How long before nation states buy bitcoin?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You are intelligent people but you are dragging this thread into the land of pixies and fairies if you trying to say that the Central Bank Of Iran is no different to the Central Bank Of Ireland.

Central Bank Of Iran does not recognise international money laundering rules, has been subject to sanctions for over a decade because of terrorist financing to groups like Hezbollah. It has enabled financing of Quds Force who are linked to significant terrorist activity. It is not even a member of SWIFT. The Governer of the Central Bank is a designated terrorist according to the US.

You might not agree with sanctions or the world view of Iran but saying Iranian central bank buying bitcoin is an example the rest of the worlds central banks should follow is preposterous.
 
Sunny said:
You are intelligent people but you are dragging this thread into the land of pixies and fairies if you trying to say that the Central Bank Of Iran is no different to the Central Bank Of Ireland.
Click to expand...

I was not saying that the central bank of Iran was the same as Central Bank of Ireland, I was asking what the difference was I understood central banks to be just that, central banks.

You have pointed out some differences, thanks.

That a sovereign state uses its central bank to fund nefarious activities in the terrorism department is hardly the preserve of the Iranians. My understanding is the CBI is not a member of SWIFT because another powerful state, the US, imposed financial sanctions against them that effectively ended their participation in that system?


So while there are differences between central banks in different parts of the world, there are also similarities. The CBIran is a function of the monetary system of Iran, like the CBIreland is a function of the monetary system of Ireland.
 
WolfeTone said:
So while there are differences between central banks in different parts of the world, there are also similarities. The CBIran is a function of the monetary system of Iran, like the CBIreland is a function of the monetary system of Ireland.
Click to expand...

So? The Central Bank of Iran is not buying Bitcoin (If that is true) because it believes in Bitcoin. It is buying Bitcoin so circumvent sanctions and international money laundering regulations. Whether you think that is a good thing or not, it not really relevant. If that is what people are clinging to in suggesting that Central Banks around the world are beginning to embrace bitcoin and that it is only a matter of time that they all follow Iran's example, then we really have entered the a new realm of ridiculous.

There are good arguments to be made for Bitcoin and other Crypto but this isn't one of them.
 
@Sunny ok, for the sake of arguement, I am willing to concede that of all the central banks in the world that acquired bitcoin first I had hoped it would not be the Iranian central bank.
 
WolfeTone said:
@Sunny ok, for the sake of arguement, I am willing to concede that of all the central banks in the world that acquired bitcoin first I had hoped it would not be the Iranian central bank.
Click to expand...
This is the point. Whilst these guys get apoplectic on the subject, bitcoin doesn't give a fiddlers what your geopolitics is. We've had similar labeling on here re. the presumed politics of those that are supportive of bitcoin. It's a tool that can be utilised by anyone. There is no opinion involved. In her twitter thread, Acheson points out whats relevant here in terms of the ongoing progression of bitcoin which is this -> "It [Iran] is merely taking advantage of a new tool in the global financial toolbox". THAT is whats relevant - not getting into the reeds on the geopolitics itself. You can decide to get indignant about Iran or you can realise that bitcoin works effectively in global settlement. You can decide that you don't like the circumstances but the reality is that its role in global settlement is being formalised by their central bank.
If in the future another nation thinks that bitcoin could serve a role for it in international trade and settlement, the notion that they will dismiss the idea because Iran has utilised bitcoin is the stuff of pixies and fairies. Someone mentioned SWIFT. This is the Brussels-based organisation that locked the Iranians out of international banking and prevented the Europeans from trading with them (against their wishes). It's toast - it's only a matter of time until it's replaced.
Sunny said:
The Central Bank of Iran is not buying Bitcoin (If that is true) because it believes in Bitcoin. It is buying Bitcoin to circumvent sanctions
Click to expand...
Nobody is suggesting that Iran has some grand ideal re. bitcoin. Leave your politics and indignation at the door - then look at it again. They're using an available financial tool - and it's a tool that can be used effectively by any central bank/country. That's proven. Busting sanctions is one thing (and it makes no earthly difference re. your belief of whats right or wrong with that...it presents a need to reach for another financial tool to deal with it). The petro-dollar system is another - that affects a hell of a lot more countries.

Lastly, maybe some of their trading will have something to do with terrorist financing, maybe it will have something to do with their nuclear programme, or maybe it will involve much needed medical supplies. Regardless, when they establish as being available to trade internationally via bitcoin, they're also dragging international trading partners into a need to trade with them in bitcoin also.
 
Last edited:
If Iran is using bitcoin to avoid sanctions then that is in danger of making bitcoin an enemy of the US. Not a smart thing for bitcoin to do. A word from Joe in Muskie's ear would be enough to knock 50% of its price instantly. But I am sure they have many other weapons to fight bitcoin if it is a sanctions buster.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
If Iran is using bitcoin to avoid sanctions then that is in danger of making bitcoin an enemy of the US.
Click to expand...
You think that they're just considering that now? Who knows what way they've game theoried it out but they would have acted a few years ago already if they felt that was the appropriate or worthwhile thing to do.

Duke of Marmalade said:
Not a smart thing for bitcoin to do.
Click to expand...
I don't think you're getting this. See my previous post. Bitcoin doesn't have an 'opinion'. It's a financial tool - that anyone is free to use.


Duke of Marmalade said:
A word from Joe in Muskie's ear would be enough to knock 50% of its price instantly.
Click to expand...
If Tesla drop kicked bitcoin tomorrow, I doubt the price drop would be 50%. With every cycle, new people are onboarded - oftentimes being much less well informed. That's why we're seeing knee-jerk reactions to all manner of fud that is being deliberately spread to induce that reaction in recent weeks. Those that have been around longer won't react on the basis of such an event.
Even if it dropped by 50%, you're talking about it being a long way above the $20k level that - over the course of 3 years - you told us bitcoin had long since retreated from - leaving so many innocents out of pocket.
Over and above that, you're talking about the price - a short term price drop doesn't kill bitcoin.

Duke of Marmalade said:
But I am sure they have many other weapons to fight bitcoin if it is a sanctions buster.
Click to expand...
You're assuming that they want to fight bitcoin. I've come across all manner of theories on this - and its as clear as mud as regards how the yanks and Chinese think about bitcoin at a strategic level. There's been mention that China likes to see it in the world as it causes problems for the Americans - busting sanctions, etc. Others have speculated that it suits the Americans as the ethos of bitcoin better fits in with the mindset of many Americans. The thinking is that they embraced free market development of the internet and tech - and benefited greatly from it - and that the same would apply to bitcoin/decentralised blockchain.
It definitely doesn't fit in with the authoritarian Chinese approach BUT it could be that they can live with it at an international level. Some arm of Chinese government came out last week and unexpectedly praised bitcoin. It can also be that they both dislike it but that they could stomach it rather than have their adversary be dominant in international trade with the USD or the upcoming digital Yuan.
There's no clear understanding of what their thinking is - but either way bitcoin doesn't give a fiddlers. Every day its out in the world, it becomes harder to put back into the bottle - that much is clear.

WolfeTone said:
this point would have been easier if it were not Iran.
Click to expand...
For sure - that's why in her tweet thread, Acheson referred to bitcoin’s "reluctant role on the global stage of geopolitical tensions".
 

The original title of this thread is 'How Long Before Nation States Buy Bitcoin'......

You come along with a huge announcement with an unsubstantiated story from some crypto website showing Iran are doing something with Bitcoin and on the back of Iran doing something, you say:

regardless of the underlying circumstances, that's a central bank normalising the use of crypto for payments ( particularly large international settlement). The rest will follow (and by the rest I mean them holding significant bitcoin reserves (although there's a good chance they do already) and the practice spreading to other jurisdictions).

It's not just time for CBs to get off zero, it's time for everyone to get off zero.

The idea that Iran Central Bank is 'Normalising' the use of crypto for other Central Bank's to follow is completely ridiculous and you are doing to a large disservice to your many other informative posts by peddling this nonsense.



As for this bit:

Lastly, maybe some of their trading will have something to do with terrorist financing, maybe it will have something to do with their nuclear programme, or maybe it will involve much needed medical supplies. Regardless, when they establish as being available to trade internationally via bitcoin, they're also dragging international trading partners into a need to trade with them in bitcoin also.

That's ok then. As long as Iran can pay foreign terrorists in Bitcoin and foreign terrorists can accept the Bitcoin, we are a step closer to Bitcoin being used in International Trade on a greater scale. Is that really your argument?

Since we have decided that Iran is the global trendsetter, it appears that even they want to crack down on it even if it turns out good enough for their Government for whatever reason.....

Bitcoin backlash: Iran cracks down on crypto exchanges

The current hawkish stance comes in the wake of bitcoin’s meteoric price rise since mid-December.
www.aljazeera.com
 
Sunny said:
The idea that Iran Central Bank is 'Normalising' the use of crypto for other Central Bank's to follow is completely ridiculous and you are doing to a large disservice to your many other informative posts by peddling this nonsense.
Click to expand...
You're entitled to your opinion as I am mine. I disagree. Actively using it for the purpose of international settlement is precisely that. You can lament the underlying circumstances all you wish but the fact is that it is being used as a financial tool to settle international trade. It might not sit well with you (because you're focusing on the geopolitics) but it's the reality.

Again, you're getting into the geo-politics. That's in no way helpful. Who's right or wrong between the US/Iran is beside the point for the consideration of the use of bitcoin in this instance. The fact of the matter is that it is being used by them for international trade settlement - and they've just formalised that. That is the basis on which trading partners will trade with them too - and so, that pulls more entities into settlement via bitcoin.


You make my point for me. I've already stated that they are using bitcoin as a financial tool that is available to them. In that role, it proves itself more than capable of settling international trade.
 
Last edited:
I exercised a little poetic licence by giving bitcoin a persona. @WolfeTone and @tecate swiftly point out to me that bitcoin is not a person and does not have opinions. I guess poetry is somewhat wasted in these parts.
 
Sunny said:
You come along with a huge announcement with an unsubstantiated story from some crypto website ..
Click to expand...
Firstly, the publication is Coindesk and they're no better nor worse than any other financial media.
Secondly, what remains unsubstantiated exactly?
Lastly, I linked to Acheson's tweet thread and her thinking on the subject as I consider it very relevant - not the article directly.
 
WolfeTone said:
Bitcoin making all Revoluts dreams come true

What are the implications of this (if any)?
Is this not the 'FinTech' that Roubini said would make bitcoin irrelevant @Duke of Marmalade ?
Click to expand...
Wolfie, I'm sure the good Duke will be along shortly to respond. In the meantime, Aunt Jemima articles? Out of respect for the honourable fish and the humble potato, I wouldn't wrap my fish n' chips with one which leaves Jemima's 'work' lacking a use case....ironic given what she's scribbled about use case in the past.
Revolut's crypto offering was lacking - this helps give it a bit more utility. Paypal will end up doing the same.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
I briefly did as you said. But it all looks a little underwhelming. Can you summarise the main takeaways that I should have, please.
Click to expand...

That is what I was hoping to elicit from posters like yourself. I just assumed that if the FT and other media sites were reporting on it that there may be some significance to it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register