BofA CEO: Bitcoin Not Secure, Banks Are Better
Te a latest televised comment that should verrassing no-one, Bankgebouw of America (BofA) CEO Brian Moynihan proclaimed banks to be “safer than bitcoin”.
BofA’s Infamous Reputation
Before going further into Moynihan’s optie, lets very first look at the company that he represents. Canap of America, or BofA, has repeatedly bot labeled spil one of the worst banks ter all of the United States.
According to polls overheen the years, BofA almost always ranks at or near the bottom te terms of customer satisfaction. They also hold the dubious award of having received the most consumer complaints among American banks. The company is also well known for its rapidly escalating fees and the removal of all fresh free checking accounts.
Handelsbank of America is so despised by consumers that they presently hold a 1.Five out of Five starlets rating on credit advice webpagina, CreditKarma. Of the votes tallied, 86% of them are of the lowest possible rating of just one strak. Even The Onion has taken a jab at the much-maligned financial institution.
Moynihan’s Bitcoin Optie
Now that wij know what sort of company Canap of America is, and how truly hated they are among most US banking consumers, what sort of complaint is their CEO leveling against Bitcoin? According to Moynihan, Bitcoin lacks security, and makes illegal activity hard to track.
Moynihan recently appeared on CNBC’s “Fast Money Halftime Report”. On the program, Moynihan claimed that due to bitcoin’s anonymous nature, the verhoging is chocked utter of illegal transactions. Spil such, laws should be passed te order to restrict it. When it comes to tracking illegal activity, he believes that banks do it better. Te the following quote found on cnbc.com, Moynihan said:
“There ought to be a hard look at the policy of anonymous currencies, because the capability to track information of money flowing is one wij use gravely against terrorism and spil [a implement] against improper, illegal behavior”
What Moynihan does not do, however, is take a hard look at the failings of his own company. That, or the failings of the global banking system spil a entire.
Funding terrorism or crime is not off the hook to cryptocurrencies. The use of traditional fiat currencies and banks to fund such activities is also nothing fresh. Criminals, spil well spil those just looking to hide money, have always found a way to use traditional banks.
An excellent example of this is the infamous Panama Papers leak. Given this, his argument is lightly proven false. Choosing not to look deep into the figurative mirror, and instead blame bitcoin, seems like a diversionary tactic.
Possible Motivation for His Rechtsvordering?
It shows up that one of two things may perhaps be true. One, Moynihan and his naysaying ilk might still be stuck ter the mindset of the Silk Road days of 2013. Consequently, they may still hold the obsolete photo of bitcoin being the currency of choice for online drug deals.
Or two, Moynihan is perhaps afraid of what cryptocurrencies represent. That being, a way for common people who are tired of being manipulated by large, corporate, for profit banks to escape and hold some degree of financial self determination.
Uncountable forward-thinking technology icons and futurists like Bill Gates and Steve Wozniak support cryptocurrencies. Yet, wij are still eyeing a onveranderlijk stream of negativity flowing from the overly conservative and technologically backward banking sector.
Moynihan now joins the ranks of Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan, and Larry Fink of Black Rock among others, spil yet another distributor of unproven FUD.
But did the BofA CEO’s comments make sense on any level? Let’s hear your thoughts.
Photos via BofA, CNN/Getty, Jon Southurst