This week, CNBC published a headline in which U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet was recently appointed, “Yellen sounds a warning about extremely inefficient bitcoin.” Ironically, CNBC published another article two days later because the systems were off the Federal Reserve.
The article reinforces her criticism of bitcoin’s value and energy consumption. The kicker is that he does it without actually comparing it to something that is absurd. So here I am to address this one-sided journalism and lack of research.
“Finance Minister Janet Yellen issued a warning on Monday about the dangers bitcoin poses to investors and the public,” CNBC reported.
He noted that Elon Musk had bought $ 1.5 billion worth of bitcoin from Elon Musk before returning to Yellen, and reported that she had said: “There remain important questions about legitimacy and stability.”
“I do not think bitcoin is widely used as a transaction mechanism,” Yellen told CNBC.
To be able to report this statement, you would think that CNBC would quantify the total throughput of Bitcoin, usually compared to something else, but maybe that’s wishful thinking.
“I fear it’s often for illegal funding,” Yellen told CNBC. “It’s an extremely inefficient way to execute transactions, and the amount of energy consumed to process those transactions is incredible.”
Let’s break it up …
“Illegal financing”: there is no comparison with bitcoin to another currency in terms of how often it is used for bad purposes. How much illegal financing is done with the dollar? Or any other currency for that matter? How could you even quantify this with the anonymity of cash?
“Extremely inefficient”: again, it lacks any comparison to even consider it that way, and in fact it is the opposite. Bitcoin is an asset of bearer, not the echo of a paper IOU. It may take ten minutes and some money to settle on the base layer, but it’s for * final finishing. * What is the cost to sovereigns of doing so? There are secondary layers to Bitcoin that allow global transactions instantly, in any currency or money, and cost a fraction of a cent. If you compare it to the costs and time requirements of traditional finance and overpayments, it is clearly extremely efficient.
‘Amazing’ energy consumption: again, without any comparison, this point is just wrong. I thought Nic Carter had the last word when he wrote: ‘However, the Bitcoin energy concerns need not despair. There is a solution. All they have to do is persuade Bitcoin fans to use and value an alternative settlement medium. The best option is to design a more secure system, which offers stronger insurance, settles faster, preserves more privacy and is censorship-proof – all without the use of Proof-of-Work. Such a system would be miraculous. I wait with bated breath. ”
The article then moved on to the volatility of bitcoin. Yellen said: “It’s a very speculative asset and you know I think people should know that it can be extremely volatile and that I’m worried about potential losses that investors could suffer.”
She is concerned about the world’s best performing asset over the past decade. It is a decentralized global monetary system and unit that goes through the monetization process 24/7, with constant price identification. What did she expect? Immediate flight to the moon with Saylor and Musk?
After Yellen provided a platform to set up bitcoin without comparisons and without any journalistic integrity, CNBC continued to set up the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDCs).
“The Federal Reserve, where Yellen once served as chairman, has studied the issue and discussed the possibility of a new digital currency, as well as a payment system he is expected to implement over the next few years,” he reported. “‘I think it could result in faster, safer and cheaper payments, which I think are important goals,’ ‘Yellen said.
Why is it about faster, cheaper and “safer” payments when the printing press kills our savings, presumably in the name of full service?
I’m just a guy with laser eyes and diamond hands, so make your own opinion, but I think it’s ridiculous when financial regulators and the media try to criticize bitcoin, without actually comparing it to fiat, as the world’s central banks are trying to measure. if they can implement draconian, Chinese Communist Part (CCP) -like CBDs.
Clearly, bitcoin is money; the latest poll by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) reflects this.
However, are CBDCs really money? The purpose of a blockchain data structure is to enable decentralized control. Therefore, it is absurd if it is deployed by a central government that continues to degrade its currency.
Can Government Stop Bitcoin?
“If no one wants a devaluation-resistant, censorship-free, consent-free, borderless, non-discriminatory, teleportable financial asset, no one will give it energy and it will die,” as Alex Gladstein wrote to Quillette.
The real question then is, I would say, no can they stop it but why in the world would they want to? 🤔
This is a guest post by Ben Jarvie. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
