Crypto Argument Falls Flat

The Wall Street Journal ran a debate on whether there is a need for cryptocurrency.


The “pro” side of the argument claimed that people in unstable countries with unstable fiat currency could use Bitcoin as their stable money. That argument falls flat just based on the volatile history of the crypto market.

She then argues that Bitcoin “enables secure, arm’s-length transactions between two unknown parties.” But we know that cyrptocurrency thefts are now in the billions of dollars.

Her arguments regarding security, transaction capacity, merchant acceptance and governmental recognition still admit that none are there (yet).

So, a less than convincing “pro” argument.

Is there a future for crypto? Probably, but it’s just not apparent yet.

About JeffKoeppel

I am a corporate/securities attorney in the Washington, DC area. Prior to joining the firm, I was a Senior Attorney Advisor in the Division of Corporation Finance at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. I am a member of the Bars of the States of Maryland, New York and the District of Columbia. You can also follow this blog on LinkedIn at:
This entry was posted in balance, Banking, Banks, CFTC, checkbook, Congress, Crowd Fund Act, Crowd Fund Act of 2012, Crowd Funding At the Margins, Crowd Funding Platforms, Funding Portals, Investments, Jobs, Legislative Intent, review, SEC, technology, VC, Venture Capital, Wall Street and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.