Ok, then call it what it actually is: tax evasion, fraud, and laundering money.
You're getting caught up in an anti-government agenda and forgetting that's not a good thing to most people.
Isn't such a claim a bit ... bizarre?
Unregulated financial speculation has a lot of issues. See: FTX and NFTs
- savings in gold/silver bullion
- your sister's small business, back in the home country
I'm sorry; if your position basically makes ever free person a criminal, then perhaps it isn't them that are the problem?
Investing in a business is legal. It also means sending money, which is regulated by KYC/AML and you're still responsible for taxes.
It's these kinds of rules to "save people from themselves" that have the bonus effect of the rich gatekeeping the best investments that make a lot of people mad and see the current system as corrupt.
Being able to spend and invest my money how I want should not be a crime.
Buying a stake in a small biz is perfectly legal and people do it all the time.
That's entirely separate from the requirement to be an accredited investor to buy unregistered securities.
Whaaaaat? Sorry, but that comment makes no sense. You can buy a share in any small business you want.
You're mistaking this for some types of stock market investments[1], which are made to "save people from themselves", from back in the day before 1929 when access was free for all and hawkers peddling crappy stock brought the entire world economy to a halt by getting the general population to join the stock market casino (slight exaggeration, but not by much).
[1] And guess what, your sister's lemonade stand isn't listed on the NYSE or even on the Romanian BVB :-p
I tried for years but angel list never accepted me being an investor because of income or nationality restrictions. And other methods of gaining access to silicon valley startups didn't work out.
Now imagine how hard it is for someone in India or Thailand to invest in USA startups.
In crypto I can buy their token in seconds from anywhere in the world, no kyc required, and no middle men taking their cut to custody it for me.
This limitation was put in place for an extremely good reason: to protect people from getting scammed and also to prevent bailouts. A lot of people think they're savvy investors when they're not.
you are living in a bubble to assume that governments are always good and anyone bucking their government is a bad actor. Try to learn more about Venezuela, Iran, Russia, North Korea or Syria. Or even truckers in Canada whose accounts were frozen because of peaceful protests.
At this point, the best thing for crypto would be for someone like Trump to freeze all the finances for some people like BLM protestors. Then perhaps people will get out of "ye subvert yer gubmint? ye traitor..." mindset.
The rest of this is pure irrational FUD. Democracies are not dictatorships.
A president doesn't have the legal authority to freeze finances like that. They are not a king.
Please get your facts straight. This happened in Canada, one of the supposedly best democracies out there
"The Attorney General of Ontario sought and was granted an Ontario Superior Court of Justice court order under Section 490.8 of the Criminal Code of Canada against GiveSendGo,[69] to freeze the funds collected from two campaigns, "Freedom Convoy 2022"—US$8.4 million and "Adopt-a-Trucker"—over $686,000,[73][74] and prohibit their distribution.[72][69] The court order binds "any and all parties with possession or control over these donations".[73] The Mareva injunction was issued on February 17 by Justice Calum MacLeod.[75] GiveSendGo funds go directly to campaign recipients such as The Freedom Convoy campaign, so Canadian banks cannot interfere. The largest donation, which was anonymous, as were six of the other top ten, was US$215,000.[74] The Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance (FINA) members, who are investigating Freedom Convoy's fundraising, voted on February 10 to include a study of the "rise of ideologically motivated extremism".[74] The FINA Committee invited GiveSendGo to testify.[74]
By February 19, at least 76 bank accounts linked to the protests totalling CA$3.2 million were frozen under the Emergencies Act.[76] Most accounts had been unfrozen by February 23.[77]"
Canadian banks and regulators looking into potential money laundering is entirely reasonable and appropriate behavior.
Canadian banks and regulators looking into money laundering might be reasonable when carefully permitted by tried legal procedure. A bunch of freely donated money for a peaceful protest of a type with lots of basic precedent being suddenly frozen for blatantly political reasons by pressure from the country's leader is not the same thing. Quite the opposite, it's a small bit of third world tinpot, would-be authoritarianism that has no place in the legal proceedings of a highly developed country like Canada.