Content pfp
Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/law-policy
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
🚨Following this news – the SEC has also now dropped its probe into Robinhood’s crypto arm…🧵
2 replies
12 recasts
11 reactions
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
The speed at which the SEC and Trump admin is moving is nothing short of astounding. I think it’s partially a play to desensitise and disengage opposition voters, but regardless it may be harmful
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
I’m all for improves regulator efficiency, but this all seems far too Trumpy. I wrote over the weekend about the problems with just how politicised regulators are becoming under Trump –
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
These regulators will always be somewhat political but their ultimate goal should be the same. TO REGULATE. To be the safety nets and guardrails that restrict private actors from acting unfairly and harming citizens
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
While I may not be its biggest fan, the economy is meant to be capitalist – this means good competition can lead to growth and all that good stuff – but as we know, this requires regulation
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
So what is a regulator’s job? To create this growth? No. To ensure growth is created by economic actors FAIRLY. Right now regulators in the US are being treated like extra arms of the ruling party rather than the rule makers they should be
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
I’m not singling out this Robinhood case, and the SEC has some excellent pro-crypto people on its side. But these regulators (CFTC too) cannot get carried away with becoming political machines or we will continue to see rapid rises in wealth inequality, the poor will get poorer and more people will slip into poverty
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
As we await various regulatory frameworks for crypto and stablecoins, let’s not forget what is needed. Decentralisation. And decentralisation made easier. We do not need crypto exchanges which ultimately serve as investment markets to be given free reign to do what they like
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0xChris pfp
0xChris
@0xchris
Can you share thoughts on where you see a need for more decentralization? For example, do you aim to see an increase in the number of protocol available to engineers? An increase in fragmented media and markets? A decrease in FAANG-style consolidation? An increase in policy or legal opinions?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Bob Hale pfp
Bob Hale
@bobhale
Yes to more protocols – would aid development of more interesting, unique blockchain structures that allow for innovation in decentralisation. Not necessarily an increase in market/media fragmentation, it’s not so much about breaking stuff up – I’d love to see lots more smaller, more controlled markets as well as smaller, nicher media outlets open up. I think there’s a lot of potential with these smaller markets to provide small communities with decentralised currencies that they fully own rather than tradfi. And on FAANG-style consolidation: yes, it does need to decrease. I don’t think that’ll happen under Trump, but it’s important. What we see regulators do now with big tech giants is try to break them up to make things fairer when they’re already in such a powerful market position that it’s impossible. With crypto, regulators have a chance to get this regulation right from the start. Prevention is better than slow regulation after problems arise.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction