If bitcoin is inconsequential, why regulate / ban it? And why are institutional asset manager trying to figure out how to profit off of it? [1]
Well, is the answer not becoming overwhelmingly obvious?
[1] https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/jp-morgan-launches-bitcoin-...
If you believe it's a speculative, ponzi scheme (not saying it actually is) where the money winds up in Singapore or wherever, do you want your population investing in it?
>[In 2018] Some estimates state at least 30 percent of South Koreans have invested in them. Simon Kim, CEO of Hashed (Korea’s leading crypto fund) told me that number could be as high as 50 percent among white-collared professionals.[0]
Would you not be worried about this?
[0]https://venturebeat.com/2018/07/14/why-south-korea-is-crypto...
Governments are probably worried about what "consequential" looks like. And they could be coming from a benevolent point of view (might be used to aid in the commission of a crime/evade taxes/etc), from a malevolent PoV (could be used to expatriate capital), or even from a position of ignorance, laziness, and/or position of weakness (we just don't want to deal with the BS, especially objections from large international trade partners).
The USA and China are powerful trading partners. If one of them says, "ban crypto," the smaller country is likely to comply.
Ah because they've agreed on so many things in the past.
What I mean is the USA and China force their laws on smaller trading partners. When the USA tells Vietnam that they need to pass certain IP laws as terms of a trade deal, VN passes those laws.
To a degree, this also happens with larger partners, such as Germany, but it's really noticeable with the smaller ones.