23 Comments

Thank you, Jud. I for one have been suspicious of cryptocurrency and you have made it (somewhat) clear that it should be avoided as a vehicle for secure investments especially in 401(k) plans.

I think these two, and I have a great mistrust of Gillibrand, have a hidden agenda.

Expand full comment

Crooked politicians, desperate to prop up their stupid investments.

Expand full comment

Trurh

Expand full comment

cathy bjust now

Judd great job. We know the GOP would love to back a place to hide money to exempt it from taxes. But we have bipartisan support here. Hoping pocket lining on both sides of the aisle will be paid in Bitcoin. I don' t know whether to laugh or cry.

The poor saps sticking money in a 401k. And from theooks of Twitter lots of saps are Bitcorn dealing.

Bury your 401k in your back yard, it will be safer.

Expand full comment

I'm so sick of crypto. I hope these senators lose their entire investments in it. Of course they already have skin in the game. There is no end and no bottom to how low senators will sink (on both sides of the aisle) to line their pockets first. They do not care about the majority and the greater good. We need to get rid of career politicians at every level of government. This cannot continue or we are doomed as a nation.

Expand full comment

What amazes me about crypto, is beside a being 99% a pyramid scheme, it’s a pyramid scheme that’s highly susceptible to cyber theft. So it’s not a same as most pyramid schemes. But it’s flashy and new, so people buy in. I dread the future reckoning. (The 1% that’s not pure pyramid scheme is crypto’s usefulness for money laundering. Not exactly a social good.)

Expand full comment

Is it sad that I was suspicious from the moment I saw a Republican and a Democrat both supporting the legislation?

Expand full comment

Thank you. It’s important to know the extent to which our elected representatives represent themselves.

Expand full comment

Let’s not forget the ridiculous waste of resources it takes to mine most cryptocurrency. I can see a Republican not caring about that, but a Democrat encouraging it is shameful.

Expand full comment

Thank you Judd!

Expand full comment

We knew Gillibrand was n.g. when she went after Al Franken. Now this! Grrrr. Thanks for spelling this out for us, Judd.

Expand full comment

"You want some assets [in a retirement account] that are just a store of value, and I think that's where bitcoin really shines."

"In the last 6 months, for example, Bitcoin has plummeted 43%."

Yep, I see no contradictions there, carry on

Expand full comment

What could *possibly* go wrong, amirite?

Expand full comment

This is the dumbest recommendation since "corporations are people" became law. And revolving door between CFTC and crypto business is a clear sign crypto bros are loading the dice once again. Everything I read about crypto is that it's a giant Ponzi scheme. And it's so vaguely defined and cryptic I guess that's why it's called "crypto"! Stay far, far away from it, especially in retirement savings until it's better defined and understood! Definitely needs regulation, but even the regulators can't define it!

Expand full comment

Thanks for the heads up, Judd. I live in New York City and have called Sen, Gillibrand's office to express my deep concern about the bill and acknowlede your article. Keep up the good work.

Expand full comment

Crypto in 401(k)s scares the daylights out of me. I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw class action suits against employers who allow this in their plans alleging breach of fiduciary duty.

Expand full comment

Instead of innovating and solving climate change, we are intentionally inventing technology that makes it worse??

Shame on these Senators for not addressing the elephant in the room capable of smothering their grandchildren. Crypto has bigger future issues than regulation. Where is Jane Fonda when I need her??? 🙃

Expand full comment

Sorry this is off topic but FYI: Some far-RW Salem Media websites have abruptly cut off their blogs to non-subscribers. As of Monday most were routinely available for anyone to read and participate in. Tuesday morning access was restricted to subscribers only (VIP members). Could it be a desperate move to cut off discussion of the feared unraveling of Trump? Considering how all-in Salem is with Trump they might worry that too much reality may upset their audience's MAGA delusions -- which they have earlier tolerated (assuming that anti-Trump bloggers are not chipping in). The vast majority of bloggers are very conservative, mostly anonymous, anti-democratic, often purveyors of warped history, frequently bigoted, and as vulgar as the usual low-info debater. Then there are a few never-Trumpers and liberals (like me) who stick their necks out for abuse and entertainment.

Not surprisingly, the nitty gritty from the 1/6 committee is getting scant attention on these sites with few exceptions including Hot Air's libertarian anti-Trump columnist "allahpundit". The level of tension from the Team Normal-type comments and their Team Rudy-type talking points has been quite a show lately. A political horror show.

I scan these sites often, especially at times when there should be high anxiety on the right. I want to see how they present various exposes to their leaders' nefarious hijinks. Naturally their hair is on fire these days, and while they usually claim to boycott the hearings they toss out scads of references to kangaroo courts, stalinist show trials and marxist demonrats. But lately they were also getting more attention from a growing few of us who were bringing actual news to their Orwellian site. Popping up were references to Ivanka, Barr, Miller, and other Team Normal wannabees. That was over Monday. Tuesday is a Brave New Insulated World at Salem Communications (BTW is it AKA Hugh Hewitt's cash machine?)

Expand full comment