It doesn’t matter what you or i think. Hell it doesn’t if matter what’s true or not. What matters is what the people in power think/do and what they think is what Fareed is articulating. Ultra bearish for BTC in short to medium term.
There's a certain logic to that i.e. it doesn't matter what you or I think. I'll give you that.
However, let me just say something about the 'main stream media' that Fareed is very much a part of. I hated everything about the yanks previous administration yet I hate to admit that they were right to call out the main stream media (even if what they called them out on specifically a lot of the time were the wrong things). Today we had a bitcoin 'opinion' piece in the NYT from some clown from Cornell who trotted out what you trotted out the other week i.e. bitcoin transactions cost too much and they're too slow. You had an excuse - in that you got your information from clowns like him. He knows better - and didn't even mention lightning network. The Economist did exactly the same thing a couple of days beforehand. Then we had the BBC last week seek comment from someone who's representative of a bitcoin clone project rather than bitcoin core. Whilst they edited their article once the pressure came on them, it's not good enough from sources that we've all been led to believe for donkeys years to be authoritative. All this to say that sure these still are authoritative - but their influence is going one direction and one direction only. Among a younger demographic, they don't rate them - not in any way, shape or form. All that to say - that I couldn't give a toss about Fareed's view. I feel sorry for anyone who doesn't know any better and is hoodwinked into consuming their content unquestioningly.
Now getting to the powers that be. First off, the SEC set out their program for the rest of the year today and bitcoin/crypto doesn't feature - so there's that. Granted, multiple agencies are implicated so it doesn't mean that there still can't be something but it won't come from the SEC. There are plenty of things that a government can do - but it's another thing entirely as regards whether it makes any sense. That brings us all the way back to the same discussion. You don't think there's anything in this and I believe the complete opposite.
Back in 1991, the law had to be changed in the US to actually make it legal for people to use/access the internet. Imagine if they didn't change that? They won't be able to neuter bitcoin without neutering all decentralised crypto - and when they do that, those innovators - who are more mobile now than ever before - will simply up sticks and leave the US - simple as that. There's no way they will pull the trigger. I think the Europeans are culturally more likely to want to do that - but it must be playing on their minds how Europe fared vs. the US in the last innovative wave.
So getting right back to where we started, of course it doesn't matter what we think in terms of how things play out. However, we have differing interpretations of what's likely to happen. Yours is an extremely bearish view re. bitcoin. Mine is a guarded bullish view (guarded in that we may have some setbacks - but I still believe that it will continue to develop over the longer haul). Opinions are two a penny - but I guess we'll get to find out soon enough.
On another note, you've joined this discussion more recently but one of the key moments in 2020 relative to bitcoin was Paul Tudor Jones' investors letter - where he set out the case to take a small position in bitcoin. Earlier today,
he set out the rationale as to why he's now moved from a 1% position to 5%.
stating:
"Bitcoin is math. And math has been around for thousands of years. Two plus two is going to equal four and it will for the next 2,000 years. I like the idea of investing in something that’s reliable, consistent, honest, and a hundred percent certain.”