Why the SEC really rejected the Bitcoin ETF

The Winklevoss twins get shafted again. It would have almost gone against the grain of the universe as we know it had Cameron and Tyler succeeded in their endeavor to list a Bitcoin-backed ETF. This time though, it wasn’t Mark Zuckerberg. This time it was Dr. Michael Piwowar, PhD of Economics, and head of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Piwowar having a doctorate in economics from what is considered the “Public Ivy League” raises red flags all over. Nearly all economists, and especially PhD economists, are paper money fanatics. They spend their academic careers crafting voodoo econometric equations trying to predict and understand human behavior with differential calculus, when the sad truth is that if calculus could predict human behavior with even any loose degree of accuracy, all PhD economists would be millionaires, knowing when to buy low and sell high.

But they’re not, at least not with their own money. They get plenty of tax money though. And they are almost always wrong. One of them runs one of the most powerful regulatory agencies in the financial world. Helps you sleep well at night.

So why did Piwowar really smack down the bitcoin ETF? Mainstream media, the kind that is losing money and struggling to survive, says it’s all for consumer protection. But that, of course, has nothing to do with it. The SEC doesn’t protect retail investors from anything, least of all bitcoin. It protects big megabanks from prosecution and competition. How can we be sure? Because pump and dump scams are everywhere. A nothing company with zero employees can merge into a shell by technical SEC rules and then start blasting ads to first time investors. This is all perfectly fine. Banks don’t buy into these scams. Retail dumb money does. No protection there.