Four years ago, give or take, I had a very strong instinct about where the world of crypto was headed. My view was not well-embraced, whether it was due to extreme optimism from the market or a lack of awareness about the political historical past, I shared my views more and more in a small circle of family and friends, realizing the rest of the online world was just gonna have to figure it out when it was too late.

That being said, it doesn't change the fact that the crypto world IS headed in that direction, and now is the time. So, I offer a few thoughts. I think they're important, you may disagree. Either way, here they are for the record so it can be one more thing that it doesn't matter I was right about- lol.

First, the idea of government's role in crypto 'regulation'

Taking this back to some real world situations, I have been through the trial by fire numerous times. It feels like having compacted 20 years of intense, emotional life lessons and career-wisdom in 4 years. So, although everything I say here is just personal opinion, I can back it up with one experience after the next after the next after the next. Then, add observation on top, and I think there are some lil pieces of wisdom to take from this.

It is my firm belief, now more than ever, that the government's role in crypto markets should be to listen to the user, investigate the complaints and legitimate law-based cases, and then butt out. That's it. Now more than any other time, I have seen more harm come from the fear and restrictions caused by government over-reach than any single criminal instance inside the crypto world.

For example: Mt. Gox. They either flat-out stole client coins, or were grossly ignorant to protocol- the minimum it should require to protect people's accounts or their own. Having said that, all of the regulatory provisions in the world have not expedited the process of people getting their funds returned, and the length of time in freezing, mandating, offering windows for claims and the sort, shows that the government is very quick to try to create rules that affect every single honest user, but they are slower than a turtle stuck in molasses when it comes to actually bringing vindication to theft or gross negligence. Why is that?

There's FATF, FinCen, the SEC, the OCC, and every country has their own agencies to spy, regulate, investigate, but when there's an actual theft, things move very, very, very slow. If making good on victims were the one and only priority in global governing protections, the end result would look the exact opposite. 

In the case of the U.S., the SEC overseas the definition of start-ups and public listings as to whether they raise funds with the expectation that the investor should hope for future profit, but somehow they are continuously seeking opportunities to change their findings on things that were made absolutes in the past, as if they load and unload the fraud-finder weaponry every time they don't like the way the market is treating someone, often if it is a positive for the wrong project. Wielding the power of "you're registered... you're not registered... tag you're it" is not what these entities are there for.

I've been the direct victim of some seriously crappy treatment from multiple crypto exchanges, and in the midst of it, if I felt I had real comradery from any government entity that would jump in, listen to our case, pressure the platform to get a fast, accurate outcome, I'd have loved it. But no such thing existed in any of the scenarios I faced.

The grass roots efforts of organizing those affected was the only thing that struck the fear of justice in the wrong-doers in some instances, and brought some measure of correction.

Trust me, the true criminals do not fear repercussions from governments. One time in 10,000 in my opinion, someone truly scamming the public actually gets investigated, caught, tried and convicted justly for their cyber crimes. But, exchanges DO fear having to get bogged down in government red tape that intends to make all of us feel like we are taking part in something we should be ashamed of, when we're not trying to do anything wrong. The only person who misses out as a result of this government posturing is the customer, who isn't allowed on most exchanges because they simply don't want to deal with that jurisdiction. Its stupid and it stinks.

I see more and more the governments of the world becoming very bold in their quest to turn us all into the peon class, and a false Marxist narrative shall be born out of it all. The self-enlightened University Marxists in training will think they are oh-so brilliant in their understanding of the utopian future coming, as they brim and stir and fume over the Capitalist Fascismo of the right, all the time handing the last pieces of freedom over to exactly the wrong people in charge. But, when it comes time to require actual justice, trust me, the Rulers have much more important things to do.

Exchanges, largely, are in the business of making money, taking funds and turning it into more money, taking what some borrow and earning a fee, earning a fee for every trade into/out of anything, and offering the hopes and dreams to every person looking to belly up to the card table. In fact, for regular spot markets, I have no problem with that. They provide a place to grab volume, handle accounts, support, regulatory hooplah, Telegram groups... it's not an easy business, but a business nonetheless. 

Yes, it is in many ways, like a legal online casino. And to that, I say be an informed player and take the informed risks that make sense to you. Don't play if you can't afford it. On top of that, I suggest that most people are becoming increasingly less intelligent and informed at how badly they are going to get burned. The job of the casino is to offer the illusion of random fairness so that people are drawn to the shiny, blinky things at the front of the room, while the less hypnotic offerings, the old staple, boring, yet reasonably fair games sit in the foggy back corner; spot markets. People with skill and a knowledge of relatively safe assets can beat the house, so to speak, but the house wants you playing the exciting high-risk odds at the front.

But here's the thing; I don't think that making the different gambling formats illegal can cure stupidity, gullibility, bad math or bad luck. If you believe the casino's word that a little leverage will only wipe out your hand, but you have the chance of winning much bigger with more leverage, then by all means, play to your heart's content. Don't go crying to Mommy government when they liquidate your stack squealing like a lil bebe "they took my staaaaaaack".

It is of my opinion, that if a government feels the need to "protect us", they can set up shop at the front of the line, where a new token company or exchange, for instance, can complete the right application and expect to be covered from the moment it is filed, not at the time of awaiting approval. It is an unfair practice to require everyone to comply, but then offer no timeline that you might ever get around to handling their approval. The government can enforce a ban without needing it, if everyone has to stand around awaiting their stamp or seal, and that's exactly the game they play.

For crypto businesses that were told they were good to go, and then suddenly dragged back into a new category, an unregistered security for instance, it should have some kind of rules that make sense, like double jeopardy for example.

If a violator is wreaking havoc on the public, then the public should be able to ask for justice from the managing agency, but that's where the governments always lose our trust. Some quick pressure applied right where it matters, right when a crime has taken place, can quickly reverse a wrong-doing. Slow-to-no action doesn't improve anyone's safety.

So, I ask (already knowing the answer): what is the real goal of regulation? Grabbing more data, controlling the flow of monetary movement from every business and every citizen to digitize and capture sovereign value.

We want more freedom, less control. With that freedom comes more risk, and if you love us, you'll want to protect us the very rare times we come to you needing your help. That's what a good government could supply, but it means more enjoyment out of life for us, and fewer jobs for them.

Second, the idea of intentional market manipulation and the pot calling the kettle black

Much of what we hear about the dangers of crypto is the radical fake volume and market manipulation taking place. So, let's look at who causes the manipulation and what the dangers are.

Here we are again, where it's just their responsibility when well-timed FUD is created directly from governments to their propaganda media machines, bought and paid. At times where we see a natural increase in volume, an increase in whales withdrawing funds from exchanges, piles of positive crypto industry news, new investors entering the field, more people saving in USDT or other stables than entering TradFi money markets, that's precisely when the new scary government report on 'xyz' is released. We know its coming, because they tell us through "a knowledgeable insider" for months in advance. Each time they tell us its coming, the market jerks a little bit. But, from the government, that's just them looking out for us. If someone in the free world plays the same games, its market manipulation. Seems rather unfair, doesn't it?

I can easily push my massive billions of dollars of investments up or down 0.5% on any given day just by telling the news wires I may be announcing the next rate hike in a week. I'm the government; I'm here to help.

The next hypocrisy is that the governments of the world know that by and large, most volume of which they speak, is 100% legal, because it is coming from market makers. This is the only topic of massive importance that Richard Heart is wrong about, in how exchanges and open markets work. Part of his hypothesis is because his marketing and promotion angle relies solely on the "us against them" and its okay, I sympathize with the vast majority of his premise. But, long before the exchanges are the devil, the government certainly is.

The argument against volume is that it is there to lure the real buyers and sellers in, and it is their buys and sells that market makers eat for lunch, while the exchanges make a fee off of your pitiful little stack. Sure, it sounds like a terrible tale. But, volume and liquidity ARE good. Richard uses the angle that it is bad, because all of the massive spike payday windfalls happen under conditions of terrible, low volume. But, that isn't the healthy market, and it really is the only major area where he rakes "traders" over the coals with false information, and none of them are smart enough with a response better than "nuh uh" or the "but wuttubout?" defense. Pitiful.

The thing in a market that is healthy, is that every person looking to sell can find a buyer within the range they hope, and every buyer is able to get in at the price they hope to pay. The friendliest, most beneficial agreement at market is when the price is high, that the seller can get out exactly where they want to earn a profit, and at times when the price is low, the buyer doesn't have to keep bidding up to get their whole order filled at higher prices.

Market makers do actual market making for a living. It isn't a hidden, illegal agenda. There are firms filed with their state or region that do nothing but offer their services to exchanges, stocks, or token projects solely to make markets. Their goal is making thousands of small trades near market price, which provide the feature that matters most to every exchange; liquidity. While those narrow spreads offer short-time-duration liquidity to buyers and sellers, no one on a good exchange is getting taken advantage of for grabbing or selling the exact price they want. But, the government expects everyone to be ignorant about this, so they pretend that it is illegal shadowy elements rigging markets to fake volume.

Who is harmed by there being more trades than if there weren't market makers? People waiting to buy that can't fill an order? Nope. People having to keep lowering their sell price taking less profit? No.

The claim is that exchanges are faking their numbers to lure customers in under false pretense. Well, that surely is part of the sales pitch, and the customers aren't told "hey guys, a lot of that 24 hour volume is from paid market makers" but the results would be exactly the same if it was all coming from other customers. In fact, in most cases the individual market makers are customers that have simply traded enough volume in a given 30 day cycle to reduce their fees to zero, opening up the ability to trade for smaller profit margins.

So, as I'll beat the drum often, when we see that Gensler pushes highly leveraged futures that wreck people to the hundreds of billions of dollars, while holding off on approving spot ETF's that are known to encourage the real current value of an asset, you have to know it is not for your protection.

When Jerome Powell tells you a little inflation is a great thing and he might raise interest rates, things look terrible... he isn't doing it so you can get your ducks in a row, he's doing it so his pals can get in at a low temporary dip. We see the evidence in the massively, grossly accurate growth in profits from members of Congress, for instance. People not smart enough to tie their shoelaces are earning 10,000% over geniuses like Warren Buffet. That, my friend, is market manipulation.

It is not the role of the government to hold back industry, to scare people away from industry, and to place applications at the bottom of the stack. It is not the government's role to lie about who is providing volume to markets as if they are criminals. It's not their place to switch the category of investment of important crypto projects at will, to cast doubt on platforms we rely upon by serving them with papers that will never lead to anything. These are all tactics of a government testing the edges of totalitarianism to see how we react.

Things only improve when they start to fear us more; not the other way around. In the meantime, it would be nice if, when someone hacks an account, that they used a few pennies on those massive budgets to, you know, investigate an actual crime.

And on that furious, watchdog note, a Crypto Gordony Superhero... for now... out.