The only possibilities cryptocurrency has ushered in are new ways to scam people. Or rather, digital versions of old scams. Involvement in cryptocurrency should be prima facie evidence of fraud.
What sounds like securities fraud about that original idea?
(0) Having money to invest.
(1) Access to the internet.
(2) Being able to afford the transaction fee.
(3) Being on a list of people who can't trade like OFAC or failing AML/KYC, or being underage.
The only one blockchain addresses is (3): granting access to people who aren't permitted to trade. Every single other thing is either a social problem, already a solved problem or can easily be addressed without the magic of the blockchain.
[1] https://money.cnn.com/2017/07/31/technology/business/flutter...
[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/tobyshapshak/2018/11/27/how-mob...
If it's not immediately apparent that this means the sale of unregistered securities, I'm not sure what to say. The SEC would seem to agree.
This is one of the common refrains, and frankly, it's myopic at best. Just because the blockchain says you own some stock or property doesn't change the fact the government ultimately regulates what you have and if the blockchain diverges from the government's view on what's permitted guess which one wins?
If the blockchain says a car is registered to me and I fail to pay my bills, guess who wins, your multi-player Excel spreadsheet cell or my tow truck?
is that true? I thought most states had age requirements for trading securities, usually the age of majority.
Unless you're not trying to say that "most american teens can own stock".
Just pointing out that people under the age of majority are, in fact, restricted from trading securities (for obvious reasons).
I did mean "most Americans", not most teenage Americans. I think OP was probably making a point about access to resources and markets, not age related legislation.