SEC...
Just one letter different and that makes it SEX, and a whole different crowd would be trying to read this, and Gordon would be uncomfortable talking about it.
Just three letters difference, and it would spell SUCKS, and that would be a closer correlation to truth. Let's make that word replacement a new paradigm for 2021.
But, we're all watching, because love it or hate it, XRP matters to the industry. The Maxi's are a little... well, they're a bit much. But, so are ETH maxi's and BTC maxi's. They're all different. I am a little column A, a little B, C, D, and so forth. I am into crypto because it is fascinating, it is both the present and future of finance, and gosh darnit, it matters.
The Securities and Exchange Commission, which let's face it, spent some of the "best" boom years of finance giving a big thumb's up to Bernie Madoff when he was the freakin' Chairman of NASDAQ, feels justified to let us all know what we should believe about cryptocurrencies.
So, in the name of clarity, they helped to make sure that we all understand, XRP is a currency, and NOT a security.
Awesome.
End.
Done.
At this stage, does anyone, even the Winkle-doppledangers, want the government to provide anything other than clarity, a green light means go, as little tax headache, and a willing actual prosecution from real exit scams? Not unless you are an insider whale or banker looking to grease a few more palms.
Alright, so in the name of clarity, the SEC weighs in on their lawsuit against XRP as a security, and provide greater clarity, it does not.
I claim that this article is satire. I wrestled with whether I should just file it under general articles, but when irony reigns supreme, it only seems fair to us, to let the truth speak its own ridiculousness.
The article that helps bring this to light, is:
https://heraldsheets.com/sec-commissioner-hester-peirce-breaks-silence-over-secs-lawsuit-against-ripple/?fbclid=IwAR3_qLdLctTvbPdIEi7T3QUTBDf9ofr34MsBIuwQ9ndHOo1_vX4D_OndkDE
The article points out, that:
"The bone of contention at the moment is whether XRP is a security or a currency. It can be recalled that XRP was deemed a currency in 2015 by the United States Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), but took a different turn in December 2020 with SEC’s lawsuit against Ripple.
Obviously, this looks confusing and the misalignment base on their stance is not the best as regulatory bodies. However, according to Peirce, each regulatory agency had its own rulebook to follow."
SEC commissioner Hester Peirce, (who seems perfectly comfortable spelling Pierce wrong- lol), states the following:
“I don’t want to speak to any particular cryptocurrency, whether it’s in litigation with us or not in litigation with us. But I think everyone has to look at the facts and circumstances.”
“In enforcement actions, it’s often a unanimous vote, but it’s sometimes not — once that vote has been taken, the litigation moves forward.”
“Often, you’ll see that the litigation ends in a settlement — sometimes it goes through and the litigation actually plays out in court.”
“I think that’s not only a problem with respect to digital assets, it’s actually a broader problem because we have this very open-ended category called an ‘investment contract. So something might be characterized as one thing by another agency, yet still be a security under our rules, and that can be frustrating for people.”
“That’s why I have called for more clarity, because I actually think it can be difficult to determine whether something fits within the security bucket or not, and we could do more to provide some guideposts for what that would be.”
So, in the name of regulatory clarity, let me ask you something for the sake of logic: What is the GOAL of regulatory clarity?
I would say that, for us, the traders and investors, the goal is to not have to wonder whether the big bad governments are going to change their rules, change their minds about how we are supposed to interact with crypto. If they warn that the category might change, it is almost assured that the insiders know, and we don't, and they will cash in on the FUD and FOMO, while we get screwed.
But, isn't the government agency's position always that clarity is meant to protect us from bad players and losing big on dishonest business practices? Yeah, I thought so.
When it comes to money, it is ALWAYS about money. And, when they are in charge of oversight... Bernie Madoff and his brother whom he wired for COMPLIANCE, for example, oversight is always about greed.
In more truth, isn't it equally true that we want every single cryptocurrency to be globally classified either as a utility or a commodity, and not as an actual currency? Notice, I did not say USED as... but classified as. See, if it is CLASSIFIED as currency, then the argument becomes about 'internet money' or money controlled and regulated by countries, to which we are all one regulatory step from losing all of our HODL's, because technically ANY currency that is not government ponzi issued fiat, can be considered illegal. It used to be. It technically still is. What is protecting us? One thing. Greed. They are too big to fail, the bankers, investor groups, firms and now banks. They do not want to see our coins fail, because they have an interest in their own gains and that is the only thing protecting our assets.
I, Gordon, am ideally a free-market Capitalist, who also believes in the reality that there is no such thing. Humanity is always involved, and regulatory control always starts in one place and advances to another, always in a way that benefits those at the top. I am not a Socialist, especially in finance. While I DO believe in certain social programs, I believe they are better served BY those who care the most about the people that they are designed to serve, and they are best protected by a government's role to prevent reduced funds involved in making those things happen. Social government programs would work, if it did not benefit the agencies that are always placed into the process to carry out such roles. The myth of utopia always ends in a huge, centralized government, and a lot of people risking an equal playing field at the bottom. We all, I assume, want what is best for the most people, other than the economic-psychopaths of industry and finance. But, as humanity goes, we are all one false move away from becoming hypocrites. Greed isn't just a temptation-risk for bad people; it is something that could turn each of us given a few self-justified false moves. "But, my baby needs diapers" is a slippery slope into "the investors will never notice another $10 Million as long as I keep inventing new fake accounts". And so, Gordon accepts the fact that freedom is always going to bear some responsibility with regulation. I also believe that the very least amount needed, is the best measure.
I have always maintained that we should have an expected, Constitutional understanding that a living, breathing human being deserves the right to our ownership of our selves, our property, and the right to pursue freedom through the ownership of property. If this is a right granted by a government, then it is just as easily a right taken away from that government. One regime change, and it happens. Gold has backed currency, and then it has been confiscated. MORE THAN ONCE.
Not your keys, not your coins, is one bad regulation away from being a myth. It takes one stupid law passed by one country, to deem it unlawful to own a private wallet without registering it with the central bank authority overseeing transfer of funds over blockchain, and you cannot find a place to cash out your coins for profit. That shouldn't be possible, but remember, it takes only two letters to change "SEC" to "SUCK".
Hehe, yeah I'm happy about that.
So, for satire, I once again cite Peirce, helping us to understand that the government's clarity means:
1. We should look at the facts and the circumstances.
2. When it comes to enforcing legal action against a legitimate, established cryptocurrency project, sometimes their decision is unanimous, and sometimes it is not.
3. Sometimes it is settled. Sometimes it goes to court.
4. It isn't just a problem dealing with digital assets. It is now a bigger problem dealing with anything that is an investment contract, in which case one government agency might think it is one thing, while another agency might think it is a completely different thing.
5. It is the SEC's role to provide more clarity, because whether something is a security or not, at this point, is not clear.
If that was my answer on the term paper, I would get an "F". What the absolute heck do we do with such useless agencies? If it were not for useless, bloated entities that accomplish nothing and get paid awfully well not doing so, "red tape" would just be another cool color option for something sticky. (Look up the history of red tape to fully agree with me... it is interesting).
So, the SEC, which provided regulatory clarity by classifying XRP as a currency, is now convinced it is worth suing the same parent company for not registering as a security, and let's be honest, the reason is because Ripple successfully raised $1.3B. It is NOT because the need for clarity. If that were the case, they wouldn't have given a hard pass on it being a security the first time around. In the name of clarity, we have the intentional declarification of a top 5 cryptocurrency, at a time that is eerily reminiscent of the creation of the Federal Reserve. I'd love for clarity, in the name of clarity, you know, in the spirit of open, public blockchains, to see who at the SEC and other agencies, has been holding bags of XRP, and of those, who sold just before Christmas break.
Wouldn't you?????
That's the kind of clarity we need. It is called accountability, and that works. Government doesn't. Let's be 100% factual and serious for a second... if it weren't for 'governmental clarity', the past 80 years of history alone would award us at least 10 million more Jews and their generations, and at LEAST 40 million more Russians, Poles, and Asians of all territories and nation states.
Gordon quotes himself:
"There is a reason that historically, the only way to acquire wealth was either to cheat by becoming a banker, or generational wealth passed through families. Remove the latter while the prior remains, and our only chance at any of this is a one-time go with crypto."
So, in the name of clarity, the SEC isn't officially clear, whether they are unanimous or not, whether their previous certainty over XRP's classification as a currency is true, because of investment contract law, and they don't know if their goal is to settle or to go to court (yes, I do know that lies partly in Ripple's hands), and in the spirit of clarity, this issue may not just come down to regulation of digital assets, but could broaden to ANYTHING that is an outlier as an investment vehicle of any sort.
Again, Gordon breaks his silence with a resounding WHAT THE HECK!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
No, really and truly I love this stuff. As long as I am not out of house and home (weird saying), and as long as fellow traders or investors get their profits one way or the other, I love that words like "stupid" and "hypocrisy" are given their due opportunities to define themselves, so the next generation can sink their teeth into good reasons not to seek the government to replace the family unit. It never ends well.
"Dad, can I got out? Dad, can I borrow the car?" asked Judy.
"Yes, dear", says Daddy, also known as government agency #1... "as long as you're back by ten and you don't drive or leave the house, unless you are responsible, in which case you can have $20 for dinner, but only if you eat vegetables, in which case you can be home by 10:30, unless you drive too fast, in which case it is 10 if you eat your vegetables and drive too fast, and 9:30 if you have a burger and drive too fast. If you have a wreck, then you can't have $20, but you won't know that until after you've had the accident, in which case call me... unless, it is after 10:30, in which case you're grounded, and you owe me $20, and you can only eat vegetables and don't get to go out."
"DO I MAKE MYSELF CLEAR?"
So, does the SEC make things clear? That's really hard to say. If laws were about safety, protection, clarity, then they would be as simple as moral codes of ethics. But, when you move the line on morality, you get more complex laws. It is true no matter how conservative or progressive you are. The EU has become a tangle of regulation, and some people love it, and some people are smart. I mean, some people hate it. If I needed someone to explain to me the plus and minus of brushing my teeth side to side, up and down, or in a circle, I've got the internet. If they pass a law for one direction or another because of "science", and the rules change in 5 years like they have since the 70's, then pardon me, but the tooth and mouth haven't changed... the absurd idea of passing a law to make it illegal to brush my teeth wrong would be both intrusive and inaccurate in its results. I'm not saying that is how far the EU has gone (yet), but there are good rules, like "don't plug this in while holding it in the shower" and "stop on red", and there are crap rules like charging a tax on people's stuff a 3rd time because, you know, they died. There is a reason that historically, the only way to acquire wealth was either to cheat by becoming a banker, or generational wealth passed through families. Remove the latter while the prior remains, and our only chance at any of this is a one-time go with crypto.
So, guess what: it's category #1, the bankers, who know you have this rare opportunity. And, to "protect" you, they have this one chance to squeeze the bottleneck of justice and make it one step harder for you to reach your dreams.
Take the risks you deem necessary. Take the responsibility when you guess wrong, have a bad day and take it out on Crypto Twitter, brush off the dust and get back to it. But, if you suck at trading, remember you're just 2 letters from the SEC- lol.
Now, if you aren't doing well, don't blame someone else, and don't try to win funds back because you guess poorly. If you get robbed, you deserve to have the backing of some kind of entity to look after your case. If you are good at investing, hodling, trading, you deserve to keep as absolute much as your good decisions earned you, Sir and Madam, and that is Gordon's wish for you in this new year.
I pray you the very best of moves in this market. I wish you a 2021 that does not 'SEC' in the same ways that 2020 absolutely SEC'd majorly in all major ways. May the road rise to meet you, may the government man's greed not eat you, and may your office chair comfortably seat you.
For now, Gordon Freeman, the loosely-regulated super hero of cryptomoney-ology... out.
