Good day everyone,

I hope you are all well and are having an excellent day welcome to CryptoGod-1’s blog on all things crypto. Following on from my recent post titled "Old Man From Belgium Starts Yelling About Crypto" today I am going to be looking at the response from Charles Hoskinson, the founder of Cardano. Within the original post I outlaid how the former Belgium Finance Minister called for a ban on crypto and likened it to drugs, which did not go down well with Hoskinson.

Hoskinson Tweet

Quite simply, Hoskinson called out Johan Van Overtveldt in a tweet where he also linked an article explaining how the current member of the European Parliament and former Belgian finance minister was basically blaming the recent banking collapse in the United States on crypto. Hoskinson, who was one of the original co creators of Ethereum and went on to found Cardano, was quick to give his views on the matter. Hoskinson pointed out how it was in fact banks and politicians who created the banking crisis and that they are merely deflecting the blame towards crypto. He also made it clear that the wider public should "not fall for it" and to remember these lies the next time there is an election taking place.

He makes a very valid point, especially when we consider that the politician in question, Johan Van Overtveldt, is involved in the financial aspects of politics. Clearly it cannot be a case of the blame lies with Johan, but in the same breadth is reeks of ignorance and arrogance for him to level the blame on crypto. The fact he provided no facts, evidence, or proof to back his claim up is further evidence of the lack of thought when it comes to his comments.

How the Banking Crisis has NOTHING to do with Crypto

When the New York State Department of Financial Services took control of Signature Bank on Sunday the 12th of March 2023, they were quick to quell any rumours that the reason for the banks closure was to do with Crypto. A spokesperson made it clear in a statement:

"The decisions made over the weekend had nothing to do with crypto. The decision to take possession of the bank and hand it over to the FDIC [Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation] was based on the current status of the bank and its ability to do business in a safe and sound manner on Monday."

They also made it clear that Signature Bank had been facilitating well-regulated crypto activities for several years, while also claiming it was a good model for regulating the space. The main issues arose when an unprecedented amount of withdrawal requests were made, and the bank was unable to handle them. While plenty of rumours were afloat of the bank having been closed to send a message to crypto or about how unsafe crypto was, this was not an anti-crypto message by regulators. The bank itself was accounting for nearly 25% of its total deposits being from the cryptocurrency sector in September 2022, although they had planned to reduce that amount as announced in December 2022.

As stated by "The Wolf of All Streets" (@scottmelker) on Twitter, the primary reasons for the Banks closure and the overall Banking crisis is more to do with mismanagement by the bank and the Fed policy than cryptocurrencies. The ramifications will be interesting, as he believes it was closed in part to 'help crush the crypto industry' although we will have to wait and see how that plays out. So far, Bitcoin and other cryptos have responded quite positively to the news.

Can Politics and Crypto Mix?

This is possibly one of the most pertinent questions revolving around the crypto community, not just in terms of regulations, but can the politicians be trusted to have everyday individuals best interests at heart? Should we believe that the politicians will make it a fair and level playing field with any regulations they may impose? I for one find it very difficult to plausibly believe anybody in power would willingly allow the mass public an opportunity to gain financial freedom and not be under the demands of the state and government. It is just not how it works. However, I do think we will see a lot of interesting campaigning globally in future elections of those looking to get into office based off a positive crypto outlook and agenda towards making crypto a publicly accept asset. These things take time of course, but for now we are stuck with what we have in charge, and even down the line those who claim to be crypto friendly will not always be the case. All we can do is ensure that those like Johan Van Overtveldt are consistently reminded that his views of crypto being as bad as drugs are unwelcome and insulting, albeit seemingly only do more damage to him than to crypto. At the end of the day, nobody cares if he thinks a new form of technology he cannot understand is bad, what we care about is what restrictions they 'try' and impose.

With news of the FED giving Coinbase a 'Wells Notice' regarding an unspecified portion of their listed digital assets, it seems the tone is set for the government to come down with force on crypto. While a 'Wells Notice' is not a formal charge or lawsuit, it is a way for them to recommend that the SEC take enforcement action for possible violations of securities laws, and could potentially lead to a lawsuit down the line. Whether people will get on board with the government taking a firm stance on crypto or not remains to be seen, but it seems the war is about to begin and the SEC are the first to strike. Coinbase are not backing down, and have clearly stated how they have requested clear guidance on regulations, not enforcement. Its a bold move and one I am sure Johan Van Overtveldt would be proud of. Whether or not the European Regulators make similar moves is yet to be seen, but a ban or not, I personally don't see crypto going anywhere anytime soon.

Have a great day.

Peace. CryptoGod-1.

Referral Links and Follow Me:

Linktree