Flick on Nostr: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/is-kamala-harriss-crypto-policy-racist/ > The ...
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/is-kamala-harriss-crypto-policy-racist/
> The Vice President yesterday unveiled a set of policies designed to help black men, an important group of voters who have been showing worrying signs of drifting towards her rival Donald Trump. […] And it also included a pledge ‘to protect cryptocurrency investments so black men who make them know their investment is safe’.
> Seriously? There are two odd things about Harris’s pitch to black men. To start with, a plan to protect cryptocurrencies is completely barmy. The whole point of Bitcoin, Ethereum and all the rest of web-based cash is that it is completely unregulated. Any scheme that tried to protect investors will either be completely irrelevant, or else it will end up costing the government billions of dollars in compensation. Investments can’t be ‘protected’ because they are inherently risky. That is the entire point.
> Next, why do black men in particular need protection for crypto? Harris’s plan appears to suggest that they are somehow uniquely susceptible to crypto scams, an argument for which there is precisely zero evidence, and which might well be slightly racist. Unless she is planning a scheme that bails out black men, but not black women, Hispanics or whites, when their investments go wrong, it does not make any sense.
https://archive.is/Veqbi
> The Vice President yesterday unveiled a set of policies designed to help black men, an important group of voters who have been showing worrying signs of drifting towards her rival Donald Trump. […] And it also included a pledge ‘to protect cryptocurrency investments so black men who make them know their investment is safe’.
> Seriously? There are two odd things about Harris’s pitch to black men. To start with, a plan to protect cryptocurrencies is completely barmy. The whole point of Bitcoin, Ethereum and all the rest of web-based cash is that it is completely unregulated. Any scheme that tried to protect investors will either be completely irrelevant, or else it will end up costing the government billions of dollars in compensation. Investments can’t be ‘protected’ because they are inherently risky. That is the entire point.
> Next, why do black men in particular need protection for crypto? Harris’s plan appears to suggest that they are somehow uniquely susceptible to crypto scams, an argument for which there is precisely zero evidence, and which might well be slightly racist. Unless she is planning a scheme that bails out black men, but not black women, Hispanics or whites, when their investments go wrong, it does not make any sense.
https://archive.is/Veqbi