Bankers are all stuck in this 19th century mentality that their centralized monetary system is "public" and Crypto is the one that's "private". https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/trading-bitcoin-is-like-trading-stamps-and-the-cryptocurrency-may-collapse-swedens-central-bank-governor-says/ar-AAOgPoH

Public: "Of, concerning, or affecting the community or the people"

Private: "Belonging to some particular person: private property"

So, the immediately break the soul of another old and outdated banker, Bitcoin is per definition not "private" and if public vs. private is your so called main concern, why didn't you once in your 101 years on this planet condemn private banking? I dare you to find one banker who condemns Crypto for it's lack of central control and not being "public money", who also on record condemned private banks and their services.

But I can't just leave it at that, so let's examine the entire article:

"Ingves's comments are broadly in line with what other central bankers have said about bitcoin and crypto".

It's just staggering how badly both the media and bankers are isolated from society and the public. It's like they both don't realize how despised banks and bankers are by the vast majority of people and that that is one of the core causes Bitcoin and Crypto is succeeding. Putting bankers all up in peoples faces to explain how bad Crypto is, is like interviewing war criminals and ask them about the benefits of illegal invasions and listen to them "explain" to us that they "preemptively defend our country".

"Personally, I wouldn't put my money into it, but clearly, some people think it's a good bet," Makhlouf said. "Three hundred years ago, people put money into tulips because they thought it was an investment."

For those not aware what the old boy is talking about here, he's referring to the 17th century "tulip mania" which was by the way the first ever price bubble. What basically happened back then, was that in a time when tulip bolls were not for everyone and actually considered a status/luxury item, investors started to artificially inflate the price when they noticed tulips popularity was beginning to rise. Their involvement not only made tulips ridiculously expensive, but inevitably set the tulip market up for a crash because those investors did not buy billions of tulips bolls to actually plant them, they had to spend money for storage and the needed care for preventing them to rot and become useless, just long enough for them to trade the bolls again for a higher price, have the market note the higher price sale, and then repeat the process for again another profit cycle. How is this the same as Crypto you ask? Well, it's not. Tulips aren't technologically developing all the time or solving any global problems like Crypto is doing, they're just.....tulips. Even if you go scout the entire world to maintain the artificially created price bubble, eventually, there are no more buyers and the price will crash like a house of cards, because the value outweighs the usefulness. Yes, there are times when Bitcoin and other Cryptos are meddled with by certain investors and set up for a fall, but they do not "crash", they go through *corrections*, there is a significant difference. Old boy's Tulip story lasted about a few moths

Bitcoin has proven itself for years, the tulip mania ended with the price crashing all the way down to where it began because, again, they're tulips, what else can you do with them when the bubble bursts? Where on the contrary the value of Cryptos with actual use cases and quality recovers even after the investors dump their shares on the market. Relatable crashes to the tulip mania in the Crypto market is what happens when do-nothing useless meme or "community driven" coins go through when they can't attract new money for basically creating nothing and thus never get back up again https://www.publish0x.com/geo-political-economical-developments/safemoon-safemars-aquagoatfinance-safetesla-same-sh-differen-xqkjwxn

"I'm sorry, I'm going to say this very bluntly again: buy them only if you're prepared to lose all your money," Bailey said as dogecoin was surging to new heights."

Remember that shot I took at the media earlier? Look at them here dragging a gimmick meme coin into the equation, instead of an Ethereum, Quant, or Uniswap. Really, just desperate man.

And the grand finale, where this article contradicts itself and basically renders their entire foundation as flawed: "Central banks across the world are looking into developing their own virtual money, known as central bank digital currencies".

Yeah, banks are adapting Bitcoin's revolutionary blockchain technology. What does that tell you? There's no Crypto out there who's adapting to banks and printing their coins out on actual tangible coins or paper bills are they? There are however some Cryptos who have centralized control and can confiscate or block you from your property just like banks can do, but that's where the decentralization argument comes in https://www.publish0x.com/geo-political-economical-developments/when-is-the-only-time-youll-see-western-propaganda-applaud-c-xelrrqk