ECB Called Bitcoin Bottom – Trustnodes

On November 30th, in the midst of peak FUD when bitcoin resolved attempts to fractional reserve it, the European Central Bank (ECB) was happy.

Bitcoin is on the “last gasp before the road to irrelevance,” Ulrich Bindseil and Jürgen Schaaf said on behalf of the ECB.

They then proceed to make the usual arguments that bitcoin is not a suitable investment because it has no return, such as dividends.

Ignoring the fact that no one buys shares for the dividend, bitcoin gives returns, but in a decentralized way because bitcoin itself is the product, and if you want to use that product, it increases the demand – and thus returns.

The rest of that statement is of the same shallow analysis. On the one hand, they say that the regulations must be used, but on the other hand, it must not be “misunderstood as approval”.

It remains a less muddled argument than the one presented recently, now that bitcoin has recovered to double from the ECB’s $15,000 bottom, by Jon Danielsson, an economist who teaches at the London School of Economics.

Writing for the LSE’s Business Review, he first says bitcoin will collapse “under its own internal contradictions.”

Sneaking into the elite towers to think about the communist language that likes to claim that others are full of internal contradictions, but not the perfect Chinese Communist Party, will hopefully not go unnoticed.

But aside, Danielsson says that “the very fact that the government is acting in such a heavy-handed way may well be what protects crypto.”

He argues that crypto should be left alone instead, as that way it will go away one way or another, but if the regulatory onslaught continues, crypto will get stronger, will boom, won’t go away, and it will be the government’s fault for all this.

Interesting fellow. A bit different than “Bitcoin’s last stand”, as the ECB declared it in November because it clearly turned out not to be.

The concern now is whether fighting crypto could backfire. Our answer is obvious, but it’s interesting to see then in the open statements that correspond to why this doesn’t just go away.

The answer is what it always has been when someone in the establishment doesn’t like something: it’s good for the people, and they like it, and there are far more of them.

So keep collapsing under your own internal contradictions of communist thinking where one man or institution decides our money, because crypto isn’t going anywhere.

Except for the moon, obviously since our plans to go to Mars instead have been delayed by the T-0.40 second test run of the Starship rocket, indicating that it might take a bit more time.

But no amount of time can help those who are against competition. Either the US government, or Chinese, the ECB or this Danielsson guy.

Nature abhors monopoly, including over money, and that the competition for such a monopoly comes from well-educated, polite, math-heavy coders is and should be seen as a gift from that nature.

Because while ECB President Christine Lagarde talks about “Policy frameworks for a fragmenting world”, someone is coding these frameworks.

And it is that code that will determine many things in the digital era. China has made the strategic mistake of underestimating it when it comes to finance.

Leaders and thinkers in the West should start thinking about why they have been wrong to underestimate it for so long too, and consider that the new innovation can instead help achieve many of the things we want.

From more dynamic markets, more competition, more life and more authority, to leading the frontier and even the frontiers.

And that they have been wrong is at this point self-evident because the delusion of the ECB could not be more clear than was stated in November, which has now proved it.

These people also need to look at themselves in the mirror and just wonder what they have become that they are happy for an innovation to fail.

Cryptocurrency, whatever you think of bitcoin itself, is an achievement of man and science, and is undoubtedly a step forward.

It must be exploited, should be, and it will be exploited, as fortunately it is by mostly quite competent men who are leading our societies into a new era of both greater capacity and greater authority.

Where the code sets the rules, unchanging, on equal terms for all, and where the market is in control, not a selfish or power-hungry man or men.