We have a well-known information on how to err when knowing Bitcoin. With these new players we could certainly see changes in behavior towards cryptocurrencies. We already know the position of the European entities on the request for regulation and now with the concepts and definitions of the next secretary of the treasury, we should not have the slightest doubt that they seek to "normalize" this digital field.
As always, we see that they are based on the fact that Bitcoin is synonymous with a recent terrorist financing route and that they would represent a new technological path that evolves the way to finance these criminal acts.
Although, we already know this argument, we must always emphasize that suspicious cryptocurrency transactions only represent 2.1%, something extremely insignificant for the fiat monetary mass that really masks criminal activities, including terrorism. Although there are many fields that use much easier ways and of doubtful regularization, we certainly found a figure that "represents 3.6% of what the planet consumes the planet", BBC News.
Activities such as drug trafficking, counterfeiting, and wildlife trafficking are some of the points that evolve the most thanks to the weakness of items such as gold or fiat money. I see that it is little known that one of the most restrictive and verification values is found in Bitcoin and nothing we see in other media can be compared to this procedure that is developed in exchange sites.
Again it is imperative to recognize that Bitcoin should be considered as a financial power, otherwise, these erroneous clarifications would be valid, because one thing is for sure, this digital asset represents a threat, an unexpected methodology that is really beginning to give results and I do not say so by the ATH reached or by its increase in the current market capitalization, I certify it by its concept and how it is directly coupled with the latent needs that are eroding with the current system.
We continue to hear how power factors, now new, will want to force the regularization of a currency like Bitcoin, but it will be interesting to see how something that responds to nothing is controlled, it does not have a central entity to whom to appeal or sanction. It is negligible that all this begins to sink only because of a transaction of 28 BTC, a supposed threat consideration, and more without conclusive evidence.
Fools build walls, wise men have bridges, we must wait for the new US administration to define a position on Bitcoin, there are many actors who are in favor of a positive approach with cryptocurrencies, a greater understanding and understanding of what are really and what is needed to be able to engage in a high-level debate, however, Bitcoin enters the list along with Yuam Digital, China and the growing debt, issues on the table that must be balanced, but without a doubt they are corrected with the cryptography.
Now I leave a reference link that has helped me to focus my opinion on this particular topic that will begin to give a deeper nuance on the control that is wanted over Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.
This article is not intended to be investment advice, but rather a practical approach to what can be the approach to a series of problems that focus on Bitcoin and the possible regulations to be taken by a new administration.