So I watched them both and honestly, I'm not that impressed. Let me share some points
First video with the governor.
1. She talks about too much money printing. We all know this is true, but as a governor, she needs this to run her state. If she is complaining about this, how about run your state without any deficits. I'm not up to speed with how well her state is run, but I don't think there is a single politician who is trying to operate within a budget. If politicians don't have access to this "free" money that she is saying is so horrible, I don't see how she could run the state and ever be elected again. In fact, she should practically be fired because she isn't standing along side with all the other politicians and is stepping out of line. She is biting the hand that feeds her and all those dollars that are sent to her she has no problem using, but then complains about how worthless they are. What a hypocrite.
2. She wants to stay ahead of China and for the US to remain having the world's currency. Well, China is the biggest producer of BTC thus far. Is she planning on adding farms here in the US? How does she plan to accomplish this? If nobody is control, then how the hell will US remain the world's reserve currency?
3. She talks about the need for a digital dollar. Great, we all agree the blockchain is awesome. But if the FED develops their own, is this a plus for BTC? I honestly don't think you can have both, and my hunch would be once the FED gets their FED coin, the use of BTC would be restricted. I'm sure that what everyone envisions if that you keep your wealth in BTC but just transact with the digital dollar. But I don't think it can work that way. If the digital dollar isn't itself seen as a store of value, it will be worthless. So the digital dollar cannot have competition.
4. She says its important to prevent illicit use of BTC, but then praises the anonymity. How can you accomplish both? Maybe she means that she doesn't mind if the exchange knows the customer, but just not anybody else. But she doesn't say this, and this isn't in the spirit of BTC. So I'm not sure how both can be accomplished. Its like how the police wanted Apple to crack a phone and they refused. You can't prevent illicit use if it can be tracked.
5. She calls BTC the great equalizer because even someone without a bank account can buy BTC. So if this is the future, is she really suggesting knocking out all the banks? Will this be an entire sector of the economy that she is prepared to toss to the side of the road?
6. She states "who knows how many dollars will be printed before you retire". So once again, as in point 1 above, she admits that dollars are worthless. So all her public sector workers are being paid in worthless dollars. She is a terrible ambassador for the government, and no matter how right she might be, she should not be saying this in her position.
2nd video.
1. She states are one point that the better technology always wins. But when it comes to BTC, is it really the best technology? Hardly. So is it just a matter of time until a new coin rises up?
2. The part about custody issues with regards to stocks was very interesting, and I can see why immediate settlement is absolutely necessary. But this is what many always say. Blockchain has a future, but does this mean BTC?
3. With regards to the legal issues, the discussion about BTC liens was crazy. If there is even a threat of the BTC that you own might be taken away, well, good luck for everything that BTC stands for. Imagine the judge forcing you to give up your private key or face going to jail.
The fact that each coin can actually be tracked is kind of worrisome. If you accept a coin from someone, that might later be deemed criminal, can be identified and taken away, then I'm not sure where this will all lead. At least with gold, you can melt it down, and nobody can say where it came from. But if each slice of a coin has essentially a serial number and owning the wrong coins can get you in legal trouble, well, Houston, we have a problem.
Suppose a mining farm in the US uses stolen electricity to mine the BTC. Then its discovered that the coin you bought is from the proceeds of a crime. Now they want to confiscate that coin and have the law on their side. How messed up is this? Am I gonna have to ask the miner I'm buying from how they operate their farm? LOL
4. When she ends with saying the officials could have killed it but didn't, I bet its because they never imagined it would get this far. They probably thought that it would die off, just like other fads. It probably is too big to kill now, but I really do not believe that the government will allow competition for their cryptocurrency once they release it.
Most points were awesome, but they center around the need for blockchain technology. BTC might be it for now, but I fully believe that it might not have the lasting power that everyone thinks it has. Maybe once it gets "too expensive", the tide will turn and people will jump on something else. Its after all only backed by the willingness of people to use it and pay for it. Give people enough incentive to switch to something else, and they will.
