Whenever the SEC throw out anti-crypto regulations, there's always a section of the population cheering from the sidelines. In their opinion, this move will protect the general public from the "threat of crypto" and make the World a better place.
I'm always at a loss to those who think these reaching regulations are good for the public. You are supporting tyranny but because you think it favours you, you clap along.
The SEC has its uses but decision-making is supposed to be objective and not antagonistic by nature. If the aim is to protect the public, focus on protection rather than outright attack on a certain section of the public.
There's no cowering behind the fence, we know that most State nations don't like Bitcoin and by extension, cryptocurrencies. They'll mask this contempt for cryptocurrencies under various guises but the truth is bare for everyone to see.
To perpetuate their derision of crypto, the government typically uses the SEC as a tool to create an adverse regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies to thrive. This oxymoronic approach is both subtle and ostensible at the same time for anyone willing to look beyond the veil.
Void of knowledge
The SEC's approach in virtually every country is to use a team of lawyers to coin their biased views of crypto into well-scripted policies that seem to be on the side of the public. However, if you've been around the crypto space for a minute, you don't need more than 2 brain cells to detect the apparent apathy that lies beneath the surface.
The policies treat crypto in the same way law enforcement in Nigeria treats anyone who has a tattoo as a criminal. Every single cryptocurrency and crypto-related project is shunted into one box with entities that are all treated the same.
This sweeping opinion of the crypto industry is the reason why the SEC cannot ever make coherent crypto policies. Even things as basic as taxing cryptocurrnecies, for example, cannot be done coherently because there are too many factors that the SEC don't consider when making their policies.
For example, why will assets in the Cosmos network be treated in the same way as assets on Hive. Yes, they're all proof of stake networks but does that warrant a sweeping policy for both and will it even be fair? That'll be like using the same regulatory framework for Gold and Diamonds because they are all "mined".
Funny enough, the general public that feels "protected" by the SEC tends to mirror the feelings of regulators. You tell a random person about blogging to earn on Hive and their mind goes to how they lost money because of Dogecoin, so they don't want to participate on Hive.
The truth is that their regulations will always be lacking until the SEC and regulators in other countries actually take the time to look at the industry beyond numbers on exchanges. If you intend to make policies, there should be some understanding of the market, the products and other affiliated resources that go into creating a crypto project.
