Bitcoin will be banned

We ask Nick Cawley and Justin Bennett how low BTC might go, whether the bull run is over, and if crypto investors should be worried right now. Plus, we discuss the crypto group that raised millions of dollars to buy a rare copy of the U. Is this prediction too ambitious? Some investors lost everything, and many watched helplessly as the value of their tokens collapsed.

And can you pass a basic crypto literacy test? Molly Jane takes the quiz live — and you can join in too. Plus… how can fraud and scams in the NFT market be tackled? Предпросмотр Apple Podcasts. Выпусков: Топ подкастов в категории «Новости». Эхо Москвы. Что случилось. Перцев и Гаазе. Стальная логика.

Сергей Михеев и Сергей Корнеевский. It is up to one or more countries to decide whether or not to outlaw cryptocurrency, since we both realize that bitcoin has a strong market valuation and a large amount of consumers who are skeptical that bitcoin can survive. Because of the large number of consumer demands, they must replace their fiat currency. So far, a large number of countries still do not deal in cryptocurrencies, so it is difficult for this work to become official.

I am new on this fourm. This fourm is real and trustfull fourm. This fourm is very good for earning and learning at the same time. I am working hard to earn money and gain knowledge about this fourm. I am making our posts useful and helpful to other members. No Cryptotalk will not banned in Bangladesh now or in future.

I know that Bitcoin is banned in Bangladesh but governments has no idea about this forum and others websites. This answer can be given to you by the citizens of Bangladesh who know the situation of Cryptocurrencies in Bangladesh. I hope you will get better answer of this question. I do not know about that, you need an economist who expects that for you because the prohibition of the use of cryptocurrencies in a country depends on its economic conditions and how it deals with the currency.

If the rights are violated, it will be prohibited. As far as i know my dear friend, Corrupt currency is a banned in many countries which makes it impossible for them to work on this website. I think Bangladesh is one of them. As long as Bitcoin is banned in your country, of course you cannot work with it because this is considered against the laws I hope in the coming days that your country will be freed from being banned. Hello my friend, in fact, I do not know if it was possible to deal with blatant currencies in Bangladesh.

There may be a law that prohibits this thing in your country and does not allow it for you to collect information about it. Good luck in your life. You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Paste as plain text instead.

Only 75 emoji are allowed. Display as a link instead. Clear editor. Upload or insert images from URL. By Dagamand , May 18, in Крипто Мир. By Gogolev Anatoly Started March 8, By serggggg Started March 25, By DenisZX Started 7 hours ago.

By serggggg Started Yesterday at PM. By coinyspace Started November 4. For Beginners. Search In. Payment Update. Sign in to follow this Followers Is here any chance to banned crypto in Bangladesh? Reply to this topic Start new topic. Prev 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next Page 23 of Recommended Posts. Vola1s Posted April Share this post Link to post Share on other sites. Qassem Zeen88 Umar shah MichelleHanonik Mjdy Unfortunately, many countries have banned cryptocurrencies Including Bangladesh I hope that dealing in cryptocurrency will prevail in all countries Because we became in the time of evolution.

Afzan 5. Oday22 Ayman22 FlyingHollandMan Queen3 3.

Это уже which cryptocurrency to buy 2022 случай кризиса

Lithuania became one of the first countries to have a framework regarding cryptocurrencies and taxation, with earnings up to euro considered tax free. Malta is known for being the home to some of the biggest cryptocurrency exchanges like Binance and OKEx because of their open stance when it comes to crypto. Their regulations are under the category of Digital Asset.

Marshall Islands. New Zealand. Cryptocurrencies are compared to gold and subject to taxes. Cryptocurrencies are considered assets and taxed. Cryptocurrencies are in the security and investment contract categories and are subject to regulations by the SEC. Any financial services that are related to cryptocurrencies, like exchanges, are subject to the guidelines of the Philippines Central Bank.

Crypto is regarded as a digital asset for taxes. Crypto services need a license. South Korea. Crypto is legal and subject to anti-money laundering laws while being closely regulated by the government. Financial institutions are required to report cryptocurrency transactions. Trade in Bitcoin is regarded as a financial service. Gains are taxed as business income. As early as , crypto was being accepted as payment by the Commercial Register Office. Institutions need licenses in order to operate cryptocurrencies.

There are extensive regulations implemented with a very positive outlook on crypto as a whole. Crypto is classified as property in the country. It is the growing destination to several crypto businesses. United Kingdom. Exchanges need to fit certain FCA requirements. Considered a crypto-friendly country, UAE has its own Emirates Blockchain Strategy , to move a majority of their transactions to blockchain and becoming a government powered by blockchain.

United States. Crypto is subject to tax laws in the United States. It is regulated if the sale of securities involves cryptocurrencies. Crypto is now legal in the country. Income gained from cryptocurrencies is not taxed and exchanges need specific requirements and licensing to be in operation. Having created its own petroleum-backed cryptocurrency in , Venezuela seemed like a prime candidate for widespread crypto adoption. It was declared illegal in and efforts to make it legal again came about in January Mining, which had been illegal and those who did it were charged, have had their charges dismissed.

Cryptocurrency activities are now legal in Venezuela. El Salvador. This is the only country so far that recognizes Bitcoin as legal tender. Before this action, it was recognized as the risk of the investor. Bitcoin investors should rejoice. Bitcoin as legal tender in any country is a huge event, one that deserves all the press it has been getting. In such cases, the usage of BTC is legal in the sense that you can own it, but there are no clear rules or legal protection concerning its status.

These countries are either already creating a legal framework for Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, or have taken a wait-and-see approach. Warns citizens to use cryptocurrency responsibly. The Ministry of Health plans to use blockchain to identify fraud in medicine. There is no legislation on it. They have policies regulating ICOs but make no mention of banning cryptocurrencies outright. Specified that their Central Bank is the only one that can issue legal currency and emphasizes that citizens treat crypto responsibly.

Belize has no crypto regulations to this date. British Virgin Islands. They have been regarded as ICO-friendly but nothing official on cryptocurrencies is available. The government is on standby with cryptocurrency policies, wanting to see how the crypto scene plays out first before further action. There is an emphasis on cryptocurrency not being legal tender.

The government urges caution. Although the government is developing its own currency backed by blockchain, cryptocurrencies are still a gray area legally, with the government warning of the potential risks involved with cryptocurrencies. Costa Rica. There is no overarching framework to operate crypto under the government. An exchange, however, has still propped up with no domestic backlash.

Citizens are warned about the decentralized nature of cryptocurrency. It is not recognized as domestic or foreign tender. No framework is given for crypto to operate on. Although there was a fear of a ban earlier in , the government is going to create a board that will decide how to handle cryptocurrency.

The individual is solely responsible for its risks. The government urges caution when handling crypto. Although crypto is subject to personal and corporate income tax, cryptocurrencies are still in a gray area legally in Latvia. Discouraging cryptocurrency practices, Lesotho does not allow the operation of cryptocurrencies that are unlicensed. The Monetary Authority of Macau discourages cryptocurrency participation.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are not legal tender and the Malaysian government advises citizens to use them with caution. Using Bitcoin and cryptocurrency with transparency is heavily emphasized. There is an emphasis for financial institutions to relay the risk of cryptocurrencies to citizens. It is not backed by the Central Bank and not considered legal currency. The National Bank of Moldova suggests to tread cautiously. Given their desire to join the European Union, and using the euro as legal tender, the government is treading cautiously with crypto.

Although investigating cryptocurrencies for the potential of tax evasion and money laundering, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are not recognized. Although the Central Bank wants to make its own digital currency, it is one of the least cyber-secure places in the world, making crypto operate through means that are neither legal nor illegal. The Tanzanian shilling is the only one that is described as legal tender and crypto is legal but discouraged.

Crypto is not considered legal tender and is discouraged by the Central Bank for now because of its risky and speculative nature. Anyone wanting to conduct business with cryptocurrencies needs a business license. The Central Bank acknowledges the potential of blockchain. Cryptocurrencies are unregulated but the government cautions individuals about their use, citing its possibilities of terrorism financing and fraud.

Because of that, many people are still wary of the trustless systems and rely on traditional banks instead. Regardless, a growing number of governments choose to embrace digital innovation and play a role in the industry. At the same time jurisdictions which oppose the emerging industry are at risk of being left behind. Ironically, these countries already are some of the poorest nations in the world, and widespread Bitcoin and cryptocurrency crackdowns seem to yield no favorable results to improve the situation.

Quite the contrary; embracing the cryptocurrency businesses with favorable regulations present an excellent opportunity to bring in innovation, capital, tax revenue and improve the living standard for the whole population. You may also like to read: How to buy Bitcoin? An increase in value is driven by a very simple market dynamic: more buyers than sellers. That is all and it is a function of increasing adoption. This is what creates long-term demand for bitcoin. As more people increasingly demand it as a store of wealth, there is no supply response.

There will only ever be 21 million bitcoin. No matter how many people demand bitcoin, the supply side is completely fixed and inelastic. As the skeptics continue to shout the same tired lines, the crowd continues to parse the noise and demand bitcoin due to the strengths of its monetary properties.

And no constituency is more well-versed in the arguments against bitcoin than adopters of bitcoin themselves. Desperation begins to kick in, and the debate re-anchors once again. The narrative predictably shifts. It is no longer that bitcoin is not backed by anything, nor that it is flawed as a currency; instead, the debate centers on regulation and government authorities. In the final stage of grief, it is actually that bitcoin works too well, and as a consequence, the government will never let it happen and ban it.

So human ingenuity somehow re-invents money in a technologically superior medium, the consequences of which are mind-bending, and the government is somehow going to ban that? Recognize that in claiming as much, the skeptics are admitting defeat. It is the dying whimper in a series of failed arguments. The skeptics simultaneously accept that there is fundamental demand for bitcoin and then pivot to the unfounded belief that governments can ban it.

Play this one out. When exactly would developed world governments actually step in and attempt to ban bitcoin? Today, the Fed and the Treasury do not view bitcoin as a serious threat to dollar supremacy. In their collective mind, bitcoin is a cute little toy and is not functional as a currency. When does the Fed or Treasury start seriously considering bitcoin a credible threat? Pick your level, but the implication is that bitcoin will be far more valuable, and held by far more people globally, before government powers that be view it as a credible competitor or threat.

So the skeptic logic follows: bitcoin does not work, but if it does work, the government will ban it. But, governments in the free world will not attempt to ban bitcoin until it becomes more apparent that it is a threat. At which time, bitcoin will be more valuable and undoubtedly harder to ban, as it will be held by far more people in far more places.

So, ignore fundamentals and the asymmetry inherent in a global monetization event because in the event you turn out to be right, the government will step in to regulate bitcoin out of existence. Which side of the fence would a rational economic actor rather be on?

Owning a monetary asset that has increased in value so dramatically that it threatens the global reserve currency, or the opposite — not owning that asset? Assuming an individual possesses the knowledge to understand why it is a fundamental possibility and increasingly a probability , which is the more defensible and logical position? The asymmetry alone dictates the former and any fundamental understanding of the demand for bitcoin only reinforces the same position.

Think about what bitcoin actually represents and then what a ban of bitcoin would represent. Bitcoin represents the conversion of subjective value, created and exchanged in the real world, for digital keys. When someone demands bitcoin, they are at the same time forgoing demand for some other good, whether it be a dollar, a house, a car, or food, etc. Bitcoin represents monetary savings that comes with the opportunity cost of other goods and services. Banning bitcoin would be an affront to the most basic freedoms it is designed to both provide and preserve.

Everyone go home. It is money which in existing society opens an astounding range of choice to the poor man — a range greater than that which not many generations ago was open to the wealthy.. Governments could not successfully ban the consumption of alcohol, the use of drugs, the purchase of firearms, or the ownership of gold. A government can marginally restrict access, or even make possession illegal, but it cannot make something of value demanded by a broad and disparate group of people magically go away.

When the U. It actually increased in value relative to the dollar, and just thirty years later, the ban was lifted. Not only does bitcoin provide a greater value proposition relative to any other good that any government has ever attempted to ban including gold ; but by its nature, it is also far harder to ban. Bitcoin is global and decentralized. It is without borders and it is secured by nodes and cryptographic keys. The act of banning bitcoin would require preventing open source software code from being run and preventing digital signatures created by cryptographic keys from being broadcast on the internet.

And it would have to be coordinated across numerous jurisdictions, except there is no way to know where the keys actually reside or to prevent more nodes from popping up in different jurisdictions. Setting aside the constitutional issues, it would be technically infeasible to enforce a ban of bitcoin in any meaningful way. Bitcoin Node Concentration by Country earn.

Even if all countries in the G coordinated to ban bitcoin in unison, it would not kill bitcoin. Instead, it would be the fait accompli for the fiat system. It would reinforce to the masses that bitcoin is a formidable currency, and it would set off a global and hopeless game of whack-a-mole.

There is no central point of failure in bitcoin; bitcoin miners, nodes and keys are distributed throughout the world. Every aspect of bitcoin is decentralized, which is why running nodes and controlling keys is core to bitcoin.

The more keys and the more nodes that exist, the more decentralized bitcoin becomes, and the more immune bitcoin is to attack. It would ultimately accelerate the shift away from the legacy financial system and legacy currencies , and it would accelerate innovation within the bitcoin economic system. With each passing threat, bitcoin innovates to immunize the threat.

A coordinated state level attack would be no different. Permissionless innovation on a globally decentralized basis is the reason bitcoin gains strength from every attack. It is the attack vector itself which causes bitcoin to innovate. Individual actors may believe themselves to be motivated by a greater cause, but in reality, the utility embedded in bitcoin creates a sufficiently powerful incentive structure to ensure its survival.

The self-interests of millions, if not billions, of uncoordinated individuals aligned by their individual and collective need for money incentivizes permissionless innovation on top of bitcoin. Today, it may seem like a cool new technology or a nice-to-have portfolio investment, but even if most people do not yet recognize it, bitcoin is a necessity. It is a necessity because money is a necessity, and legacy currencies are fundamentally broken.

Two months ago, the repo markets in the U. It is precisely why bitcoin is a necessity, not a luxury. When an innovation happens to be a basic necessity to the functioning of an economy, there is no government force that could ever hope to stop its proliferation.

Money is a very basic necessity, and bitcoin represents a step-function change innovation in the global competition for money. And more practically, any attempt to ban bitcoin or heavily regulate its use by any jurisdiction would directly benefit a competing jurisdiction. The incentive to defect from any coordinated effort to ban bitcoin would be far too high to sustain such an agreement across jurisdictions.

If the United States made the possession of bitcoin illegal tomorrow, would it slow down proliferation, development and adoption of bitcoin and would it cause the value of the network to decline intermittently? Would it kill bitcoin? Bitcoin represents the most mobile capital in the world. Countries and jurisdictions that create regulatory certainty and place the least amount of restrictions on the use of bitcoin will benefit significantly from capital inflows.

It is multi-dimensional involving numerous jurisdictions, all with competing interests, making any attempts to successfully ban bitcoin that much more impractical. Human capital, physical capital and monetary capital will flow to the countries and jurisdictions with the least restrictive regulations on bitcoin.

It may not happen overnight, but attempting to ban bitcoin is the equivalent of a country cutting off its nose to spite its face.