Kamala Harris has given cryptocurrency fans little to be hopeful about — despite some of the milquetoast rhetoric from her supporters.
The Federal Reserve’s enforcement action against a crypto-friendly bank shows that Operation Choke Point policies may still be on the table. The enforcement action also undermines the idea that Harris would bring a change of pace for U.S. cryptocurrency policy should she win the presidential election.
Dan Spuller, the Blockchain Association’s head of industry affairs, was quick to point out that the Federal Reserve’s enforcement actions appear to be only the latest of Choke Point 2.0 policies under the Biden administration.
Harris has given fans of cryptocurrency nothing to be hopeful about. She has yet to address the issue once on the campaign trail — leaving the public with little more than the past few years to judge.
Perhaps she is deliberately not being clear in order to win both sides on her side, considering that the cryptocurrency community in the United States is still relatively small and does not have the power and influence of the other side that is biased towards central banks.
On the other hand, Trump may be exaggerating in his statements and election promises about Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. He was clear in his statements, but should we believe all his promises? We can only judge conclusively after he wins the elections, and then we will see whether he will fulfill his promises or forget them.
What?Yes, that's true, but I mean the crypto community within the US itself is considered small and has less influence compared to the other side, I mean how many believe or work in Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies compared to those who still prefer the central banking system?
The USA is big enough to make the crypto industry scared whenever it advises people not to use no-KYC exchanges to the point where they self-censor themselves.
From what I think I heard, the crypto community is about 50 million out of a total US population of 330 million.
So if Harris is really serious to get the votes of those in the cryptocurrency space, she should send the message clear once and for all especially on the question if she is approving the many things happening right under the Biden administration where she is very much a part of.On the basis of part of the Biden administration we are doubting Kamala Harris she is obliged to the Biden administration till the voting and once she gets elected as President then she might change the rules of chokepoint 2.0 if they are not contract based.
~snip~
From what I think I heard, the crypto community is about 50 million out of a total US population of 330 million.
Somehow, I doubt that even 50 million US residents own cryptocurrencies, but even if that is true, how many of them actually own Bitcoin, and how many of them are "gambling" with various altcoins? I personally think that this figure is overblown for the reason that everything has to be big in the US, so why not the number of users of cryptocurrencies - and someone is obviously using these numbers very well to create FOMO "Hey, 50 million have already invested, what are you waiting for?"Yes, your words make sense, the numbers that I read about the crypto community in the United States do not talk about those who own Bitcoin specifically, but about everyone who owns any altcoin or maybe even those who bought shares of ETF companies, all of these will be counted, although this is wrong because the owners of shares are not considered part of the crypto community.
but she lacks more focus on policies that may work and in fact she is avoiding many interviews as she can not articulate that much on what she would be doing once in office and even in the last debate there are many things not so clear.i don’t think she is in support for crypto but i don’t think she is outwardly anti crypto, i just don’t think she supports it as much as trump shows he is
Perhaps she is deliberately not being clear in order to win both sides on her side, considering that the cryptocurrency community in the United States is still relatively small and does not have the power and influence of the other side that is biased towards central banks.
On the other hand, Trump may be exaggerating in his statements and election promises about Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. He was clear in his statements, but should we believe all his promises? We can only judge conclusively after he wins the elections, and then we will see whether he will fulfill his promises or forget them.
i don’t think she is in support for crypto but i don’t think she is outwardly anti crypto, i just don’t think she supports it as much as trump shows he isYeah, Harris hasn't expressed much of a stance on crypto so far, and we can't confirm whether she's pro-crypto or not. Usually presidents have an advisory board, Biden does too, but it seems his advisory board isn't quick enough to understand the value of crypto to the US economy and politics.
she knows that she should be careful in what to say because if she so as much says something not in favor of bitcoin, all bitcoiners would run flocking to trump (not like they haven’t yet) and she most likely does not want to say something that might backfire if she promises support to crypto and she wins and doesn’t implement what she said in the election campaign many would be furious
she’s playing the safe side basically these politicians doesn’t seem to have an opinion of their own or even if they do have their own opinion, they are willing to hide it to gain voters
Somehow, I doubt that even 50 million US residents own cryptocurrencies, but even if that is true, how many of them actually own Bitcoin, and how many of them are "gambling" with various altcoins? I personally think that this figure is overblown for the reason that everything has to be big in the US, so why not the number of users of cryptocurrencies - and someone is obviously using these numbers very well to create FOMO "Hey, 50 million have already invested, what are you waiting for?"Yes, your words make sense, the numbers that I read about the crypto community in the United States do not talk about those who own Bitcoin specifically, but about everyone who owns any altcoin or maybe even those who bought shares of ETF companies, all of these will be counted, although this is wrong because the owners of shares are not considered part of the crypto community.
~snip~
To be honest, they don't do it only in the US, we have "crazy" data on the number of crypto users from various parts of the world, especially India or some African countries, which when studied in a little more detail do not make any sense.I also expect that this data is random, inaccurate and meaningless because it is not based on real accurate statistics, as I mentioned to you earlier, most cryptocurrency holders prefer privacy, especially in countries with anti-cryptocurrency laws.