SEC official Caroline Crenshaw stated on January 10th that the move to greenlight Bitcoin-based investment products is “unhealthy and outdated”. Additionally, other cryptocurrency critics have made bold statements.
Harsh Comments on Bitcoin!
SEC official Caroline Crenshaw, who is reported to have voted on ETF approvals, addressed malicious activities in the cryptocurrency markets and stated the following in her comments:
I am concerned that these products will flood the markets and settle directly into the retirement accounts of US households who can least afford to lose their savings to fraud and manipulation prevalent in spot Bitcoin markets, affecting ETPs. The global spot markets, which underpin Bitcoin ETPs, are overshadowed by fraud and manipulation, intensified, and lack sufficient oversight.
Better Markets, a nonprofit economic organization, also criticized the ETF decision, claiming that the nature of cryptocurrency is inherently worthless and purposeless, and made strong allegations in their statements:
Today’s action by the SEC has not changed anything about this worthless financial product. Bitcoin and cryptocurrency still have no legitimate use. It will continue to be the product of choice for speculators and criminals.
Criticism of ETFs
Five days ago, Better Markets CEO Dennis Kelleher wrote a letter to the SEC, requesting the agency to reject Bitcoin ETF applications, claiming the products would lead to “significant investor harm”. Longtime cryptocurrency critic Stephen Diehl also weighed in on the currency shortly after the approval, suggesting that Bitcoin represents “the tyranny of serfdom, stagnation, and discredited medieval ideas”.
Gold advocate and Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff added his own interpretation to the mix by saying that the approvals are nothing more than new ways for speculators to invest in Bitcoin. Crypto researcher and decentralization advocate Chris Blec stated that the introduction of institution-focused ETFs would ultimately harm the decentralized nature of the Bitcoin network in the long run.
