China Looks To Set Up Digital Asset Bourse in Virtual Yuan Push (bloomberg.com) 30
China is considering setting up a digital asset exchange in Beijing as officials push to promote usage of the digital yuan and crack down on cryptocurrencies. From a report: Beijing will explore the possibility of establishing a bourse for digital assets trading, as part of broader efforts to boost financial services in the capital, according to guidelines issued by the State Council. The cabinet called for faster trials of the digital yuan and urged big banks to set up e-CNY operation firms. The statement provided no further details on the planned digital asset exchange.
China has been in process of creating a virtual version of its legal tender since 2014 in an effort to cope with an increasingly digitized economy as well as to fend off potential threats from virtual currencies such as Bitcoin. It banned crypto-exchanges in 2017 and stepped up scrutiny this year to ban crypto mining and all related transactions, in tandem with campaigns to promote the digital yuan.
China has been in process of creating a virtual version of its legal tender since 2014 in an effort to cope with an increasingly digitized economy as well as to fend off potential threats from virtual currencies such as Bitcoin. It banned crypto-exchanges in 2017 and stepped up scrutiny this year to ban crypto mining and all related transactions, in tandem with campaigns to promote the digital yuan.
How malleable is reality? In China and the world? (Score:2)
[Any one notice a brain fart?]
Who is the fool here? The players who think the illusions are real and marketable, xor the players who understand there are differences?
Actually, what this story most reminded me of is the stock market slump in reaction to the news about the new variant from South Africa. Stocks have also become mass-opinion-driven digital assets pretending to have real value, so all of the market prices tended to slump in reaction to the bad news--but the smaller slumps seem to have been for t
Re: (Score:2)
Dang nab it.
s/smaller/larger/
Negative context and rush to change the Subject... *sigh*
Re: (Score:1)
Stocks have also become mass-opinion-driven digital assets pretending to have real value, so all of the market prices tended to slump in reaction to the bad news--but the larger slumps seem to have been for the countries that have the highest probabilities of suffering major damage from the new form of SARS-CoV-2.
That is the entire point of stock market valuations.
If your economy is going to be hit harder by the lockdowns, slowdowns, dead bodies piling up, whatever it is. Then your companies will be less profitable and their share prices are supposed to go down.
The absurdity in it all is when the bad news is 'just bad enough', and then the markets rally. Because the participants know a new round of free money stimulus is on its way
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for fixing the mistake, but you still seem to be missing my point. No one knows the future in detail, but the stock prices are extremely precise speculations about what no one knows. I didn't go into the details, but it's actually much worse than that, because of leverage and the financial tools (and toys) that can speculate on the speculations ad infinitum.
When the idea of the stock market first appeared, there were two basic objectives: (1) Gather large amounts of capital for extremely large projec
Re: (Score:1)
If everyone knew the future in detail there would be no need for markets.
You are making perfect the enemy of good. I can predict it's going to rain tomorrow. Without the precise details of what time and how much. I'm still going to take my umbrella. Those who don't will get wet.
I agree with what you are saying. Governments are actively interfering in the markets. And mentioned the obvious example of bad news causing a rally. People also need to realise the market is not the economy. Just because the marke
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is that you are at least dabbling in the market (and rationalizing your participation), but I must caution you that the house always wins in the end. (Well, setting aside a certain orange exception...) If the house isn't winning, then the rules of the game MUST be tweaked.
This is not a case of "the perfect is the enemy of the good", but of profiting on the imperfections. It would not matter at all if you knew the "perfect price" for a stock as long as you are correct in your guess that you can sell
Re: (Score:1)
You are missing the point if you think there is a 'perfect price'.
Prices are set by (semi?)independent actors working off their own perceptions/information/risks. There couldn't be a market any other way.
I also think some kind of transaction fee may be necessary to cut down on the pointless churning. But it doesn't seem easy to implement when players could just move their game elsewhere via dark pools and other off market transactions. It might even have the opposite affect, moving the more speculative an
Re: (Score:2)
Partial concurrence, though I still think you're looking at it even more oddly than I am. However the power source I was referring too was not "the free money" (and I'm unsure what you meant by that phrase). I guess I think the power source of my concern is the unlimited imagination driving the insane valuations of shares? But as a solution approach, the details of the transaction fee don't matter too much. The mere existence will throw sand into the bearings and hopefully keep the engine at a relatively sa
a captured currency (Score:2)
Making all cryptocurrency illegal EXCEPT the currency they set up themselves... what they are basically doing is setting up a system in China in which EVERY SINGLE TRANSACTION is visible to, and monitored by, the state.
One more step in China's total control of their population... and a BIG one.
This is an anti-China site. (Score:1)
This is an anti-China site.
One only need look at the moderation of topics mentioning or related to China.
Anything that isn't rabid anti-China will be perceived as pro China. There is no middle ground or neutrality here.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks for agreeing with me I guess.
Re: (Score:1)
In case anyone else didn't know (Score:3, Informative)
A bourse [investopedia.com] is a market organized for the purpose of buying and selling securities, commodities, options and other investments. The term bourse is most often used in Europe and can be synonymous with an exchange. "Bourse" is based on the residence belonging to textile merchant Robert Van der Burse, where Belgian traders and financiers would gather and trade with one another in the 13th century.
Today the word "bourse" is more commonly associated with the Paris stock exchange and other Euronext bourses such as in Amsterdam and Frankfurt.
Also: french for "purse" (Score:3)
Also means 'purse' in French: https://www.merriam-webster.co... [merriam-webster.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Fixes one problem I guess (Score:2)
Re:Fixes one problem I guess (Score:4, Insightful)
It fixes many problems, if you're an authoritarian regime. The usage and flow of digital currency can be controlled and monitored. It could be tied to their social credit score for instance, and it'll be used with centralised and regime controlled applications, in ways the regime allows you for. They'll probably ban cash completely at some point.
In China's battle against cryptocurrencies/tokens/etc and bitcoin the idea is to remove notions of decentralisation and open systems. The concepts don't fit with the centralised regime.
Blockchains and distributed ledgers/systems will power web3 and many other fields of business (China has their own "internet" and government built systems, so they don't need to care). Even on Slashdot there are many who basically parrot Chinese state propaganda in their outdated and naive critic of these technologies.
Countering China is best done by opposing centralisation and closed systems, and embracing these innovative technologies. Sure there are problems, but they can be solved.