Massive opinion shift in China: a court in Shanghai declares Bitcoin to be private property. This is likely to lead to accelerated adaptation and to international competition between countries for the best and scarcest reserve asset.
pull down to refresh
47 sats \ 1 reply \ @Bee_Aye 2h
its a trap!
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @TomK OP 2h
Give it a trie
reply
74 sats \ 11 replies \ @OT 9h
I saw something the other day about the OTC desk trades starting to heat up in China. It makes sense as real estate and Chinese stocks are not doing well at all.
reply
57 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 7h
this was the video I partly watched:
reply
116 sats \ 9 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 8h
The real estate crisis was in large part due to the lack of choices for Chinese people to invest their savings into.
The Chinese government needs to give its citizens more credible savings options and Bitcoin could be one.
reply
74 sats \ 8 replies \ @OT 7h
I don't think the CCP can allow it. They've printed their way into one of the biggest economies in the world and the people will end up having to pay for it in one way or another.
As for allowing Bitcoin...I think it will continue to be a grey area. For one reason they would have to admit their mistake in banning miners in 2021. The other is that it would give citizens too much sovereignty and freedom.
This might just be an edge case. Shanghai is different to the rest of China too. More international and also the financial center.
reply
7 sats \ 0 replies \ @TheWildHustle 6h
Your thinking, China won't adopt bitcoin no matter what?
Or do you think they'll capitulate eventually?
reply
7 sats \ 3 replies \ @xz 7h
I was thinking about this. I don't think it's so much of a faux pas for a change in policy. People pay for their electricity and their hardware, and so long as they're not siphoning someone else's electricity to do these things, there should be no problem with it.
But as there is no moral highground in using electricity for hosting a generative ai service or gaming, as opposed to using an ASIC to participate in a global technology network, it's something that governments need to come to term with, if they don't want to find that they are increasingly isolated.
reply
7 sats \ 2 replies \ @OT 7h
They literally kicked everyone out. Some came back and I remember hearing it's still quite significant like 10-20% of the hash rate.
It depends on their CBDC. If it's successful they might continue to ignore Bitcoin. They still have the 200k odd BTC seized from that Plus token scam.
reply
7 sats \ 0 replies \ @xz 6h
True.
The government is leapfrogging from an already ubiquitously accepted mobile payments platform to another. I think this is also part of the problem, not just that Bitcoin was already there, and was soon likely to be everywhere.
I think this idea that governments want to migrate payments to central banks is meeting opposition and indifference everywhere because there is no government able to delineate real advantages for the average end-user.
I don't get when international transactions are cited as being the advantage of CBDC. For global trade, sure, if there's a willingness to co-adopt a new system. This is very different to international transfers and foreign exhange for retail.
IMO, if any, the embarrassment should be the 10-20% hash rate, not lifting restrictions.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @konstantin21 5h
it's actually 55%
https://cointelegraph.com/news/chinese-bitcoin-miners-control-55-of-network
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 7h
Agree it seems unlikely the CCP would allow it- but it would be impressive if they did.
Am less critical of their economic performance to date- sure there have been mistakes like the property market bubble but China has directed far more fiat debt sourced capital toward actual productive investments than the west- in fact Fiat is not all bad if it is primarily directed toward productive purposes- and Chinas real productive economy is impressive- they have beaten the wests manufacturing giants at their own game with a mix of piracy (reverse engineering western factory blueprints) scale, planned infrastructure and huge emphasis on engineering.
Engineering in China is like what it was in the west 80-100 years ago- quasi religion- very important and highly valued- most of the poliburo are engineers.
Engineering combined with Keynesian capital direction is a potent combination...see the west 1930s-1960s and China 1980- present day.
Keynesian capital issuance combined with neoliberal bankster cronyinsm is a mongrel - and the wests current, possibly terminal, disease.
Belt and Road is a serious global empire project...directly challenging the wests 500 years global hegemony.
Yes they would struggle with the freedom of capital movement that Bitcoin would give citizens although if wrapped into ETF format that could be controlled....
Much like how the wests bankers/govts have captured and controlled the protocol into a relatively harmless speculative commodity...;)
reply
28 sats \ 1 reply \ @OT 7h
Yeah, buying up strategic ports, property, and building roads are all good things you can do with printed money.
I guess we'll have to see how it plays out. They aren't stupid. Just remember most of the actual Bitcoin is in the hands of early adopters. It's ours to lose. The ETF and current hype is just a passing phrase to hyperbitcoinization.
Remember that forks are always an option. Thinking that Bitcoin is a "relatively harmless speculative commodity" is a bit defeatist IMO.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 7h
ETFs and the banker directed narrative they support is what has seen Bitcoin redefined as largely a speculative commodity. Yes its a TRAP.
This is what they want as it renders Bitcoin relatively harmless...and prone to capture and control.
In the Chinese context this would be appropriate as well- as the Chinese place huge importance upon the increase in acceptance of their CBDC eYuan.
Jack Ma was sidelined to emphasise that nobody will challenge the eYuan and its crucial role in the tertiary layer of the Belt and Road model.
At current rates most Bitcoin will be held by US domiciled institutional custodians within 5 years. I do not think that is a good thing BTW!
There is little difference between Blackrock and the CCP.
reply
47 sats \ 0 replies \ @aS7017ur5 7h
It such a good thing for Chinese people.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @Slestak_Jack 7h
Is it not private property antithetical to communism? This story, without reading yet, doesn't sound like something to take at face value.
reply
14 sats \ 4 replies \ @TomK OP 7h
You think You are the owner of Your house or if Your money in Your bank account?
reply
47 sats \ 2 replies \ @Slestak_Jack 7h
I'm aware. At least on paper in the U.S. there are property rights. Communism is principally about the removal of all property rights.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @TomK OP 7h
Correct. What if the CCP uses btc as a liquidity sponge to be able to debase the Yuan faster?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Slestak_Jack 6h
Not a bad thought. What if they are decentralizing their purchasing power thru the millions of wallet addresses called citizens?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 7h
All property 'ownership' is largely dependent upon the states support...
States have developed precisely to uphold and enforce property rights.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 8h
The Chinese government will nevertheless struggle to accept Bitcoin anymore than they have to.
It is almost completely diametrically opposed to the ideology of the CCP.
reply