墨西哥《比特法案》预计通过,数字货币线下服务活跃

链得得2022-09-27 tarihinde yayınlandı2022-09-27 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

墨西哥CBDC预计在2024年上线,数字比索上线也是为了对抗美元霸权,然而萨尔瓦多起了个坏头。

墨西哥CBDC预计在2024年上线,数字比索上线也是为了对抗美元霸权,然而萨尔瓦多起了个坏头。

7月,墨西哥新莱昂州参议员 Indira Kempis 表示,比特币(BTC)的引入可以促进全球金融包容性,因此承认其为法定货币并使其合法化。他表示,墨西哥是接受比特币作为法定货币的第二大市场。

不过,根据Kempis的数据,墨西哥有超过 6700 万个人没有正式的储蓄账户,而且他们的信用评级无法判定,因为没有存款,这部分人也根本没有可能会进行投资或者接触到其他金融产品。

—1—

墨西哥《比特币法案》会通过吗

自 2018 年上任以来,这位参议员在过去几年一直鼓励加密货币经济。但是她的推特发出以后,并没有成为萨尔瓦多总统一样成为加密界的红人,她的这条推特只有70个点赞和30个转发。

在2021年9月萨尔瓦多的《比特币法案》实施以后,Kempis访问了萨尔瓦多,她评论萨尔瓦多的比特币是大势所趋,“在一个中美洲国家,这种努力正在取得进展,这是历史性的。”

随后,今年的2月,她向国会提出了墨西哥版的《比特币法案》。

2022年已经快进入第四季度,萨尔瓦多总统Nayib Bukele对于比特币的5大猜想还没有实现一半。他的5大猜想中包括预测今年比特币单价将会达到10万美元。

链得得在之前的文章中也提到了萨尔瓦多目前将比特币作为法定货币以后的窘境,萨尔瓦多政府对于“比特币法案”执行的初衷也是在于对抗美元霸权,具体请参看链得得之前文章:太平洋岛国CBDC计划此起彼伏,“美元霸权”局面实难消除

首先是世界监管机构的刁难。国际货币基金组织(IMF)认定其破坏了金融稳定性。目前对于为该国提供的 13 亿美元新贷款的谈判也陷入僵局。IMF 一直敦促萨尔瓦多废除《比特币法案》。

所以,对于同样是紧邻美国的中美国家墨西哥来说,世界寡头们不太可能支持。因为,那是墨西哥。

学过世界史的人应该知道,墨西哥与美国长期以来的不和。实际上,中美洲大部分国家目前对于美国是臣服状态的,除了众所周知的劳动力,还有这些并不发达的中美洲的咖啡、糖、水果、矿场等,只要美国说一个“不“字,中美洲这些靠出口存活的小国就会掀起经济崩盘。

—2—

墨西哥市场欢迎数字货币

作为中美洲国家,墨西哥实实在在需要比特币的情况依旧不容忽视,这也是墨西哥目前推进数字货币的内在动力之一。早在自 2018 年以来,墨西哥城的比特币大使馆酒吧一直接受比特币和其他加密货币作为付款方式。

2021年6月,福布斯世界富豪榜第 172 位墨西哥第三大富豪 Ricardo Salinas Priego 发推文表示“我和我的银行(阿兹台克银行)正在努力成为墨西哥第一家接受比特币的银行。“他还多次在采访中表达“所有国家法定货币都是骗局”,并建议投资者应该拥有比特币。

Salinas去年 11 月在一条推文中宣布,他已经将 10% 的投资组合投资于比特币。

Salinas经营着墨西哥第二大电视台阿兹台克电视台和他的祖父在 1950 年代创立的零售集团 Grupo Electra,两者均由阿兹台克银行出资。

现在这家炙手可热的Elektra 已经开始接受比特币支付。从 2021 年 12 月开始,网上购物将可以使用比特币支付,而这次目标已扩大到实体店,今年6 月开始在其商店中接受比特币支付。

据 Elektra 称,自 2021 年 12 月推出比特币以来的六个月内,已有数百人使用比特币进行购买。产品价格以墨西哥货币比索为基础,比特币支付以后可以实时兑换。随后墨西哥的一些商店也开始接受比特币。

不过,非常明显的是,墨西哥银行(BoM)已采取立场反对在该国金融体系中采用比特币。

在2021年9月萨尔瓦多的《比特币法案》通过的时候,墨西哥央行行长迪亚兹·德莱昂9日表示,与央行发行的“进化”的法定货币相比,加密货币(虚拟货币)比特币作为保值能力差的高风险投资,更接近于易货交易手段。

因为在2022 年 1 月,BoM 宣布正在开发自己的央行发行的数字货币,即数字比索 (CBDC)。墨西哥 CBDC 预计将在 2024 年流通,以帮助墨西哥人获得金融服务,进行比特币等加密货币流通和交易。

İlgili Okumalar

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details serious allegations of fraud against Bitcoin infrastructure company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. In June 2024, investigative account NatInfoSec published a report accusing Blockstream's mining note (BMN) program of potentially operating a multi-billion dollar scheme with Ponzi-like characteristics. The core allegations focus on Blockstream Mining Notes (BMNs), which offer investors fixed annual yields up to approximately 20% from Bitcoin mining. NatInfoSec's investigation raises several key issues: 1. **Suspicious Hashrate & Payout Capacity**: The analysis suggests Blockstream would need 20-45 EH/s of mining power to cover its BMN obligations, but its public dashboard shows only around 15 EH/s. Furthermore, no verifiable public evidence (e.g., grid connection records, import data) was found to support the massive mining operation required. 2. **Questionable Payout Source**: The BMN contract allows Blockstream to use Bitcoin from *any source* (Substitute Performance BTC) to fulfill investor payouts, raising concerns that payouts may not come from actual mining revenue. 3. **High-Risk, Fixed Returns**: Offering ~20% fixed yields in the volatile, cyclical Bitcoin mining industry is viewed as highly unusual and requires clear explanation. 4. **Undisclosed Criminal Record of Key Figure**: Christopher William Cook, a key figure in Blockstream's mining operations and CEO of spin-off Exacore, was found to have a federal felony conviction for mail fraud in 2008, a fact not disclosed in BMN offering documents. His background was also allegedly embellished. 5. **Potential Contagion to BSTR SPAC**: Questions were raised about whether these liabilities and Cook's record should have been disclosed in the SEC filings for Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a separate Adam Back-associated firm planning a SPAC merger. The crypto community is divided. BitMEX Research validated Cook's criminal record and expressed concern over the high yields but found other evidence lacking or misleading, noting the legal separation between BMN, Blockstream, and BSTR. Blockstream defenders, like Samson Mow, argue the mining is real. Critics, however, emphasize the lack of independent, verifiable proof of the mining operation's scale and the true source of investor payouts. The article concludes that BMN remains shrouded in key unanswered questions regarding its actual size, the verifiability of its underlying mining assets and payouts, the source of its high yields, and the full role and disclosure concerning Chris Cook. Blockstream had not issued a comprehensive response at the time of writing.

marsbit1 saat önce

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

marsbit1 saat önce

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details allegations of serious fraud surrounding the crypto company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. Investigation account NatInfoSec accuses Blockstream of raising billions through its Blockstream Mining Note (BMN) products, which offer high fixed yields of up to 20% from purported mining revenue. The core allegations are: 1) Blockstream's public mining hash rate (15 EH/s) appears insufficient to cover the massive payout obligations from sold BMN notes, raising questions about the true source of investor payouts. 2) Key executive Christopher William Cook, central to the mining operations, has a prior federal conviction for mail fraud, a fact not disclosed to investors. Cook's background and lavish lifestyle are highlighted as red flags. 3) The structure allows payouts from any source of BTC, not necessarily mining revenue, which critics argue gives it Ponzi-like characteristics. The controversy also touches on Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a related entity planning a SPAC上市. Critics question whether BMN's liabilities and Cook's record should be disclosed in BSTR's filings. BitMEX Research offered a tempered analysis, confirming Cook's criminal record is likely true and the high yields concerning, but found other claims like insufficient抵押证据 less substantiated. Community debate centers on the need for verifiable proof of Blockstream's mining output and revenue. The article concludes that while fraud is not proven, BMN presents significant, unresolved questions regarding its actual scale, the source of its high fixed returns, the verifiability of its mining operations and payouts, and the full disclosure of associated risks and personnel backgrounds. Blockstream has not yet issued a formal response.

链捕手2 saat önce

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

链捕手2 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
Futures
活动图片