FTC

bazinguh

Tell that the the two FTC commissioners that were fired illegally.

banellie

We will find out. There's a supreme court case coming up on the 15th after Trump fired two Democratic appointees to the FTC when it's supposed to be independent. They figure if he wins this, Trump then might go after the Fed's independence since it could be legal too.

Know_nothing89

The “Trump SEC”’ Found no wrongdoing. We have to look at any government rulings from this point of view from now on. “Trump DOJ” , “Trump FBI” , Trump FTC”

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; FTX co-founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) has been transferred from Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center to FTC Oklahoma City via 'Con Air' after an unauthorized jailhouse interview. SBF, convicted of defrauding FTX users, is serving a 25-year sentence and is expected to be moved to a minimal-security facility, possibly in California. His trial revealed a scheme involving billions in misused customer funds. SBF maintains his innocence and is appealing his conviction while his parents seek a presidential pardon. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

bratukha0

FTC? Dude's going from the big city to... Oklahoma? Remember when crypto was fun, not this?

OffalSmorgasbord

Call the CFPB. It's not their jurisdiction, but they will provide you with a path of recourse through the FTC and your reps. Just kidding, it's grift time,you are the enemy. If you raise an issue, you will be classified...

SeemoarAlpha

Have some respect, they aren't VC's, they are extraordinarily gifted crypto grifters and they paid $177 million for the right to grift unfettered by the pesky SEC, FTC, and DOJ. Just wait until they go full MAGA (Make Alt-coin Grifting Acceptable).

NRA4579

The government confiscates lots of things. They also fine people and organizations for things. These are not taxpayer funds. That’s just one way that they could allocate non-taxpayer funds to acquire new Bitcoin. If the FTC allocated a certain percentage of fines, they Levie and put that towards bitcoin, that would be non-taxpayer funds

Own_Vegetable_8094

Yep, and don’t just read about self custody, do it. I know people that bought hardware wallet but never setup, or transfer… waiting to be a victim of an FTC like scenario

OffalSmorgasbord

Didn't year hear? It's only illegal if Pam Bondi or Tr/ump says it's illegal now. They now interpret the law for all independent agencies. In other words the independent agencies(SEC/FTC/CIA/FCC) are no longer independent and the Judicial branch has no power.

10Core56

Well it isnt surprising. I wonder how long the FTC will continue working tho.

No-Magician-2257

- It hardly dumped in the last dumling cycle. - There are 2 ETFs approvals in the pipeline which will be either directly approved by the FTC or Court (If they approved BTC, they cannot deny LTC as their arguments will be inconsistent) It might just start running and never come back. Good luck.

futon_potato

The problem is that people are still using the word "invest" for anything other than the one crypto that actually has mainstream institutional involvement and financial instruments attached to it (BTC). Even then I'd use that term loosely. It's gambling. Gambling on getting in before the dump. Gambling on a celebrity tweeting about your coin or talking about it on a podcast.Gambling on the next FTC or cabinet pick. If we normalize calling it gambling I feel as though far fewer people would get burnt as they'd think twice before throwing their life savings into it. Imagine going to the casino and saying you were going to invest $30k on black.

JamesQuall666

Asking DeepSeek the same question Creating a cryptocurrency that is resistant to manipulation by large firms while being accessible to retail traders is a challenging but achievable goal. Below are some rules and mechanisms you could implement to make your coin less susceptible to manipulation and more friendly for retail traders using technical analysis: 1. Decentralized Ownership and Fair Distribution No Pre-Mining or Large Initial Allocations: Avoid creating a large portion of the coin supply for yourself, early investors, or institutions. Use a fair launch model where everyone has an equal opportunity to acquire the coin from the start. Proof-of-Stake (PoS) or Proof-of-Work (PoW) with Anti-Whale Mechanisms: Implement staking or mining mechanisms that discourage large entities from accumulating disproportionate control. For example: Limit the maximum stake or mining reward per wallet. Introduce a decaying reward system for large holders to incentivize distribution. 2. Anti-Whale Measures Transaction Limits: Set limits on the maximum amount of coins that can be transferred or traded in a single transaction or within a specific time frame. Progressive Fees: Implement a fee structure where larger transactions incur higher fees. This discourages large players from moving significant amounts of coins at once. Wallet Caps: Limit the maximum balance a single wallet can hold to prevent excessive accumulation. 3. Transparency and On-Chain Analytics Public Ledger: Ensure all transactions are recorded on a public blockchain, allowing anyone to audit wallet activity and detect suspicious behavior. Real-Time Monitoring Tools: Provide retail traders with tools to monitor large transactions, wallet movements, and market activity in real time. 4. Liquidity Pool Design Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs): Encourage trading on DEXs rather than centralized exchanges (CEXs), as DEXs are less prone to manipulation by large entities. Automated Market Makers (AMMs): Use AMMs with deep liquidity pools to reduce price slippage and make it harder for large players to manipulate prices. Liquidity Incentives: Reward small liquidity providers (LPs) to ensure a diverse and decentralized pool of liquidity. 5. Price Stability Mechanisms Algorithmic Stabilization: Implement algorithms that adjust the coin supply based on demand to reduce volatility and make it harder for large players to create artificial price swings. Circuit Breakers: Introduce mechanisms that temporarily halt trading if the price moves too quickly in a short period, preventing pump-and-dump schemes. 6. Retail-Friendly Features Low Transaction Fees: Keep transaction fees low to encourage participation from retail traders. Fractional Trading: Allow trading of fractional amounts of the coin, making it accessible to traders with smaller budgets. Educational Resources: Provide resources and tools to help retail traders understand technical analysis and make informed decisions. 7. Governance and Community Involvement Decentralized Governance: Use a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) to give the community a say in the coin's development and rules. This prevents large entities from exerting undue influence. Voting Power Caps: Limit the voting power of any single entity in the governance process to ensure a fair and democratic system. 8. Anti-Spoofing and Wash Trading Prevention Order Book Transparency: Use transparent order books to detect and prevent spoofing (placing fake orders to manipulate prices). Wash Trading Detection: Implement algorithms to identify and penalize wash trading (trading with oneself to create fake volume). 9. Regular Audits and Updates Smart Contract Audits: Regularly audit the coin's smart contracts to ensure they are secure and functioning as intended. Protocol Upgrades: Continuously update the protocol to address new manipulation tactics and improve fairness. 10. Psychological and Behavioral Incentives Gamification: Introduce gamified elements to encourage participation from retail traders, such as rewards for holding the coin or participating in governance. Community Building: Foster a strong, engaged community that values fairness and transparency, making it harder for large players to manipulate the coin without facing backlash. Example Implementation: Coin Name: FairTradeCoin (FTC) Supply: Fixed at 100 million coins, distributed via fair launch. Transaction Limits: Max 1% of total supply per transaction. Fees: 0.1% base fee, increasing to 1% for transactions over 1% of total supply. Governance: DAO with voting power capped at 5% per wallet. Liquidity: Incentivized DEX pools with rewards for small LPs. By combining these rules and mechanisms, you can create a cryptocurrency that is more resistant to manipulation by large players and more accessible to retail traders. However, keep in mind that no system is entirely immune to manipulation, so continuous monitoring and community involvement are essential.

goodfriendsbadhabits

I can't tell if it's a deepening state of idiocracy, or 300 IQ level machiavellian plays that my monkey brain can't comprehend. Either way I'm in. FTC > BTC

eupherein

Everything anyone said as “news” in 2016-2018 like china bans, FTC news, etc…none of it mattered. The same will apply in another 5-8 years for everything you see today. There are better things to do with your life, just stack and ignore anyone whose convictions are not in line with yours because it’s just FUD.

Rude-Jaguar-5930

Your risk is still there. When you buy USDT or any stable x coin and stake it on exchange the risk is in whether or not the exchange will collapse or not. Alot of these exchanges are new and dealing with a bunch of highly volatile assets. Just takes one wrong move and get over leveraged like FTC did few years back. Since its a crypto if the exchange collapses they do not have to pay you back one penny unlike putting your money in a bank where its insured to atleast pay you back something.

hvyboots

Have none of these people ever seen how these stupid meme coins work before? It's a shame the FTC or some other government body isn't allowed to do strong regulation on these, but oh hey, people voted for a felon for president who loves cryptocurrency (because he sold all his for real money after bilking people out of their life savings), so these people are basically getting a really expensive lesson in FAFO.

patrick2099

Not sure it will do any good, but I'm going to file complaints with my state's AG office, the FTC, and the CFPB against both Swan Bitcoin and Fortress Trust.

redubshank

>Look at it this way; if you're a MAGA dissident, you can talk shit all you want b/c Trump, as a free-speech absolutist, endorses your right to talk shit (incl. about him).  Absolutely false. 1. Before Trump took office he had a system that they named called "Catch and Kill". It was that when anything negative would happen they would try to hush up the story by either a bribe or a lawsuit that would tie things up until the other party didn't have the funds to deal with it. One example is playing an ex-playboy bunny 150,000 dollars to not talk about what happened. 2. He has tried to attack various media or entertainment using the FTC. Luckily our seperation of powers prevented that. Some examples include wanting to remove NBC's broadcasting license. You can check Twitter/X to verify this. You won't. He wanted to regulate the press through anti-trust actions. He signed an executive order to limit legal protections for media in that Communications Decency Act. He wanted the FTC to fine SNL for hurting his feelings. 3. Recently he said the FTC should pull CBS's broadcasting license because he didn't like that they edited a 60 minute interview(despite every show being edited). Funny enough, CBS doesn't need a broadcasting license. 4. In November 2024 there was a bipartisan bill that helped shield journalists during criminal investigations. He told republicans they must kill that bill. Trump is not for free speech AT ALL let alone an absolutist.

jesschester

The bill introduced earlier this year proposes to classify “functional decentralized “ cryptocurrencies as commodities (which world be regulated by the FTC) and “functional non-decentralized” cryptos as securities (regulated by the SEC. With the republicans having a majority as well as Gary Gensler (notorious for refusing to define what a security is) on the chopping block, the proposed changes have a decent chance of going through.

digital_sn0w

The above account shows activity consistent with that of a complex content farm with several valuable accounts that sport diverse interests PLEASE BE AWARE THESE ACCOUNTS ARE DANGEROUS AND WILL STOP AT NOTHING TO PROTECT THE ONLY LIVING THEY HAVE AS THEY HAVE NO SKILLS. THIS ACCOUNT IS ONE OF MANY VALUABLE HAND FARMED ACCOUNTS THEY USE Please be aware the FBI is aware of the gangs of influencers that have been posing as actual customers on social media accounts when they honestly would not be writing these things if it werent for other motivations. Which is what they track motivation. Anyone who words their message as a complaint receuves HEAVY NEGATIVE STIMULUS from these influencers until they no longer complain anymore, this is an older tactic utilized by foreigners for years. If you feel your funds have been used in a way that you disagree with, didnt give permission for, or were otherwise unaware of, please send any and all evidence to the FBI TIP LINE as well as filing a complaint with your local police department the FTC any consumer protection agencies I didnt mention or a private law firm

digital_sn0w

The above account shows activity consistent with that of a complex content farm with several valuable accounts that sport diverse interests PLEASE BE AWARE THESE ACCOUNTS ARE DANGEROUS AND WILL STOP AT NOTHING TO PROTECT THE ONLY LIVING THEY HAVE AS THEY HAVE NO SKILLS. THIS ACCOUNT IS ONE OF MANY VALUABLE HAND FARMED ACCOUNTS THEY USE Please be aware the FBI is aware of the gangs of influencers that have been posing as actual customers on social media accounts when they honestly would not be writing these things if it werent for other motivations. Which is what they track motivation. Anyone who words their message as a complaint receuves HEAVY NEGATIVE STIMULUS from these influencers until they no longer complain anymore, this is an older tactic utilized by foreigners for years. If you feel your funds have been used in a way that you disagree with, didnt give permission for, or were otherwise unaware of, please send any and all evidence to the FBI TIP LINE as well as filing a complaint with your local police department the FTC any consumer protection agencies I didnt mention or a private law firm

Ok_Nefariousness9019

Ask the SEC and FTC.

Blisstopher420

Bitcoin's CEO was vetted by the FTC, so it's really really legit. Not like those other unlegit companies.

Sightlysleights

This person is trying to fixate the conversation that I am wearing their face to exhaust them from causing harm elsewhere This is a fake influencer account that goes around pretending to help people then exhausting them from ever complaining to the FBI about lost funds Please be aware the FBI is aware of the gangs of influencers that have been posing as actual customers on social media accounts when they honestly would not be writing these things if it werent for other motivations. Which is what they track motivation. Anyone who words their message as a complaint receuves HEAVY NEGATIVE STIMULUS from these influencers until they no longer complain anymore, this is an older tactic utilized by foreigners for years. If you feel your funds have been used in a way that you disagree with, didnt give permission for, or were otherwise unaware of, please send any and all evidence to the FBI TIP LINE as well as filing a complaint with your local police department the FTC any consumer protection agencies I didnt mention or a private law firm

Sightlysleights

This is a fake influencer with several accounts at their disposal and is worried one of their valuable accounts have been identified, that account that goes around pretending to help people then exhausting them from ever complaining to the FBI about lost funds Please be aware the FBI is aware of the gangs of influencers that have been posing as actual customers on social media accounts when they honestly would not be writing these things if it werent for other motivations. Which is what they track motivation. Anyone who words their message as a complaint receuves HEAVY NEGATIVE STIMULUS from these influencers until they no longer complain anymore, this is an older tactic utilized by foreigners for years. If you feel your funds have been used in a way that you disagree with, didnt give permission for, or were otherwise unaware of, please send any and all evidence to the FBI TIP LINE as well as filing a complaint with your local police department the FTC any consumer protection agencies I didnt mention or a private law firm

Sightlysleights

Please be aware the FBI is aware of the gangs of influencers that have been posing as actual customers on social media accounts when they honestly would not be writing these things if it werent for other motivations. Which is what they track motivation. Anyone who words their message as a complaint receuves HEAVY NEGATIVE STIMULUS from these influencers until they no longer complain anymore, this is an older tactic utilized by foreigners for years. If you feel your funds have been used in a way that you disagree with, didnt give permission for, or were otherwise unaware of, please send any and all evidence to the FBI TIP LINE as well as filing a complaint with your local police department the FTC any consumer protection agencies I didnt mention or a private law firm

Sightlysleights

The above account has been noted trying to manipulate conversations with the motivation of personal gain to no benefit for the other party, interactions with this accpunt have been documented and detailed for exact specific details into why its actions are immoral due to its feverish disagreements when asked to stop hurting the public. Please be aware the FBI is aware of the gangs of influencers that have been posing as actual customers on social media accounts when they honestly would not be writing these things if it werent for other motivations. Which is what they track motivation. Anyone who words their message as a complaint receuves HEAVY NEGATIVE STIMULUS from these influencers until they no longer complain anymore, this is an older tactic utilized by foreigners for years. If you feel your funds have been used in a way that you disagree with, didnt give permission for, or were otherwise unaware of, please send any and all evidence to the FBI TIP LINE as well as filing a complaint with your local police department the FTC any consumer protection agencies I didnt mention or a private law firm

RedneckHippy76

Not familiar with this Financial Institution, but a lot of Banks are shy about on boarding crypto and there is a conspiracy theory that allegedly the FTC or one of those Initial for a Name Department doesn't want banks working with crypto.

AwkwardObjective5360

Clearly hasn't met Lina Khan over at the FTC.

abrahamlinda

⚠️Let this come to your notice; I was also a victim of fraudulent scam and I reported my case to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). They were able to assist me in recovering my lost money without any charges or fees. The FTC is dedicated to protecting consumers from fraudulent activities and providing support when possible. Inbox me if you where not able to recover your lost money.

mathcampbell

On top of that, the US election will drive a surge one way or another, and the big whales entering the market over this last year cos of us FTC changed haven’t really been felt yet, but come next financial it’ll see a big surge from that, so this is all just the ripples before the storm. TLDR: HLOD. HLOD FOR YOUR LIVES.

BtcKing1111

For your paper, here are some key areas you could explore regarding the legal challenges of accepting Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies as legal tender in the United States: 1. Constitutionality and Legal Tender Laws: The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to coin money and regulate its value (Article I, Section 8). There's a significant question of whether this power allows the federal government to declare non-fiat currency (such as Bitcoin) as legal tender. Could Bitcoin be classified as “money,” or would it need to be treated differently under constitutional principles? How would existing legal tender laws (31 U.S.C. § 5103) need to be amended? 2. Federal vs. State Regulation: States may want to declare Bitcoin as legal tender independently, but they may face issues under the Supremacy Clause if such state actions conflict with federal currency policy. Examining the tension between federal and state law on regulating currency could provide insights. 3. Monetary Sovereignty: Bitcoin is decentralized and not controlled by any government. This raises legal concerns about how the federal government could regulate or control its use as legal tender. You could look into how the Federal Reserve might react and whether Bitcoin’s volatility undermines the federal government’s ability to maintain monetary sovereignty. 4. Regulatory Frameworks and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Laws: Cryptocurrencies are already regulated under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and Anti-Money Laundering statutes. If Bitcoin became legal tender, the U.S. would need to navigate compliance with AML laws and know-your-customer (KYC) regulations. You could analyze how the decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies complicates the enforcement of these laws and how the government might adapt. 5. Taxation: The IRS currently classifies cryptocurrencies as property, not currency, leading to complex tax treatment. Accepting Bitcoin as legal tender would likely necessitate significant tax code changes. You could explore how capital gains taxes would be managed or eliminated in the context of cryptocurrency transactions if Bitcoin were legal tender. 6. Consumer Protection and Legal Recourse: Cryptocurrencies operate on blockchain technology, which makes transactions irreversible. This poses significant challenges for consumer protection. You might explore how existing consumer protection laws (e.g., under the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or Truth in Lending Act) would need to adapt to ensure fairness and legal recourse in crypto-based transactions. 7. Contract Law Implications: U.S. contract law typically requires payment in lawful money, and the designation of Bitcoin as legal tender would have substantial implications for the drafting and enforcement of contracts. A possible focus here would be whether courts would treat Bitcoin-based obligations differently from traditional currency-based obligations, especially in terms of remedies and enforcement. 8. Environmental Regulations: The environmental impact of Bitcoin mining could bring legal scrutiny under federal environmental laws. Consider addressing the potential clash between cryptocurrency mining and environmental regulations like the Clean Air Act. 9. International Legal Considerations: If the U.S. declares Bitcoin legal tender, it might affect international agreements on currency and trade. Exploring the intersection of U.S. policy with international monetary law, including treaties with organizations like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), could provide an interesting angle. By diving into these issues, you could thoroughly address the complex and multifaceted legal landscape surrounding Bitcoin’s potential status as legal tender in the U.S.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Professor Crypto, an award-winning crypto influencer, deleted his X account after being accused of using bots to inflate his social media metrics. The accusations came from crypto investigator ZachXBT following Professor Crypto's win at the DeGen Summit in Singapore. ZachXBT highlighted the use of bots as a violation of FTC regulations. The influencer removed posts related to his award and hid comments questioning his authenticity before deleting his account. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

ace250674

According to the FTC's 2022 report, cryptocurrency scams accounted for about $1.4 billion of the total $8.8 billion lost. So, excluding crypto: Estimated loss: approximately $7.4 billion

MidnightDiplomat4792

It's the only crypto-asset defined as a commodity by the FTC and SEC. That's it's use case buddy, legally it's up there with precious metals, oil and pork butts.

Chancoop

In my opinion, Kamala absolutely needs to be asked if Khan is staying in her position at the FTC under a Harris administration. If that answer is anything other than a hard yes then she isn't worth voting for.

frenchiefanatique

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/26/business/reid-hoffman-kamala-harris-ftc-khan/index.html definitely 'hated' enough that the founder of LinkedIn went on TV to ask that she be removed as head of the FTC. personally I think she is fantastic and a breath of fresh air

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Major Democratic donors are pressuring Kamala Harris' team to consider replacing FTC Chair Lina Khan and SEC Head Gary Gensler, citing concerns over their regulatory approaches. Donors argue Khan's actions are hindering the tech sector and economy, while Gensler's stance on digital assets and perceived attitude towards Wall Street have also drawn criticism. This puts Harris in a difficult position, balancing donor interests with the progressive wing's support for Khan and Gensler's regulatory efforts. The discussions highlight the tension between political influence and regulatory independence. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Bitcoin ATMs, rapidly growing in the U.S., are becoming a significant cybercrime threat. The FTC reported that losses from scams via these ATMs exceeded $120 million in 2023, with a 1,000% increase in scam incidents since 2020. These machines are vulnerable to both physical and cyber threats, including malware and network vulnerabilities. The decentralized and immutable nature of Bitcoin transactions, combined with the lack of a governing body for ATM operations, makes these machines attractive targets for hackers and scammers. Users are advised to be cautious and verify the legitimacy of transactions to protect against scams. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

LacCoupeOnZees

That rocket company is not super profitable and he needs liquidity somewhere. He needs to ask the FTC permission to liquidate stock so it sounds like crypto is where it’s at for him despite his massive wealth on paper

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The FTC has issued a warning about a significant increase in Bitcoin ATM scams, with consumer losses rising nearly tenfold since 2020, reaching over $110 million in 2023. Scammers are exploiting Bitcoin ATMs to deceive individuals into transferring cash into their cryptocurrency accounts, with older adults being especially targeted. The FTC advises the public to be cautious of unexpected calls, to take their time, and to avoid withdrawing cash in response to such scams. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

cpt_charisma

Because the FTC crash housing bitcoin bubble shrimp.

AvatarOfMomus

Except it hasn't boosted tourism, and overall the authoritarianism and uncertainty under Bukele has probably hurt the country's tourism industry. It's also extremely unlikely that Bitcoin is ever going to '10x' over a short period of time ever again. The price is a function of supply and demand, and supply is fairly static, but demand is extremely volatile and there areb't a lot of opportunities for growth. There just isn't really any 'new money' with a reason to get into Bitcoin. The institutional investors have taken their dip into the pool at this point, and the average person's experience with Crypto has been resoundingly negative after the boom and bust of the pandemic, the theft, the scams, FTC, Terra/Luna, SVB, Silvergate, etc. When you mention Bitcoin to the average person not on this sub they think drug buying, ransomware, and money laundering. Not El Salvadore's geothermal projects.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued a warning about crypto ATM scams, revealing that victims are losing an average of $10,000. According to a report by NBC News, $65 million was stolen in the first half of the year through these scams, with losses increasing tenfold from 2020 to 2023 to over $110 million. Scammers often pose as bank employees, government workers, or tech support agents, convincing victims to deposit money into Bitcoin ATMs under false pretenses. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Quiet-Reveal5462

I am want to warn everyone about the fraudulent activities on the CTALL website. This platform is nothing but a scam tool designed to steal your hard-earned money. I was a victim of this scam, losing $60,000 USD to these criminals, specifically a so-called "Professor Andrea" and his assistant "Caroline. "These scammers lured me in with false promises and then disappeared with my money, leaving me devastated. This is a dark hole that no one should fall into. If you've had a similar experience, I urge you to report it to the Federal Trade Commission agency FTC immediately. We need to expose these scammers and stop them from preying on innocent people. Do not trust CTALL, and do everything in your power to protect yourself and others from these thieves!

Ok-City8641

Report to FTC, local authorities, and Bitcoin ATM operators; help friend file complaint with IC3 and monitor financial accounts closely

Series7Trader

If by North America you happen to mean the US and not Mexico or Canada, then opening a new crypto trade platform would be mountains of regulations falling under the SEC and FTC just as a start. Read up on what Coinbase had to do and there's your long answers. [https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2023-102](https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2023-102)

InternationalGur4623

In the United States, cryptocurrencies have been the focus of much attention by both federal and state governments. At the federal level, most of the focus has been at the administrative and agency level, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”), the Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) and the Department of the Treasury (the “Treasury”), through the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”) and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”). While there has been significant engagement by these agencies, little formal rulemaking has occurred. Many federal agencies and policymakers have praised the technology as being an important part of the U.S.’s future infrastructure and have acknowledged the need for the U.S. to maintain a leading role in the development of the technology.

No-Setting9690

You sue? For what reason, to burn your money? Just report them to FTC/State AG and move about your business.

Correct_Citron_133

Hey Alex, I've got a complaint to lodge with you. River vetted me and approved me to buy BTC on your platform. Then, after I invested tens of thousands of dollars in BTC... and tried to move it into cold storage... I was told I could not move my BTC off your platform until my identity was approved. I submitted exactly the same ID that you guys approved me with, but was told I was declined... and told to try again in several months. How could I be approved to buy but not withdraw BTC from your platform? Highly suspicious. I contacted Support 5 times but got no response whatsoever. I've been totally ghosted. I was just about to publish a scathing review here on Reddit (not to mention TrustPilot, with the FTC and others) when I saw you here. I have zero interest in scathing reviews. I simply want to purchase BTC using your platform... and move it into my cold storage. You guys came highly recommended, but the service I have received so far is outrageous. I'll hang tight for your response before taking further action. I eagerly await your response.

aminok

From the article: -- Wall Street was relieved when Sen. Elizabeth Warren was passed over for the leadership of the Treasury Department. But now the financial industry faces another threat: President Joe Biden is enlisting a small army of her former aides and allies to run his government. Warren’s expanding network in the upper echelons of the administration includes protégés who helped execute her aggressive oversight of big banks and other corporations as well as friends who share her views of the risks looming on Wall Street. But it goes beyond finance, covering pivotal posts at the Department of Education and even the National Security Council. The Warren recruits mark a victory for the progressive movement, which has supported her yearslong “personnel is policy” campaign to chip away at the dominance of corporate insiders in setting policy for Democrats. Those who took on the fight with Warren say they’re pleasantly surprised it has produced so many results under Biden, reflecting a new emphasis on inequality and challenging corporate power. Industry lobbyists, in turn, warn that banks, private equity firms and consumer lenders should pay close attention. The appointments “confirm that Sen. Warren will be the most influential voice in the financial policy debate under the new administration,” said Karolina Arias, a former Democratic Senate aide who is now a partner at Federal Hall Policy Advisors. The growing list of Biden personnel backed by Warren and other progressives illustrates the leftward shift underway in the Democratic Party’s approach to policymaking, which was also seen in the $1.9 trillion aid package that Biden signed into law Thursday. “No one should be surprised Sen. Warren has virtually hand-picked the financial and other regulatory nominations she cares deeply about,” said Consumer Bankers Association President Richard Hunt, who represents banks that have faced withering criticism from Warren and her allies. The Warren alumni at senior levels of the executive branch include banking and economic policy staffers who spent years leading her office’s oversight of Wall Street. Bharat Ramamurti is now deputy director of the White House National Economic Council and Julie Siegel is Treasury deputy chief of staff. Other former Warren aides in the administration include Julie Morgan, a senior adviser at the Education Department; Anne Reid, deputy chief of staff at the Department of Health and Human Services; and Sasha Baker, senior director of strategic planning at the National Security Council. “Getting the right people in those slots is really important,” Warren said in a December interview. “And it’s not only the top slots, it’s also the deputies and assistants. The people who do the hard work day in and day out to develop policies and then to execute them.” Other close allies have also been nominated for key posts. Adewale “Wally” Adeyemo, who helped Warren launch the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, is Biden’s pick to be deputy Treasury secretary. FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra, another former CFPB official, is awaiting confirmation to lead the consumer bureau. Leandra English, also a CFPB alum, is chief of staff of the NEC. Gary Gensler, known for cracking down on big banks as a post-financial crisis regulator, is the nominee for Securities and Exchange Commission chair, a position that in the past Warren and her staff have invested significant effort trying to influence. Even Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen worked closely with Warren when Yellen was Federal Reserve chair, a position the economist attained thanks in part to political pressure that Warren and other progressives applied on then-President Barack Obama.

CalvinFromCanada

You're crazy if you think the FTC isn't watching them under a massive microscope.

MaximumStudent1839

> Let me start by defusing a potential concern: it is a blue ocean market. TON can be good and SOL can be good. I don't even know what you are talking about. Never once did I bring up SOL can't do well if TON do well. You are trying to insinuate my critique on TON is based on my SOL position. Well, buddy, you are fucking wrong. I am probably one of the most honest straight-talkers in this sub. I speak my mind based on facts and don't give a fuck about narratives created by mid-IQ OG whales, traders, and VCs. I regularly speak against stupid group think and mass bullshit. And it turns out, a lot of times market seem to agree with what I say in the long run. > TON isn't merely associated with Telegram, they're already integrated. -- Your statement misrepresents this. GTFO with your semantic BS. There is "no misrepresentation", The marketing spiel is they are related to Telegram. Your distinction of "integration" doesn't make any substantial change. > SOL is used for sh\*t coins mostly and it's wildly successful. Why would that count against TON? Ok, you are now trying to strawman now. lol > SOL is also more difficult to onboard than Telegram + TON.  GTFO. I can onboard via SOL on Coinbase via SOL/USDC and PayPal via PYUSD. TON has nothing close in terms of on-boarding or off-boarding rails back to Trad Fi. Ppl are more likely to trust connecting their bank details with regulated and publicly traded companies, like PayPal and Coinbase. You can't be serious if you want to argue Telegram, HQed in Dubai, instills more new user confidence than companies, like Coinbase and PayPal, regulated by the FTC. If new users can't trust your onboarding ramp, you are fucking toast. > Hamster Kombat that have 200 million active monthly users.  [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8rW1BgmLrEI](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8rW1BgmLrEI) Wow, congrats on boarding millions of third-world farmers tapping their lives out to farm this shit coin. Plenty of charts tell you where all this shit end ups in the long run.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The COPIED Act, introduced by a bipartisan group of U.S. senators, aims to combat AI-generated deepfakes by requiring a standardized watermarking method for AI content. This legislation also mandates AI tool providers to enable creators to attach unremovable origin information to their content. The act, led by Senator Maria Cantwell, seeks to enhance transparency, give creators control over their content, and protect against unauthorized use and copyright infringement. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) would develop the watermarking method, with enforcement by the FTC and state attorneys general. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; This week in crypto, Bernstein predicts Bitcoin could reach $1 million by 2033 due to ETF-driven demand, with a potential $200,000 price point in the current cycle. Ethereum ETFs are expected to launch in July. MicroStrategy plans to buy more Bitcoin using $700 million in convertible notes. The FTC reports a surge in crypto-related romance scams. Nigeria dropped tax charges against Binance executives, and Thailand revoked Zipmex's license. The NFT market saw a 17% increase, with Bitcoin NFT sales jumping 50%, surpassing Ethereum. Paradigm announced an $850 million fund for crypto projects, and blockchain startups secured $109.3 million in funding. Hacking threats persist, with notable losses at OKX, Lykke, and UwU Lend. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued a warning about crypto romance scams, where individuals you meet online feign romantic interest to defraud you through cryptocurrency investments. These scammers often initiate contact via social media, build an emotional connection, and then claim to be investment experts to persuade you to send money through untraceable methods like gift cards, money transfer apps, or crypto. The FTC advises cutting off contact and reporting suspected scammers to both the social media platform and the FTC. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

David-Trace

Undisclosed advertising will get you fined, but not by the SEC - that's by the FTC or through a criminal/civil lawsuit. As I said, if the SEC has a case against someone for anything (including undisclosed advertising), it's because some type of investment contract or security/unregistered security is being involved. In the case of Fyre Festival, the celebrities had to pay due to lawsuits being brought against them - the SEC wasn't the one to investigate that. However, on just a side note, the SEC actually was involved with Fyre Festival, but that's because they committed fraud with their seed round investments of $100 million before hosting that shit show. You're right about the definition of managerial efforts, I had that incorrect. However, that still doesn't change the fact of memecoins bypassing this criteria, and again most of them actually meet this criteria and will therefore be labelled as securities. The [SEC outlines](https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/framework-investment-contract-analysis-digital-assets) a lot of technical details but you can take a look under "Section C: Reasonable Expectation of Profits Derived from Efforts of Others." I will say that obviously you and I can't say for sure what counts as a security and what doesn't, as the SEC is still grappling on how to tackle memecoins.

IHaventEvenGotADog

QoinPro? I've got hundreds of emails from them in 2013 like this: ​ > We have added the following daily coins to your balances: > >FeatherCoin: 0.00002617717 FTC Bitcoin: 0.00000001240 BTC Litecoin: 0.00000035197 LTC FedoraCoin: 0.42757479861 TIPS InfiniteCoin: 0.02630257158 IFC Dogecoin: 0.00059777642 DOGE > >During the beta stage we will increase the daily amounts of each coin gradually and frequently. Website is long gone now tho.

Wayward-sherpa-2

Project 2025, also known as the Presidential Transition Project, is a collection of policy proposals to fundamentally reshape the U.S. federal government in the event of a Republican victory in the 2024 U.S. presidential election.[2][3] Established in 2022, the project aims to recruit tens of thousands of conservatives to the District of Columbia to replace existing federal civil servants—whom Republicans characterize as part of the "deep state"—and to further the objectives of the next Republican president.[4] It adopts a maximalist version of the unitary executive theory—which asserts that the president has absolute power over the executive branch upon inauguration.[3][5] Unitary executive theory is a disputed interpretation of Article II of the Constitution of the United States.[6][7] Project 2025 Purpose Plan to reshape the U.S. federal government to support the agenda of Republican Party president Location Washington, D.C. Director Paul Dans Main organ Mandate for Leadership Parent organization Heritage Foundation Budget $22 million[1] Website www.project2025.org Edit this at Wikidata Project 2025 envisions widespread changes across the entire government, particularly with regard to economic and social policies and the role of the federal government and its agencies. The plan proposes slashing funding for the Department of Justice (DOJ), dismantling the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), sharply reducing environmental and climate change regulations to favor of fossil fuel production, eliminating the Department of Commerce, and ending the independence of various federal agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).[8][9] The blueprint seeks to institute tax cuts,[10] though its writers disagree on the wisdom of protectionism.[11] Project 2025 recommends abolishing the Department of Education, whose programs would be either transferred to other government agencies, or terminated.[12][13] Scientific research would receive federal funding only if it suits conservative principles.[14] The Project urges the government to explicitly reject abortion as health care[15][16] and to restrict access to contraception.[17] The Heritage Foundation, an American conservative think tank that leads the development of Project 2025, stated in April 2024 that "the radical Left hates families" and "wants to eliminate the family and replace it with the state" while driving the country to emulate totalitarian nations, such as North Korea. The Project seeks to infuse the government with elements of Christianity, stating in its Mandate that "freedom is defined by God, not man." Project 2025 proposes criminalizing pornography,[18] removing protections against discrimination based on sexual or gender identity,[18][19] and terminating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs,[4][19] as well as affirmative action.[20] The Project advises the future president to immediately deploy the military for domestic law enforcement and to direct the DOJ to pursue Donald Trump's adversaries by invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807.[21][22] It recommends the arrest, detention, and deportation of undocumented immigrants across the country.[23] It promotes capital punishment and the speedy "finality" of such sentences.[24] Project director Paul Dans, a former Trump administration official, explained that Project 2025 is "systematically preparing to march into office and bring a new army, aligned, trained, and essentially weaponized conservatives ready to do battle against the deep state."[25][26] Dans admitted that it was "counterintuitive" to recruit so many people to join the government in order to shrink it, but pointed out the need for a future President to "regain control" of the federal government.[4] Although the project does not promote a specific presidential candidate, many contributors have close ties to Donald Trump and his presidential campaign.[7][27] The Heritage Foundation has developed Project 2025 in collaboration with over 100 partners including Turning Point USA, led by its executive director Charlie Kirk; the Conservative Partnership Institute including former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows as senior partner; the Center for Renewing America, led by former Trump Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought; and America First Legal, led by former Trump Senior Advisor Stephen Miller.[28][29] The Project is detailed in Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, a version of which Heritage has written as transition plans for each prospective Republican president since 1980.[30] Critics of Project 2025 have described it as an authoritarian Christian nationalist movement[31] and a path for the United States to become an autocracy. Several experts in law have indicated that it would undermine the rule of law and the separation of powers.[8] Some conservatives and Republicans also criticized the plan, for example in the contexts of centralizing power,[4] climate change,[32] and foreign trade.

Formal_Regard

Like going after the FTC, it is just not possible to win. Good luck.

Tuwannaglenn1

Thank you, I did, and I also put in with the FTC

RumbleLab

I opened a new account within my fidelity portfolio which prompted a financial advisor to call me to see what was up. I told them I was looking to roll my 401k into FBTC. He got my info then set up a meeting. Now I can't remember specifically what he said, but something to the tune of: we are not allowed to advise people to take positions in these yet. Something with the FTC I believe. He said that could change soon, it could change 10 years from now. I could have completely misunderstood.

moemonies1

Damn. Am sorry that happened to you man. The best you can do is contact and file a report with the FTC. Go here [https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/#/](https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/#/) This is the FTC official website. Report fraud and get in touch with them. The officers may be able to help and have the resources to go after these scammers. You need to do this. They can track the BTC. Make sure you have their btc address and give them all the information needed. Do not divulge personal information to anyone. Officers from FTC will not make you divulge information that can compromise you further. Contact the FTC right now so they can start investigating

courtrye

There is so much to consider when it comes to grayscale. Before the ETFs were launched, there was actually a discount on their stock when compared with self custody bitcoin. It was kind of a bet whether ETFs would come at all, and grayscale initiated the lawsuits against the FTC which led to the approval of ETFs in general. “the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the SEC's denial of Grayscale Investment's application to convert the Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) into an ETF was invalid and must be reviewed, calling it an “arbitrary and capricious” rejection.” We are all really fortunate, and grayscale should be positively recognized for their efforts on this lawsuit. That probably cost them a lot of money, and they are a business trying to maximize profitability, so they just picked the management fee for GBTC that would net them the most ongoing fees. Going from 2% all the way down to 0.25% is a huge drop. They would probably still make more with a third of the customers paying 1.5% compared to all of the original customers paying 0.25%. I don’t want to do the math here, but you can find the brake even point. They picked a number, have seen some customer attrition, and are now launching that many trust to try to catch new people or those who are switching out of GTC and taking that capital gains hit.

0DTEx

Break even is bottom in bear markets so this is really good info to know. If for whatever reason the price of bitcoin gets near breakeven post halving it’s probably a really good time to buy. Knowing this info got me buying 18-15k as breakeven was 13k around the time of FTC collapse.

jadequarter

nexon is a bunch of scammers. they've rigged gacha odds for a decade and korea FTC caught them and fined them $9m imagine thinking the odds for getting X item is a coded %. nope, nexon uses an algorithm and reduces or increases the odds based on factors that were unknown to you, as mentioned here: https://i.imgur.com/75WeIzc.jpg https://np.reddit.com/r/Maplestory/comments/1ab92kc/suit_against_nexon_co_ltd_has_been_filed/ cant believe avalanche would partner with scammers lmao

HSuke

It's actually harder than you think because it's super easy to detect and block. The FTC is already fining and threatening to ban companies that don't verify numbers and allow spam. Every SIP trunk has a list of DIDs or DID ranges expected from that trunk. Legit telcos will simply block numbers outside of the expected DID range. What's easier than faking a number is just buying a real VoIP number

Head_Pie4518

Thank you so much, we did also file a report with the FTC already ❤️

ilillilillilillilili

Sorry to hear your elderly parents were taken advantage of. Its disgusting that thieves latch on to any buzzwords to get the vulnerable to hand over money of any sort. Unfortunately, crypto is made to work securely with good and bad actors and once a transaction is confirmed, its 100% permanent. Definitely help your parents submit an official report of some kind. Best I can come up with off-hand is the FTC. https://reportfraud.ftc.gov At the very least: it may warn others from being taken by the same actors. Best of luck to you!

Number_United

Imagine selling your company and then buying it back again for 10% what you were paid. FTC made alot of people money.

Jenn2895

Look up FTC stats on crypto scams. Then consider how many people don't report they were scammed.

SOCOPOPO

The two big ones I can see is savings/finance. As tps is going through the roof to be able to cover credit services to match Visa and Mastercard’s tps, I could see crypto taking over that market. Secondly the thing I thought about is companies could move their “stocks” to the block chain. Instead of buying a stock from an exchange and waiting 2 days to settle, they could move all stocks to a stock “coin.” This will be tough with the SEC and FTC and every other gov’t entity, but you could sell fractional shares with no market close, and settlement could be 2 seconds instead of 2 days.

Regular_Chapter_788

Looks like you got scammed >Scam Scam. Look up their address, it will show you. 7 Laurier Rd, London, England, NW5. Just a residential townhouse, not a business. Their business license expires in November this year, registered as an advertising agency. Fraud alert. FTC has been reported to as well. Not playing any games with these clowns. >Date of experience: 04 February 2024 >Absolute scam bags Absolute scam bags, don’t even deserve the 1star. No withdrawals no feedback from scam hunter. Do not invest, all the people leaving good comments are getting paid to leave them… I say again people “DO NOT GIVE YOIR MONEY TO THESE SCUMBAGS” cause you will get nothing back in return… no pay day no feedback from scamhunter, no nothing… good luck in your investing, just don’t put your money here >Date of experience: 15 February 2024 >Company adress dosnt exist So I Googled there ceo... Same name was done for fraud... I also Google there company adress it's a housing estate in London .... And I've purchased 85 TH roughly 560 pounds and hit with the same thing everyone else is telling me.... I have not been able to withdraw at all yet due to the high btc load....they owe me 500+ >Date of experience: 17 February 2024

Rydog_78

Did FTC actually go out and buy the Bitcoin for customers when they bought it or did FTX just funnel customer money strait through to Alameda research, it’s trading arm?

Iron0ne

Says the guy that was in bed with FTC.

PkmnTraderAsh

I owned FTC (Feathercoin) in 2013 (mined it and LTC) and converted to BTC before end of bull run. I owned NXT (Nextcoin) in 2018 (played around with exchanges and liked the idea for brief minute) and converted it to BTC before end up bull run. It's the same story every bull run - alts rise on ideas and die off with end of bull runs. Some are sticking around longer as crypto space becomes more mature, but you'll still be more likely to gamble/speculate on a loser.

Crypto__Sapien

Good on you for recognizing this scam attempt! Unfortunately these tactics do prey on some victims. In terms of fighting back, engaging further does open yourself to potential risks if they trick you into downloading malware. Best not to interact at all. A few options that are safer and can possibly help authorities: Document everything - save emails, record calls if legal in your area. Details like phone #s, sender addresses, and transcripts could aid investigation. Report issues - file complaints with local authorities, the FTC, exchange partners, etc. The more reports filed, the higher priority. Warn others - expose techniques used on forums/social media to educate potential targets without engaging directly. Prevent the next person from falling for same tricks. I know it's tempting to try getting vigilante justice, but safer to simply document, report, and bring awareness to protect others. Be very careful before clicking any links or files from them. Ultimately authorities are best equipped to handle the perpetrators when possible. Stay safe out there!

OMFGROFLMAO2

Wait, back then FTC had 0 BTC under custody, they actually had negative BTC in their books (don't actually know how that's possible), how are they shorting BTC if all trades ended on the bankruptcy notice?

ClotworthyChute

Another important point, these companies are being monitored by the jackboots with the SEC so there is no chance of anything resembling FTC, Celsius or Mt. Gox happening.

ClotworthyChute

GBTC is nothing at all like FTC. That post is misleading and should be removed. GBTC has higher fees than it’s competitors.

truckstop_sushi

"MAY HELP guard against" that's a legal qualifier shoehorned in there because their lawyers knew making a product claim without the "may" (maybe it will, maybe it won't) is asking for the FTC to fine you for making unsubstantiated Product Claims that they'd rather not have to argue in court to prove.

CryptoAbundance4All

Please be judicious with Solana. The overall blockchain governance is concerning and It’s only a matter of time before Federal Prosecutors or Investigative Research Firms begin to piece together the insights uncovered in the SBF trial; further investigate; and bring potentially criminal charges against the foundation and it’s founders. It starts with the multiple agreements between FTX/Almeda/SBF and Solana post token launch; followed by the ability for FTX to “turn off the blockchain” and control trading volume. It is obvious that Solana was complicit and benefited from the manipulation of the Solana token based on the timing of the incredible rise in its market cap. SBF is the biggest Solana holder (purchasing at 20 cents) and half of all Solana currently staked belongs Alameda, who continue to profit in rewards. Beyond taking a risk, I feel an ethical obligation to NOT purchase any Solana tokens at this time. They are too entangled in the criminal acts of FTX/Almeda/SBF and it doesn’t end there… Founders, insiders and VCs have control and It’s a brilliant plan. Leverage Airdrops to stimulate on-chain activity volume through the trading of useless meme coins that have no real value or utility; only capitalizing off the meme narrative. Increased user activity increases retail and VC investor confidence in the chain, which means more capital inflow. All the while, they can create unlimited supply and an unlimited number of these tokens that generate tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars in market cap while indirectly raising the price of Solana, all with minimal costs. It’s like printing money out of Air(drops.) And by the way, there is no cap on Solana tokens… In fact, transparency in token supply has been an ongoing issue at Solana. Don’t get me wrong, There are good things happening on the chain but it’s all because of the community. Now is not the time to buy Solana tokens or support the bad actors currently in control. The valuation is extremely frothy because VC groups and many influencers are selling us on the most bullish picture of Solana, creating FOMO among their followers. Since Solana does not provide transparency on its foundation expenses, there is no way to know if these influencers are being compensated to promote the blockchain or have a vested interest in its success. We have to put our trust in their adherence to disclose under FTC law. And I’m not sure they all do… In fact, I've posted this comment on other influencer channels and It was deleted. We deserve better. There is better tech out there that is more decentralized with goals of advancing the space ethically. That’s the amazing thing about crypto, it’s the first asset class where the retail investor has the leg up on Wall Street. We get to choose! However, that doesn’t mean we should drop our guard. There are still VC’s and insiders that have the upper hand. This is not exclusive to Solana but it is to their detriment. Be careful, things could get really heated up legally. Take profits and wait for this to flush out before investing. You’ll know when the opportunity is right.

beenscammed2023

This happened to me. I added $1000 first, then was told another would be refunded in 48rs but was reinvested. Then I was told to pay 30% or $7000 to get them out. I didn’t but it’s frustrating because I’ve reported it to the BBB, SEC, FTC etc. how does this get out. The person I worked with I thought was someone my sister knew…they are still on FB now…how do they get caught? What can be done to warn others?

tbombs23

Nope nothing is insured and if they claim to be they're lying. Voyager digital fraudulently claimed FDIC insurance and look how that turned out. There was a 1.65billion settlement with FTC regarding it. Luckily they suspended the judgement so Voyager can pay more back to creditors to supplement the measly 35% we initially got back

MushroomMermaid80

This could actually happen, a guy I know was on a dating site scamming women out of $ telling them he was doing bitcoin investing for them but setting up his own accounts. Eventually he got busted by the FTC for fraudulent trading. But no one reported him because he would also get incriminating information over texts that he could use against people. I hope he lost everything when the crypto market went down.

AngryRobot42

That is not how the law works. The key word their is evidence. You cannot just manifest evidence out of nothing, it takes time. And to your other statement that price gouging doesn't exist then you have not been reading the lawsuits that the FTC brought up against Amazon for price gouging two months ago. So yes, according to your own logic, companies were price gouging and lawsuits like: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/09/ftc-sues-amazon-illegally-maintaining-monopoly-power

life762

If price gouging is "obvious", then take your evidence (that's apparently in plain sight) to the FTC. It's particularly strange to say price gouging is "obvious" from retailers. Retailers? Seriously? Retail is a low-margin business. If one or a consortium of retailers are price gouging, an independent retailer will swoop in with lower prices and steal their business. In reality, price-gouging is not an obvious cause of high prices, because there are many things that can cause high prices. There's a connection there that needs to be proved. What you call "obvious" is really just your assumption.

life762

Yep, the answer is there is no direct connection between prices and profits. Like I said, prices are set by market forces, supply and demand. Notice I didn't mention "profits." There can be a lot of reasons why profits can increase that are not related to prices at all. I'll give you an example. Profits of oil companies has been higher during the term of the current president than the last president. I'll put forth two possible explanations (although there are certainly many more): 1. Oil company execs decided to start price-gouging. Maybe they woke up one day and decided to be greedier. Or maybe they took advantage of real supply shocks in order to sustain high prices longer than necessary. A lot of people want to believe this. It's simple to understand, and people are predisposed to hate big oil anyway. Here's another possible explanation. 2. The administration implements policies that disincentivize investment into oil. When companies don't invest, they are less prepared for the future but their profits immediately go up. You'll see this on 10-K filings. Notice profits increase regardless of what current oil prices are. Frankly, #2 is a lot more believable to me. This example was about oil, where OPEC has a legal monopoly, but #1 is even more absurd in other industries where markets are more free. Grocery and food supply, for example, are low-margin businesses. It's hard for a grocer or supplier to price gouge because another grocer or supplier will step in with lower prices and take their business. Do you really think when egg prices triple, that's because fat cat grocers and chicken farmers are in the back room twirling their mustache, rubbing their hands together as they rake in the big bucks? If you've ever met a grocer or chicken farmer, you'd understand the absurdity; these aren't super rich people. Or is it more likely that eggs are more expensive because chicken feed, labor and transportation costs have all gone up? And when you trace the causes of all those increased costs, where do you think it will all lead? There can be natural reasons, like natural disaster, famine, acts of God, whatever, but one of the primary reasons is simple: policy. Somebody with power somewhere created a policy that had a bunch of downstream effects which ultimately increased costs. It would be in the interest of those policy makers to pretend like they're not causing problems and point the blame somewhere else. Many people will go along with them because it's easier to understand and feels good to believe "they make lots of money, so they bad" -- and I'm not saying that policy makers are pure bad and everyone else downstream is pure good -- but taking what a president or any other policy-maker says at face value is ridiculous. Like I said, if the U.S. president or _anyone_ has evidence of price-gouging, they can take that evidence to the FTC. That would do us all a favor. But it seems more likely that they're just misdirecting.

commander_clark

Asking in good faith, because I am not very knowledgeable in this department - Can you ELI5 how price of goods being much higher while corporations are posting record profits is not price gouging? Maybe not the FTC involved legalese definition but conceptually price gouging?

life762

Prices don't respond to what you think they "should" do. Prices are set by market forces, supply and demand. If you or the U.S. president have actual evidence of price-gouging, then go talk to the FTC. If, on the other hand, you want to complain about prices because they're politically inconvenient, then carry on.

anonymouscitizen2

This is the biggest acquirement in finance. I wonder if the FTC will stop the acquisition of Dogelon mars

ConclusionMaleficent

I would like to point out that way before FTC crashed they were pushing the BTC price down so they could buy cheap BTC to cover what they claimed to hold for their clients. It was their actions in 2021 not their collapse that triggered the bear market. Google it!!!

JDepinet

Problem is they are trying to define crypto as securities. They don’t properly fit that role. This industry should be regulated by the FTC not the Sec.

MakeTotalDestr0i

They will still flag you with large transactions and freeze things even when you think you are "KYC'd" because every transaction is a new risk assessment. They are completely opaque by law and it's almost impossible to meet their burden to prove yourself innocent of the imaginary money crime. One cannot simply contact support to smooth over any issues before transaction. Every transaction resets your standing. It is a true Kafkaesque clusterfuck of tyranny . You can struggle to be as legal as possible and still get your shit frozen in a morass of " I don't knows" bounced through an Infinite loop of phone calls and emails only resolved by sending attorney in to liberate your money. My advice is get that attorney pre loaded and ready to go. Also have FTC and attorney general and all those other agencies form ready to file complaints. This is what Ive had to do over single BTC. Luckily I didn't have to pay a lawyer because I was able to explain my legal case using law pulled from internet . But I can almost guarantee next time I try to do anything with my own money in account they will put me through the ringer again.

GTKFANL

TL;dr: BlackRock forced the SEC’s hand by filing a spot Bitcoin ETF application. This is not a drill. There’s two currents going on here. The first is legal pressure. Multiple federal courts have ruled against the SEC in cases involving crypto assets. People talk about Lina Khan being ineffective at the FTC but Gary Gensler has an equally bad if not worse track record on this stuff. For example, the SEC was ordered to review Grayscale’s application to turn their Bitcoin and Ethereum trusts into spot ETFs. In another example, it appears highly likely that the SEC will lose its lawsuit against Coinbase; not to mention they just had to drop securities fraud charges against the heads of Gemini after a federal judge reprimanded SEC lawyers for experimenting with “new legal authority” in his courtroom. The second is institutional pressure. The SEC’s argument against spot ETFs from companies like Grayscale, VanEck, and ARK is that they’re too small and young to protect consumers from the risks / volatility of crypto assets. There actually is a bit of truth to this. But there’s nothing prima facie wrong with their applications, at least nothing so defective that couldn’t be fixed in the normal comment and revision period. BlackRock, on the other hand, is the largest asset management firm in the world. If there is an Illuminati, Larry Fink is probably the Chairman. They’ve never filed an ETF application that didn’t get approved. Their presence in crypto-markets will bring legitimacy and, frankly, a whole lot of price stability. An important note here is that the SEC is implicitly required by statute to treat ETF application has presumptively valid. That’s why people are giving such near term predictions. It’s not them divining the future, the SEC is required to respond within a certain timeframe. I forget the dates right now but I think the last possible date they can hold BlackRock’s application is January 4, 2024. So the SEC has two options: 1. They can approve the BlackRock application and let their ETF go to market. But their application is basically the same as all the others, so approving theirs cuts off any legitimate legal argument they’d make against the others. So the SEC would have to approve them all! 2. They can reject the BlackRock application. Who knows what exactly would happen here but the likely scenario is that BlackRock would sue the SEC in federal court, and they would win. The only thing the SEC would get in taking this option is more time… for Congress to pass a law explicitly declaring their oversight of crypto assets? I don’t even know. In any case, losing to BlackRock means you’d also be forced to approve all the other applications.

PsyOmega

> 2 to 5 percent of fiat currency transactions attributed to money laundering and the like, according to United Nations data". That's lowballing it. "Cash and checks were used in 14 percent and 13 percent of fraudulent transactions, respectively, while debit cards were used in 10 percent of cases." -FTC.gov

e789162

With the incoming FTC approval, next years halving and a golden cross I don't see how this is not the time to take risks. If this is the start of a bullrun, then the 3k could turn into 50k. I don't see how risking 3k for a real chance to get 50k is unreasonable. Would it be better to split the investment? 1k 2x, 1k 3x, 500 4x and 500 5x for example?

PepeDeCorozal

The FCC has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of anything on the air. They are a licensing agency, not a censor. He is thinking of the FTC. And even then, it would be difficult to stop Burger King because they could put some fine print calling it a "dietary supplement" and the FDA would leave them alone, meaning the FTC would not pursue it.