Me in 2009 instead of mine Bitcoin | Odyssey Exchange on Binance Square

Trending Articles

Bookmarked and Liked

Odyssey Exchange

--

Me in 2009 instead of mine Bitcoin

Disclaimer: Includes third-party opinions. No financial advice. May include sponsored content. See T&Cs.

BTC

98,342.91

0.00%

575

0

Replies 2

Quote 1

Explore the latest crypto news

⚡️ Be a part of the latests discussions in crypto

💬 Interact with your favorite creators

👍 Enjoy content that interests you

Email / Phone number

Relevant Creator

Odyssey Exchange

@ansemfake

Explore More From Creator

You open TikTok and an “ investor” posting : “ BTC 200K , XRP $1000, USDT $5 “

--

--

me asking my memecoin everyday

--

You’ve asked me to explain why MiCA regulation is BAD for stablecoins I'll explain you why MiCA regulation is catastrophic for stablecoins. MiCA demands 60% of stablecoin reserves to be held in EU banks. Tether’s USDT is not MiCA compliant because it has US Treasuries as collateral, not EU reserves. MiCA is designed to limit USD stablecoins and protect weak EURO stablecoins. EU stablecoins lack liquid collateral such as bonds or assets like US Treasuries. MiCA forces issuers to hold 60% of reserves in EU banks, where stablecoins are treated as liabilities. Banks reinvest these reserves in low-risk assets like Euro bonds, which are less liquid that US Treasuries. This rule increases risk for stablecoin issuers, with no benefit to EU banks - unless they issue stablecoins themselves. MiCA ignores systemic risks of relying on fragile banks for stablecoin reserves. Circle's USDC held 10% of reserves in Silicon Valley Bank. When SVB collapsed in 2023, USDC’s peg fell to $0.80 due to $3 billion of trapped reserves. SVB collapsed on a Friday, redemptions froze until Monday due to banking closures. Coinbase also froze withdrawals, to see if US government would bail out SVB depositors. This crisis proved one thing: US Treasuries are safest collateral for stablecoins! MiCA risks driving EURO stablecoins backward. EU’s reliance on legacy banking creates systemic risks for stablecoins under MiCA. Instead of innovation, MiCA forces issuers into fragile, outdated systems that increase risk for everyone. You need to understand: MiCA doesn’t add rules - it adds RISKS! 1. MiCA offers no benefit for EU stablecoins, which lack liquidity of US Treasuries. 2. MiCA drives USD stablecoins out of Europe, leaving the market fragmented. 3. MiCA forces reliance on legacy banks, which are prone to failure. Stablecoins succeed with safe, liquid reserves like US Treasuries. Not when they're trapped in risky, outdated banking systems. What’s your view? Will MiCA help Europe lead - or fall behind in crypto innovation? 👇 Let’s discuss in comments.

--

Which pill is for ya ?

--

Latest News

Gold And Bitcoin Gain Prominence Amid Currency Devaluation Concerns

--

Chilean Lawmakers Consider Legislation For Strategic Bitcoin Reserves

--

Bitcoin(BTC) Surpasses 98,000 USDT with a Narrowed 0.02% Decrease in 24 Hours

--

Ethereum(ETH) Drops Below 3,600 USDT with a Narrowed 0.80% Increase in 24 Hours

--

BNB Drops Below 710 USDT with a Narrowed 0.01% Increase in 24 Hours

--

Trending Articles

$XRP As of January 4, 2025, XRP is trading at approximately

Shamraiz Abbass

Daily Crypto Market Insights: Prepare for Major Bitcoin and Ethereum Moves

How to Turn $25 into $670 on Binance in Just 3 Days: A Beginner’s Guide 🚀

DOGE&PEPE... If your *trusted with lifesaving* assets boom on Elon's tweets... problem WITH YOU🫵

Azariah Doublev

💥 $BIO Short Liquidation Alert 📈 Liquidation Amount: $5.0

Cookie Preferences

Cookie Preferences