'Government has become addicted to indirect regulation' \ stacker news ~Politics_And

pull down to refresh

'Government has become addicted to indirect regulation'cointelegraph.com/news/government-become-addicted-indirect-regulation-ripple-cto

377 sats \ 26 comments \ @Cje95 30 Nov Politics_And_Law

I am not a fan of Ripple at all but the growing chorus of people speaking out against Operation Chokepoint 2.0 which has resulted in people getting unbanked by the US for being in crypto needs to be looked at. While I do expect the US Government to take a dramatically different stance come next year with crypto and blockchain overall there has been a ton of damage done already.

I know as well a ton of people here are quick to come out against anything that isn't Bitcoin but this is just an example of something that has been growing for years within the US government. Look at the EPA and their court cases (how Chevron Doctrine was rolled back considerably) and the SEC being forced by the courts to allow BTC ETFs. It is a widespread problem.

Because of how crypto has been revolutionary and changed so many people's lives so quickly creating a new wealth class more "regular" people are able to speak out about what has gone on and highlight the issues that have taken place.

view all related items

193 sats \ 3 replies \ @Arceris 30 Nov

I agree with you. Just because Ripple & other crypto projects are scams, doesn’t mean that the government is justified in applying unconstitutional and fraudulent practices to sanction them.

Of course, government will do this, and no one will be punished, but it doesn’t mean it’s justified.

Indirect regulation is too easy, too opaque, and too difficult to appeal. Which is exactly why they want it.

210 sats \ 2 replies \ @Cje95 OP 30 Nov

Well with the fall of Chevron though it now is a hell of a lot easier to go after this type of enforcement and I think next year we are going to see Congress hit a ton of spaces with a new approach.

By any chance did you see the Rogan Podcast with Marc Andreessen over AI? I do not see the incoming Admin and Congress really allowing such a thing to happen. JD Vance is a huge hater of big tech and I don't see him folding esp. with the venture capitol money on his side

173 sats \ 1 reply \ @Arceris 30 Nov

You’re correct that the incoming admin is likely to back way off on indirect regulation, especially in the crypto and oil & gas space. Not entirely sure about unilateral disarmament on the concept though (very happy to be proven wrong here!).

I’m not entirely sure that Loper Bright will strongly impact indirect regulation though. Chevron more allowed agencies to unilaterally impose direct regulation when they shouldn’t have that power.

Indirect regulation (at least as I understand it) is more of a “we have no power to force you to do this, but if you don’t, then you can expect us to be extra super thorough in going after what we can.”

Unless the Trump admin is able to put in place some guarantees, future administrations can and will reach for these tools again.

Of course, what I really want is unlimited personal liability for regulators who use their power to coerce others to engage in acts which would be unconstitutional for the regulator to do. One can dream.

Regardless, Jan 20 can’t come soon enough.

110 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 OP 30 Nov

You’re correct that the incoming admin is likely to back way off on indirect regulation, especially in the crypto and oil & gas space. Not entirely sure about unilateral disarmament on the concept though (very happy to be proven wrong here!).

Okay okay I can help here lol!!! The House the last two years has been building up staff support in areas that are not well or easily understood like AI and Blockchain for instance the House Bipartisan AI Task Force was stood up and our report should be coming out soon its over 256 pages and counting!

With regards to the indirect regulation idea I think your idea is correct but can be expanded into what I think of it as and that is "we don't know IF we have the power but we will force you until someone else (courts or Congress) tells us differently". Since the Secretary and head of the SEC assign/task the various departments with enforcement priorities I think the new Admin will be a lot more hands-off but and a huge but when you screw up and lets use FTX as an example the charges and the years for everyone will be MUCH more severe.

I think next Congress (Congress starts Jan 3rd and President starts Jan 20th) we will see a ton of legislation move through to codify things. This will highly likely be done via budget reconciliation since that gets rid of the 60-Senator filibuster issue unless Republican Sen. can find 6 Dems they can count on for a crypto package.

The other way which is something Biden is trying to execute now because the process to unravel it takes 3+ years is rules published in the Federal Register. He has hinted at moving to tie up a lot of public land oil and gas production this way and likely would have already finished this except for the way the rule was being interpreted it also would take out all solar, wind, and hydro production ideas as well. The big one is appliance efficiency which they are rushing to do and I want to say the Methane tax if I recall correctly!

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @zapsammy 30 Nov

banks love crypto. cryptofiat will be the new enslavement arrangement, with obscure terms & conditions as usual. this resistance to crypto is a show, to herd people into the new system, by making them think there is a revolution going on.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Cje95 OP 30 Nov

Banks love Blockchain. Tokenizing things is a huge future thing for them and something that Jaime Diamond has talked about for a while now. They don't really care for crypto due to FedNOW essentially making it meh for P2P transactions that are publically linked to a person.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @zapsammy 30 Nov

what is the difference? it's all the same system of central planning and control. monopoly money. same god, different mask.

the three branches of mind-control are: coercion, religion, money; enforcers, preachers, bankers. the cycle repeats over and over, spiraling and taking hold deeper and deeper into people's psyche.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 OP 1 Dec

Uhhh FedNOW is controlled by the Fed and with the trickle down effect banks however crypto isn’t nor are you forced to be on it?

It’s like saying a cat and a dog are the same thing just cause they are 4 legged animals doesn’t make them the same at all

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Aardvark 30 Nov

I'm not into any other crypto project's, but I assume some of them have some use cases. Either way, just because I'm not comfortable putting my money into them, doesn't mean the government should make unclear regulations and then fuck people over because they might have broken the rules.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 OP 30 Nov

Yeah the only ones I ever really get involved with are either ones that I more or less threw some "fun money" at I mean its borderline gambling and once I can take my money out I typically do and let the rest ride (Solana is a prime example of this I bought some in the 9 dollar range and now I have ~2 left that I have staked and yolo to them) or someone gave me. I also write on Publish0x and they give you ETH and OP at the moment so I have some of that that I play around with.

0 sats \ 15 replies \ @kepford 30 Nov

What you describe is a key reason the Constitution has failed. The state and its many arms simply find work arounds to its limits. There are many examples of this. The result of the Snowden revelations was not that the state started following their Constitutional limits. They just used private businesses to do the same work. I could probably come up with many more examples.

The only solution is for people to push back and develop technology that limits the state.

On another note I really don't get the XRP hype. It's so stupid to me.

0 sats \ 14 replies \ @Cje95 OP 30 Nov

You think the Constitution has failed? Would love to hear how and why it has "failed" since a failure would mean none of it works or is enforced when I cannot see that for the life of me be the case.

Not to mention the Constitution by design was set up to be updated and not a permanent thing. Honestly, it falls to citizens for not pushing for it to be updated more if there are parts we do not like. State Conventions are not that hard to trigger in most states and that is all you need... most states.

People push back all the time as mentioned above with the fall of Chevron that completely sunk a huge facet of the EPA, SEC, etc., and is pretty clear in that Congress has to give authorization. Most of the world's cutting-edge technological innovations come from the US National Labs so not sure how that would help limit the states when that is where the funding and innovation is happening.

XRP is trash I think it was a decent idea but just because an idea is good doesn't mean the product is and I think the product sucks. It'll I guess "officially" be able to do what other cryptos are doing?

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 1 Dec

Here's a different angle.

I grew up believing in the Constitution as many on the right do today. Its a beautiful document. At a certain point I realized that when it comes to political debate and argument it has little effect. In practical terms people on the right claim the Constitution justifies their positions and opposition to the left. The left does the same thing but more sparingly.

The reality is both sides cherry pick from the document and have wildly different interpretations. After many years it became apparent to me that few actually care about trying to understand what was meant by the document unless it helps your argument. In practice it is just another tool. An appeal to authority that you reach for to win an argument.

Philosophically I do not accept that the authority of the Constitution nor any government. I can only speak for myself but I can tell you I never consented to this document or any government. If I had consented should I not be able to remove my consent? These are questions that are never really respected. They are laughed off. We are just supposed to shut up and stay in line.

I just wish we as a society could actually accept reality. We live under the rule of a powerful elite. Their hold on power is not just. They do not represent us or work for us. They rule over us. The system only works when the masses accept this illusion of authority. I would prefer a society built on truth, consent, and natural law.

Don't get me wrong, we could do worse but I hardly think the status quo is ideal. I reject that idea. I don't have a plan to get to the ideal. I don't all or even many answers. I just refuse to lie to myself and pretend I believe in democracy or whatever you wanna call the state.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 1 Dec

Its simple. It was designed to restrain the Federal Government trampling on the rights of the States that ratified it. It has been twisted beyond recognition. Don't get me wrong. It's better than not having one but it's an example of the dependency of the people to keep government in check.

I'm coming from the anarchist perspective. Lysnader Spooner and many others have written complete books on its failure. The Federal Government was once small and limited but is now incredibly powerful and involved in many aspects of individual lives in ways I imagine the founding generations could not imagine.

You mention it was set up to be updated. 100% but these days that's not even really needed. Just appoint judges that have a bend towards a school of interpretation and you gain the same outcome.

I call that failure.

0 sats \ 11 replies \ @zapsammy 1 Dec

no offence, really, i merely state the fact. as far as i see it, u are a fighter in the belly of the beast, because u r on stacker news and use ur brain. nonetheless,

ur job depends on believing that the constitution, whether the original or the corporate form, or any formal document of governance for that matter, is still functioning for the people's betterment.

now, at what point does it fail? when people's health and prosperity is down by 10%? 51%? 100%?

if u really think it through, the correct answer is that it's a failure as soon as people are worse off tomorrow than today. nothing else is consideration.

0 sats \ 10 replies \ @Cje95 OP 1 Dec

Oh Jesus you think the US is a corporation… alright that explains a lot.

People’s health and prosperity isn’t something you can easily translate because hell just between the US and Europe the idea of AC/Central Cooling is a privilege in Europe and hard to get while in the US it’s something that is shocking if you don’t have it.

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @xz 1 Dec

About ACs, Europe is not a good example. Latitudinally, 90% of Europe is inline with northern US states or Canada. A better example might be China. If you mean central heating systems, I guess you might have a point, but it's not easy comparison, Europe has much less high-rise housing and I guess is more gas / fuel dependent than electric. China has a more mixed approach, but again this depends whether you live north or south.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @zapsammy 1 Dec

very insightful, thank u for pointing out the similarity in latitudes of Europe & US/Canada. temperature regulation is very important.

my mission is to chip away at the core of mind control in the brain. one by one, the chips will fall out.

#789827

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @zapsammy 1 Dec

please explain to me 28 USC section 3002, subsection 15a.

after that, please also explain 9 UCC section 307, subsection h.

i ain't Jesus, but i like his messages.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 OP 2 Dec

Thankfully @kepford addressed your concerns. You cannot take a complex thing like the US government and everything it encompasses and simplify it for a few buzzwords to make it pop up on Google. Thats not how it works that's well not how anything works.

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @kepford 1 Dec

Out of curiosity I had brave search try to do that.

28 USC Section 3002 Definition Based on the provided search results, subsection 15a of 28 USC section 3002 defines “United States” as including any federal corporation, agency, department, commission, or instrumentality. This definition is relevant to lawsuits and prosecutions involving the federal government.

Here is a breakdown of the relevant text:

"(15) The term ‘United States’ or ‘United States of America’ includes—

(A) a Federal corporation, agency, department, commission, or instrumentality;

(B) any private attorney authorized by contract made in accordance with section 3718 of title 31 to conduct litigation for collection of debts on behalf of the United States;

This definition clarifies that the term “United States” encompasses not only the federal government as a whole but also its constituent parts, including federal corporations, agencies, and instrumentalities. This is significant in legal contexts, as it establishes the scope of entities that can be considered part of the “United States” for purposes of litigation and prosecution.

It’s worth noting that some individuals and groups have interpreted this section as evidence that the federal government is a corporation, rather than a sovereign entity. However, this interpretation is not universally accepted and is subject to debate among legal scholars and experts.

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @xz 1 Dec

Interesting. It leads me to think of 'The City of London.' I.e, 'The Square Mile,' I.e, 'The City' or 'The Corporation.'

I suppose that language and law are not always what they seem, unless you follow them to the letter (of the law.)

*Well, law v2.0?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @zapsammy 1 Dec

https://www.bitchute.com/video/EFujxtIf9v9z

law 2.0 right... what version are we trapped in?🧟‍♂️

why can't we build classical architecture anymore and why are their first couple stories underground plus basement and tunnels? when was the latest great reset?

reply on another page

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @zapsammy 1 Dec

it literally reads "corporation." whether it's federal or Federal, or any other type of corporation, it reads the same.

just like "negotiable instrument" can be simplified to "instrument" (this is straight from the UCC 3 definitions).

finally, why rely on the bot to read a few short lines straight from the source? who programs the bot? who programmed people to use the bot?

these are the enhanced reading skills of the next generation. we are going backwards, where no knowledge of the original meaning of words is required.

the best deceptions are in plain sight. alas, just as it is with bitcoin, everyone receives the knowledge at the price they deserve. i am referring to the real price: the sweat, the tears, the blood, not the fake fiat digits.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 1 Dec

I was curious what it would spit out that's why. Relax brother. Our interpretations of this document aren't significant. It doesn't matter.

view replies