crypto-currencies and btc

Rising Concerns over Bitcoin Prices and Place!

Behind the scenes, there is a growing discomfort about the degree of disruption these new currencies could have on the banking and payments sectors. During the summer, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the World Economic Forum published detailed reports on the state of play and their concerns.

Central banks must wake up to crypto-currencies.

As the last few weeks have shown, few problems are as worrying for central banks as the fear of losing control of their currencies. Recently, the Chinese central bank recently banned Bitcoin fundraising, leading to a temporary 15% drop in the value of crypto-currencies.

So far, the big winners of technological innovations have been the customers. The innovations introduced by fintech banking seem to have been less disruptive than anticipated, mainly because they have largely failed to change the competitive bases of such a regulated environment. Instead, the technology has significantly improved customer service and lowered transaction costs as said on this Twitter page.

But three major concerns remain, beyond the issue of resilience to cyber attacks.

other altcoinsFirst of all, will the banks, which have made so much effort to protect themselves against any eventuality, be put at risk by the newcomers?

In other words, will they be exposed to the same level of risk that Amazon is putting other industries at?

Bankers have tended to think that regulation would make financial services less attractive to new entrants, but they now realize that new rivals outside the banking world can attack them on more profitable segments and make traditional, regulated players less profitable.

Second, will banks become less important as more lending moves away from the regulatory framework?

Since 2009, entire sectors of activity have shifted from banks to asset managers. More than $600 billion has been raised to finance private debt, according to Preqin’s data. As a result, political leaders are now focusing their analysis on the non-banking sector.
The growing dependence of banks on large technology companies to manage their infrastructure prompts decision-makers to ask themselves the following question: which players will be more important on a systemic level?

Thirdly, will central banks lose control over payments if the volume of encrypted currencies issued by the private sector increases? Foreign currency issuance is a lucrative business, as central banks pocket the difference between the cost of issuing a coin or banknote and its face value.

Central banks are also concerned about losing their ability to monitor global trade. Given the global fight against terrorism and organized crime, this is a major concern. In an extreme scenario, central banks might even fear losing control of money supply.

Until recently, policy-makers were very concerned about crypto-currencies (cryptomonnaies in French) only to a very limited extent, because they offered few advantages as currencies, except for those who saw them as an opportunity to erase all traces of transactions. They are not a “store of value,” as recent movements linked to China have shown. Nor are they widely enough accepted to be a useful means of exchange. Finally, digital currencies are not as secure as expected, having been successfully hacked several times this year, at considerable scales.

With the increasing volume of crypto-currencies, we should expect that more central bankers will seek to prohibit or curb their use. It will be particularly visible in countries concerned about capital flight and organized crime. This will not stop speculators and enthusiasts but will limit their potential to create powerful network effects that could turn them into usable parallel currencies.


trump d

Donald Trump criticizes press freedom.

When asked in the Oval Office, Donald Trump (our dear president agent orange) attacked press freedom:”It is frankly disgusting that the press can write what it wants.”

A statement that will not improve Donald Trump’s relationship with the media. On Wednesday, in the Oval Office, while receiving Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the U. S. President attacked press freedom, after again attacking NBC News on Twitter. He was trying to denounce an article he said “fake news” in which the channel asserts that it wanted to increase the country’s nuclear arsenal tenfold:

“Cable news channels have become so one-sided.” It’s not fair to the public!”

his tweet

Asked about this tweet, he replied that he found it “frankly disgusting that the press can write what it wants and people should look into it.” A journalist then asked him if there should be “limits on what the press should write”:”No. The press should be more honest. CNN pointed out that there is no license for national channels, but one per local station.

“They have non-existent sources, which do not exist.”

So he denied the information that he wanted to multiply the U. S. military arsenal by ten, saying that it would be “unnecessary”:”I know the capability we have and believe me, it’s impressive. It’s massive. So when they make up stories like that, which are just made up, well, the generals will tell you that. And they have non-existent sources, which do not exist. They’re making springs. There are no sources.”

Trump’s resentment towards NBC News (in particular, among all the media he describes as “fake news”) is also due to an article in which the station assured that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had thought about resigning this summer and calling the president a “moron” at a meeting at the Pentagon. Rex Tillerson denied the first part and refused to mention the second part, saying:”I’m not going to talk about mean things like that.