Yes, the government should screen cryptocurrencies before circulation to ensure legitimate value and exchange rates

The strongest counterargument to government screening of cryptocurrencies is that it directly undermines the core principle of decentralization, which makes cryptocurrencies resilient and valuable. Proponents of cryptocurrency argue that government intervention would introduce a central point of control, defeating the purpose of a trustless system and potentially harming the very innovation that cryptocurrencies represent.

Cryptocurrencies value fluctuate based on market forces except for stable coin tokens which are pegged to the value of fiat.

No, I don't believe that the government should screen cryptocurrencies before circulation, I believe that this intrudes upon the privacy of the user, its not as if they are doing things of this nature to people exchanging cash so why would they need to do this on a different currency. I believe if needed then it should be screened past a certain dollar amount.

they shouldn't add more to the media, more people would demand ways to take it away after easily being hacked

I think that there just should not be someone in the government that is being paid for something so monotonous and miniscule and there should be less government regulation Lassie Faire

Cryptocurrencies have been proven to have a legitimate value since they have been used for years, sold and bought by millions of people, who have potentially gotten wealthy off of doing it.

I disagree, I believe that the government should not have control of cryptocurrencies, but only its own currencies. We should first find out what would happen to the cryptocurrencies if or when they do circulate.

At that moment the government would control all your money and could freeze your whole account if you do something they don't like. Happened in Canada with Venmo so they resorted to crypto.

The purpose of cryptocurrency is to be anonymous and quick, it should be a platform which is safe and secure for any type of transaction to be made

The Government might potentially ruin the structure of crypto by restricting how much you could put in and how much you could take out. Even though crypto has shown some signs of lacking security not many ways of making money is and crypto has seen this and would give a warning before you click.

Cryptocurrencies can be individually ran and anybody buying should know the risks beforehand anyway. there is no need to screen for legitimate value if everyone already knows the risks of buying cryptocurrencies.

Cryptocurrencies are decentralized and owned by the owner of the currency, the government has no right to stick their nose into what never was and will never be their buisness.

I think that cryptocurrencies should be outside of federal reach to have a way to move money and pay for things between countries and not deal with as many taxes and different paperwork to go along with the transfers.

A currency is something that should be able to be traded by citizens in an open market. By screening before circulation the government takes too much of an oversight stance in a market(cryptocurrency) originally built to be traded anonymously.

Individual Liberty and Financial Freedom: Opponents emphasize the right of individuals to freely transact and choose their forms of exchange without government oversight. They argue that people should be allowed to evaluate risks for themselves, and a free market is better at determining the "legitimate value" of an asset than a government bureaucracy

Government screening of cryptocurrencies goes against decentralization and turns crypto into a centralized system like fiat. It would slow innovation and favor large institutions over small developers. Crypto value should be decided by supply and demand, not government approval. Regulating exchanges for fraud is better than controlling the coins themselves.

I believe that if you want to persue the use of cryptocurrency, you inherit the risk that are associated with it.

"The strongest counterargument to government screening of cryp- tocurrencies is that it directly undermines the core principle of decentralization, which makes cryptocurrencies resilient and valuable. Proponents of cryptocurrency argue that government in- tervention would introduce a central point of control, defeating the purpose of a trustless system and potentially harming the very innovation that cryptocurrencies represent." - From a responder I agree with

I guess we already can gamble. Cryptic allows us to gamble while potentially funding bad actors using those funds against the citizenry.

I work with millions of different crypto currencies a day. The government is clueless on what is safe and what is a rug pull. Everyone in defi knew that FTX was a scam. It amazes me that no one in the government saw any signs of this scam.

uhh i want to make more money whether legal or not and enforcing it more would make it harder to make money

If the government were to screen cryptocurrencies before circulation to ensure legitimate value and exchange rates, it would devalue the sole purpose of why cryptocurrency is a thing, and would prevent many Americans from doing their job or profession.

Cryptocurrency should not be monitored by the government, however literacy surrounding cryptocurrency should be enforced to prevent fraud. Crypto is self regulating and isn't in need of govt assistance the same way general economy is.

Cryptocurrencies are self regulated by design and legitimate value is created by perceived value that is created through the mining process and limited supply.

It defeats the whole purpose of crypto. Crypto and Bitcoin were created with the aspect of not having a centralized power, allowing investors to make their own decisions.

I disagree because crypto is a totally new and different financial market where it’s kinda like a casino, and people there are just trying to make money, not like investing in tesla because they know they will achieve some crazy space mission. The people in crypto are there for money, and everyone is aware with that, and the regulation by the government would remove that ability for people to make lots of money ion the space.

Such intervention destroys the core value proposition of decentralized digital assets, sovereignty, privacy, and censorship resistance, effectively turning them into inefficient, state-controlled digital fiat currencies.

The whole point of a cryptocurrency is that it is independent of the government and grants the holder freedom and privacy they wouldn't have with fiat

counter argument to someone who answers “Yes, the government should screen cryptocurrencies before circulation to ensure legitimate value and exchange rates

The government shouldn't have the regulatory power to decide whether certain cryptocurrencies are legitimate or not. Liability is in the hands of civilians.

Of course tax exist but crypto is heavily decentralized and essentially hard to tax. there something that exist called capital gains tax, which is earned income still taxed, but significantly less

it fundamentally destroys the unique, decentralized value proposition of digital assets—trustlessness and censorship resistance—by re-introducing the very central-party risks (corruption, inefficiency, and confiscation) that cryptocurrency was designed to eliminate.

I think it’s important for the government to screen cryptocurrency as if it not monitored it will be very easy for crypto bosses to scam people without facing any consequences which will lead many people to lose money while the crypto gangs are making fortunes.

#2 Expert Cryptocurrencies

This would be under the umbrella of SEC/FTC/Consumer Protection. Screening cryptocurrencies like the SEC does for companies going IPO is not something that existed overnight and developed over time. This is not a good idea and would undermine the system causing us to potentially lose a large footprint in something that is here whether we like it or not.

A parallel that exists today would be a company going public and offering an IPO (Initial Public Offering). There is due diligence that the company is expected to produce and in future the company is expected to file publicly available 10q and…  Read more 10k reports. These reports offer insight into the inner workings, needs, and risks that the companies expect/perpetuate. They can be held accountable for the information (or lack of information) in these reports in regards to the shareholder.

I actively use it to make transactions online and gamble with it, and I do not want to be taxed on it

Government screening of cryptocurrencies defeats the entire purpose of crypto: decentralization and freedom from central control. It would slow innovation, threaten privacy, and still couldn’t stop people from using global or unregulated coins. The market and blockchain transparency do a better job of ensuring value than bureaucracy ever could.

The state may have a role in this, but independent organizations should be involved as well. And it should not cross the line of private property rights and financial freedom.

Heck no, not ever. The entire idea of cryptocurrency gets ruined as soon as governments step in at all.

It fundamentally violates the core premise of Blockchain technology, defeating the purpose of peer to peer financial system.

This has an inherent assumption that the government knows which cryptocurrencies are the "correct" or "safe" ones which is essentially providing a guarantee on the cryptocurrency, which makes no sense. We should incentivize investors to educate themselves on the different cryptocurrencies.

The only people this should apply to is large corporations or large sums of money it's a waste to try and regulate normal citizens or small amounts of cash.

the government already controls there currency . cryptocurrency Is and should be independent market , people buying crypto should be aware of the dangerous of investing

Cryptocurrencies are inherently decentralized and permissionless. The government cannot even stop the circulation of new token launches even if they wanted to. Regulatory clarity is all we need in terms of cryptos being a security or commodity

Cryptocurrencies are created for a less monitored and regulared environment in the first place. This defeats the purpose of cryptocurrencies.

A primary counterargument is that government screening contradicts the decentralized, permissionless core tenets of cryptocurrencies, which were often designed specifically to operate without central authority or intermediaries [1]. This control could stifle the innovation and financial inclusion that decentralized finance (DeFi) offers [1, 2].

No, that would essentially defeat the purpose of crypto currencies and customers would be aware of the risks of any downsides

The government should let the people be able to interact with a global market since crypto and bitcoin are global coins and markets

it allows the goverment to potentially abuse there power kind of deafeting the whole porpuse of crypto currencies

The point of legitimate Crypto is it being decentralized and no one being able to make arbitrary decisions changing the value beyond just market movement

Cryptocurrencies were largely founded on the principle of decentralization, meaning they operate without a central authority like a government or bank. Proponents argue that government screening fundamentally violates this core tenet, moving the system back toward the very centralized control it was designed to circumvent [1]. This control is seen by some as an infringement on economic freedom and the right to private, permissionless transactions

Value is based on how individuals use the currency, the government has no need to regulate currencies to control their value.

I think it would bring the prices down because most people wont want to use currency that's screened by the government.

The government should not have any matter or regulation in the circulation, creation, or exchange of any cryptocurrency. However, it should be legally required that the creator of a cryptocurrency be truthful and honest concerning the value and purpose of a currency.

Government screening of cryptocurrencies would contradict the core principles of decentralization and limited regulation that define cryptocurrencies. It could stifle innovation, create a single point of failure susceptible to political influence, and potentially undermine the global, borderless nature of digital currencies.

No the gov should not because the values and exchange rates are set themselves and the people trading make it that way and its best to leave it that way and let it flow.

It would discourage citizens from using cryptocurrencies and we should adopt this technology faster and crypto technology promotes economic freedom and makes censorship more difficult. KYC would only make easier for government to censor citizens.

Value is based on how individuals use the currency, the government has no need to regulate currencies to control their value.

Screening of cryptocurrencies runs the risk of the centralization of the currency that crypto is actively trying to avoid.

People need to be aware of crypto scams but part of the good part is that it is so unreguladed so some people can make a bunch of money. People who fall for cryto scams are not as smart and should know. The other thing is that crypto value can change so its big you cant regulate it.

Crypto is meant to be an unregulated form of currencies, completely different from the US currencies.

Cryptocurrencies are not federally backed currencies, so the government should not have a say in their regulation.

Crypto is decentralized, and be government should not have the power to regulate it, they just want control so their citizens don’t gain freedom

The government has no business regulating crypto or any exchange in the free market besides the United States dollar in which the government does not even have control over printing and guaranteeing inflation rates.

This would severely decrease the investment and innovation in the sector. Making educated guesses or bets on investments shouldn't be reserved for qualified investors and only does more to broaden the wage gap.

Screening cryptocurrencies before they circulate would undermine the core purpose of crypto, which is to operate as a decentralized, permissionless system outside government control. Requiring government approval would slow innovation, create huge regulatory bottlenecks, and allow the government to decide which digital assets are “legitimate,” effectively killing smaller projects and giving an unfair advantage to large, well-funded companies. It could also push developers and investors away from the U.S. into countries with friendlier regulations, weakening American competitiveness in a rapidly growing global industry.

Cryptocurrency was never meant to be controlled or interfered with by anyone. The value of cryptocurrencies, especially those with high trading volumes, fluctuates based on the market of people who own them. We do not need a government to "ensure value".

No, because it legitimizing the value and exchanging rates seem to not help, although it can be a good solution.

Government screening of cryptocurrencies would stifle innovation and decentralization, concentrating power in regulators, while market forces and transparency are better at determining legitimate value.

Crypto currencies have been a big part of "money" in the U.S., it is a way that some people earn a living and won't have to work another day in the life and I don't think that cryptocurrency should get taxed anymore. It is legitimate and holds real value of money

Cryptocurrencies are becoming the main form of currency all over the world and they are already heavily monitored such as in Japan.

Depends on the cryptocurrency, most are decentralized and need no government intervention to function or ensure legitimate value. The exchange rates regulate themselves that's the point of a free market.

Cryptocurrencies should be a decentralized currency that government has no interference with especially exchange rates, since its global it would be irrelevant for the US government to intervene

What defines legitimate value and exchange rates? If people are voluntarily exchanging with the currency, it has value by definition. We don’t need an outside entity to make that determination.

Crypto is a CIA Currency. It's already controlled. It may have been anonymous at some point but that was a very long time ago. I have seen first hand how the Fbi and police track crypto to control it like they do everything.

The market should be allowed to move freely, strict regulations and hard monitoring cannot be good for it

I think that the government shoud have nothing to do with crypto currency because it was not created by the united states.

I think that if people are willing to risk their finances on cryptocurrencies they should be able to know how the system works and decide what to do with their money based off of their knowledge. If they cannot handle their finances in a way that is safe and reliable for them, they should have to take responisbility of what may come of it.

No, because crypto is like the stock market so you gamble on what coin will be worth what amount of money.

cryptocurrencies were made to limit government control over currency, so they should not have any influence or control over it.

what would you define as legitamate value the concept of crypto currency itswelf as a concept is that its all unliquidatyeda dn the market is controlled by the poeople for the most part

It is an anonymous currency, within context can be conceived similar to cash, in which the government has no right to impede upon.

Its not taking away from anyone and it takes a lot of knowledge to understand crypto so if you understand how to make money from it then go ahead.

I view cryptocurrencies similar to a stock. There are a few "stable-coins" but otherwise is fluxuates more than other stocks do. It's up to the individual who wants to invest to do their research and risk.

I do not agree with this statement because the market is unpredictable. If the government were to regulate cryptocurrency, then it would put the hands of the market into the government, and then the market would completely collapse. Businesses would fail, and many people who trusted the market and had money in the market would become poor.

Cryptocurrency should be at an individuals own risk, they are committing to the currency when they purchase it. If the government regulates cryptocurrencies than it would lose the value that cryptocurrencies have.

This allows Govt intervention into a free market and stricter regulations would likely harm all projects and any advancing tech, causing a decline in innovation

I believe the government shouldn’t control or screen cryptocurrencies before they circulate because it goes against the whole idea of cryptocurrencies being free and decentralized, and the market should decide their value, not the government.

Crypto is involved in the economy and the government should be staying out of it as America's economy is based on capitalism.

People have a right to purchase what they want and it is the duty of the buyer to verify such thing.

People should be free to buy whatever they want, even if it's a bad investment. The government should not need to babysit people through wisely using their money

If you want the government to change your diapers you have every right to live in a society where that happens. We need to make "states" in the US virtual entities like companies and to allow companies to behave as governments.

The government aren't experts and there's no reason to believe their idea of what's 'legitimate' would be worth anything