Digital Assets - The Law, Regulations and Policy are Already Super Adequate

When you hear a policy maker talking about how "all we need are new regs for digital assets" they are largely in the process of delivering a make work program for their industry. They do care about your risk. Just not as much as they do about the super adequate income they are pleading for.

A protectionist activity par excellence. They're asking the people to allow them to make extra work, for themselves, "you need us". A make work program under a veil of saving us.

This is a serious allegation for me to make. Regulators and policy makers are there to protect the people from risk and find the best ways to carry out difficult financial operations. 

Sure. They are doing this too. And they are doing very much more than is necessary when they ask for additional laws, regulations and new policy. Because what is there already is already perfectly adequate. To object to this is to say that for some fundamental reason digital assets are especially different to all other forms of assets, in law.

They are not. Digital assets, as property, are identical. So the law and regulations are already perfectly adequate for digital assets to be attended to as always.

For example, virtually all crypto assets, including Bitcoin Core(BTC) are in law and under regulations, de facto unregistered securities. And just like other non digital financial securities, they are covered fully by the law and regulations already. It just requires the case law to be carried out in each case to assure users of their levels of risk. 

This of course is a very serious matter for those businesses such as miners and exchanges when those legal cases go to the high court, and they will. Because it's illegal to operate while unregistered. Even those investing in them might come under serious scrutiny too. As fiduciaries.

Where are the regulators when we need them most please - after all, they're here to save us, right?

Whereas Bitcoin proper (BSV) is well understood by lawyers to be a commodity. So does not require to be registered nor licensed in the same ways to operate. After all it is not a speculative asset, being a peer to peer ecash system for micropayments. It's a payments mechanism with no speculative risk. 

So, when you hear a policy maker talking about how "all we need are new regs for digital assets" they are largely in the process of delivering a make work program for their industry. They do care about your risk. But not as much as they do about the super adequate income they want more.