public blockchains are already outside the banks.   and they aren't ever going into the banks.  they are free from centralized power/control that banksters love.

they are Digital Democracy and they scare the shiat out of our Banker Friends.
 
Displayed 14 of 14 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.