And I was beginning to think that trend of calling Bitcoin not a currency but lacking the willingness to impose regulations was gone after Japan. I guess some just can’t let go of what seems like a good idea.
The position of Danmarks Nationalbank, which is reflected in this statement, is far from original. Virtual currencies (yes, even this is trivial) are not money due to the lack of issuer or what cryptocommunity would call a “centralization”.
Same old song
What makes Danish central bank have a negative attitude towards digital coins is the fact that with cryptos it’s not they or any other price it’s the community of people who use it every day. Thus in case of something like latest disaster will befall on the publicly accepted financial system it would be easy for governments to localize the damage and find the scapegoat in the process.
To further show the arrogance towards digital currencies, this warning compares Bitcoin to glass beads that were traded for real commodities at some point of 20th century, not forgetting to state that precious metals actually have their use unlike cryptos.
Governor Hugo Frey Jensen also scolds the Bitcoins volatility, but I see no reason to quote the thing that you, our devoted readers has seen hundreds of time on Cointelegraph. There are only two things worth mentioning in what he has to say in this paper.
Newer, not better
First is that bitcoins as means of payment are still restricted by the lack of shops. Surely, in most corners of the world, it’s true, but it is only because of the discouragement that banks are imposing. That is why crypto-friendly stores are not easy to be found. However, in US, where people are usually more initiative when the question “Whether to open business or not?” is asked, you can buy almost anything for Bitcoin.
Second thing is that “European authorities are analyzing the need to regulate such virtual currencies.”
Seriously? I mean, only now do they think it would be a great idea to look into the financial infrastructure that has absolutely nothing to do with traditional system? That’s just negligence, if you ask me. However, you don’t; that is why I want to ask you for some comments on this.
Do you think that this policy is better than, for example, strict regulations in US? Share your opinion with us!