Big governments and the institutions that align behind them -- big banks and big unions -- have scaled up the campaign against Bitcoin and Uber recently. Russia has been added to the list of countries that are trying to limit the spread of Bitcoin, as London is added to the list of local and national governments that banned Uber's operations.
There’s a good reason big governments have been going after Bitcoin and Uber. They are innovations that challenge the status quo, the power of elites to write the rules that advance their own interests at the expense of the people at large.
Bitcoin has emerged as a "people's currency," an alternative to national currencies, freed of the control of central banks and banks. And that means a loss of seigniorage income for governments—the benefits derived from printing money and from controlling the economy, as discussed in a previous piece here.That's why big governments from China to Russia -- and smaller governments like Venezuela -- have been trying to crush it. How? By banning Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), by closing Bitcoin exchanges, and by going after Bitcoin developers.
And it seems they are succeeding it, with the digital currency having lost close to 30 percent of its value in a matter of days.
Coin/Investment Trust Change 24H*
Bitcoin (BTC) -1.05%
Ethereum (ETH) 0.62
Litecoin (LTC) .72
The ascent of Bitcoin likewise implies that banks are losing control of the cash that streams between national banks and the economy, and the premium pay and expenses related with them. A Bitcoin economy, for example, can cultivate distributed loaning that substitutes for customary loaning, where banks gather the "financing cost spread," the contrast between the financing cost they charge investors and the rate they charge borrowers.
At that point there's Uber, which has developed as "individuals' transportation organization," a contrasting option to customary nearby taxi restraining infrastructures whereby taxi unions figure out will's identity around here, for to what extent, and how much purchasers will pay- - with neighborhood governments taking their cut as emblem charges.
Uber has likewise risen as an other option to wasteful mass transportation frameworks, normally claimed and controlled by nearby governments in a comfortable course of action with open representative unions. That is the reason some huge nearby, provincial, and national governments decline to permit Uber or convey its gauges to those of taxi unions.
A Sample Of Countries/Cities That Have Banned Uber
China
Taiwan
Italy
Denmark
Bulgaria
Hungary
Denmark
London (as of September 30)
Austin Texas
Vancouver/Canada
In any case, if history can be a guide, huge governments and their partners can back off advancements however can't slaughter them. Particularly in majority rule social orders where individuals will in the end send home lawmakers who remain against them and the advancements that better their lives.
Source: Coinranking.com and google
Out of date. Austin had to cave. Pressure from the state of Texas.
Congratulations @asrarahmad! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPThis post has received a 1.04 % upvote from @drotto thanks to: @banjo.