Caitlin Long: Bitcoin & The Future of Regulation

Published on
December 9th, 2020
Duration
66 minutes


Caitlin Long: Bitcoin & The Future of Regulation

The Interview - Crypto ·
Featuring Caitlin Long

Published on: December 9th, 2020 • Duration: 66 minutes

Caitlin Long, CEO & Founder of Avanti Financial Group, joins Real Vision CEO Raoul Pal to discuss Bitcoin, Wyoming at the forefront of regulations, and the problems of custody for crypto assets. Long explains the benefits Bitcoin has over many traditional asset classes as well as the concerns brought about by unclear regulations. She sheds light on how and why Wyoming aims to provide the most clear crypto regulatory environment in the US, and she also touches on Avanti, the crypto bank and custody company she founded. Filmed on November 30, 2020. Key Learnings: The importance of having clear regulations for crypto assets and their custody can not be understated. As innovative states such as Wyoming remove uncertainty by providing clear regulations, more investors will be able to get exposure to the asset class with confidence. Regulations are becoming more clear, but not all states stand on equal footing, and competitive regulatory environments are emerging within the US.

Comments

Transcript

  • SW
    Sean W.
    2 February 2021 @ 20:33
    This discussion of DTC and actual property rights versus IOUs really came into focus now with the WallStreeetBets / GameStonk controversey too. Caitlin Long is now one of my favorite guests along with Danielle DiMartino Booth and Mike Green.
  • LA
    Lars A.
    29 January 2021 @ 22:26
    Absolutely one of the most important Videos I have seen with respect to the legal base for Crypto in all its flavours. I recall the same struggle from 1990 when I was engaged in Sweden for dematerialization of government bonds and mortgage back securities via a new CCP/CSD that required a bill on multilateral netting as well as a bill on CSD holding securities in digital form. It was inspiring to listen to Raoul and Caitlin both saying that Central Banks was not against Bitcoin. Only the establishment for the old financial elites.
  • mw
    martin w.
    17 January 2021 @ 02:53
    Great interview! I would love to know what interview is Caitlin refereeing to around min 40.
  • JA
    JAK A.
    15 January 2021 @ 20:32
    Thanks for great interview .Caitlin knows what she is doing.Made me want to move to Wyoming.
  • MG
    Matthew G.
    14 January 2021 @ 19:17
    This made me feel really dumb and made me go study fiscal history lol. High quality interviewee, no doubt.
  • KM
    Kyle M.
    13 January 2021 @ 21:47
    Fantastic interview with Caitlin, and I agree with everything she said except for her argument about Stablecoins & CDBCs involving banks outside of the Central Bank. Certainly central banks are not equipped to deal with 350M individuals, but does she really think that a group of commercial banks are the ones to handle that when there are tech companies that serve 2B+ users at scale? From a tech perspective alone, why would central banks work with commercial banks using legacy software and mainframe computers slowly running cron jobs when big tech companies have the most advanced computing and serving infrastructure in the world? Furthermore, Facebook is clearly eager to be the ones handling this with the Libra initiative and are arguably the best choice if we're going in the direction of a surveillance/command economy with more levers to play with since Facebook already possesses the largest social graph of individual interactions and adding a stablecoin payments layer on top of that existing social graph is trivial to do giving those in charge of monetary/fiscal policy a lot more control.
  • lk
    leland k.
    4 January 2021 @ 02:23
    This interview is pure gold. One of the best videos on finance and crypto that I've ever seen.
  • TR
    Tom R.
    3 January 2021 @ 14:32
    Really superb interview - one of the best ever on RV. Caitlin is very impressive - please do more content with her ASAP!
  • JC
    John C.
    2 January 2021 @ 19:39
    Is there a Caitlin fan club and if so, how do i join?
  • DD
    David D.
    2 January 2021 @ 10:24
    exceeded expectations
  • OL
    Olandis L.
    29 December 2020 @ 13:10
    That was a Great Interview with her! Get her back!
  • KZ
    Konrad Z.
    28 December 2020 @ 17:55
    Great interview! Just wanna know one thing: is it or will be possible to invest in Caitlin’s Wyoming bank? (Avanti Bank and Trust)
  • JP
    Jeff P.
    28 December 2020 @ 13:53
    Wow, fantastic interview. Caitlin is VERY impressive and this video was very educational. The segment about the impact of settlement delays in the traditional system vs. a blockchain system, and the segment about liens were unbelievably useful and clear. I’d love to hear Caitlin cover any topics, any time.
  • JV
    Joseph V.
    26 December 2020 @ 16:00
    Which is why you get high interest rates on BlockFi. The risk is real.
    • JV
      Joseph V.
      26 December 2020 @ 18:15
      Leverage and BTC. Multiple layers of dehyopcating. Legal risks of ownership in bk. Revaluation my risk levels on my BlockFi account.
  • JL
    J L.
    16 December 2020 @ 00:11
    p.s. Listening further, it seems clear that both Raoul and Caitlin are both conflating monetary policy and fiscal policy as a sort of overarching theme. They are mixing them together. Not intentionally, but in significant ways that need to be pointed out, because the two (monetary versus fiscal, and central bank powers versus congressional powers) should really be separated. They are legally very distinct. The below statement from Raoul (quoting him from the transcipt in the next two paragraphs) is all about FISCAL policy, which is NOT THE REALM of central banks, meaning, it is all about the power of congress to spend — a power that the central bank does not have under the current Federal Reserve act or constitional system: "[Benoit Coeure] has made it absolutely abundantly clear that central banks can take two choices. One is just essentially a stablecoin with nothing attached. Most likely smart contracts with the ability to fiscally stimulate and create good outcomes with programmable money." "There is a hugely different world. I keep trying to explain it, people do not really get it yet, but this is gigantically a different world where monetary and fiscal mixes, where behavioral economics and incentive based systems become the economic modus operandi, not monetarism, Keynesianism, or any of these things. Everything is about to change." That vision may be correct, but you would LITERALLY have to change the Federal Reserve act and the constitution first, because the central bank does not have the power to spend or to bring new legal tender into existence as an act of will. Only congress can do that. Central banks cannot create legal tender under the existing framework. The central bank can only adjust the mix of government securities within the system, meaning, they can swap out zero-maturity dollars for ten-year or thirty-year treasuries or vice versa. This swapping is not creating. It is like being a manager of someone else's accounts. The Fed is pushing the envelope of this with a commitment to buying corporate bonds, but that is very edgy and a technical violation of the Federal Reserve act as Jeff Gundlach has pointed out, and one that could not be taken as far as what is being suggested here (e.g. the Fed all of a sudden taking decisions to stimulate the economy directly). To ACTUALLY get this world where monetary and fiscal mix, in a deep and substantial way -- which is what Raoul is suggesting will happen! -- you would need to change the system, meaning, the existing framework of the Federal Reserve act and the power of the purse as bestowed upon congress' ability to control legal tender and create it, so that central banks have the power of the purse instead of congress alone. That would be a much bigger legal change than, say, Wyoming law versus Delaware law. It would effectively be giving direct political power to the central bank. It might actually be easier to, say, abolish the electoral college than to do that. It would be really hard. The Chairman of the Fed is not allowed to make direct fiscal injections, or decide who gets what money when. The Fed is not even allowed to create money, not truly. That is the fiscal domain. The power of the purse is a very political thing. You can't be cavalier, or shouldn't be, in assuming the central bank can just pick up that ability without a major political shift. New legal tender is created via congressional spending, because again, when congress decides to spend the funding is literally created ex nihilo, with government securities and the corresponding currency to purchase them created at the same time. The Fed "manages the mix." It does not decide to send $500 to a steel worker in Ohio or to increase funding for a grandmother in Kansas. So this world being described may well come about, but I would argue there is an intellectual imperative here to: -- understand the differences between monetary policy and fiscal policy -- acknowledge that central banks in their current form do NOT have the authority to do fiscal -- recognize that, in order for this to change, MAJOR political legal structures will have to change -- talk about what that means and how long it will take to happen (there are many barriers here) With an added irony being that, the closer one gets to realizing that monetary policy and fiscal policy are truly separate domains, with congress holding the power of the purse and the ability to create legal tender (because currency and debt are the same), the closer one gets to understanding the basic premise of MMT (why a currency issuer is different than any other entity, and inflation is the vital health indicator, and real resources and national output and societal well being, not nominal currency vs debt levels, are the logical benchmark…)
    • KZ
      Konrad Z.
      26 December 2020 @ 18:10
      "real resources and national output and societal well being, not nominal currency vs debt levels, are the logical benchmark" But aren't these first two a product of the latter?
  • PL
    Peter L.
    24 December 2020 @ 17:30
    Great interview Raoul and Caitlin. That discussion of custody was worth the price of my yearly subscription. And the discussion of liens on BTC made my head explode.
  • pl
    paul l.
    22 December 2020 @ 20:04
    Awesome discussion. Caitlin is amazing. Thank you both very much.
  • JR
    Jake R.
    22 December 2020 @ 00:06
    Fuck real vision is incredible
  • JD
    John D.
    13 December 2020 @ 20:52
    💡 I had a lightbulb moment. The end that blockchains can fork and it is difficult for institutions to understand that. There are centralized tokens on ethereum, USDT being the one with the highest market cap. If and when ethereum forks the issuers of these centralized tokens can unilaterally decide which chain they respect. The tokens on the other chain immediately lose value. Everything else false apart on that chain. Token issuers have veto power. Proof-of-Work is meaningless. Vitalik can just meet with USDT issuers behind closed doors do whatever and everybody just needs to accept it because the token issuers have veto power to kill any fork.
    • DH
      Don H.
      21 December 2020 @ 06:20
      USDT is not native only to the Eth blockchain. USDT runs on Tron protocol, Solana, and a few other protocols. In the event of a protocol fork, if you have USDT you can still easily transact and send it via other protocols or the forked protocol. It is not up to the issuers to respect the chain, but which protocol wants to support USDT on their protocol.
  • DH
    Don H.
    21 December 2020 @ 06:13
    Amazing conversation. Caitlin brings a very unique and much needed set of skills/knowledge to Crypto today and tomorrow. Her combined understandings of financial laws, economics, and Crypto is top notch. Looking forward to her next conversation on RV!
  • JS
    Joe S.
    15 December 2020 @ 04:57
    easily worth watching twice! zero fluff, pure education.
    • GS
      Gustavo S.
      20 December 2020 @ 22:49
      Fully agreed. And I'm doing that right away. Greetings from Brazil!
  • PG
    P G.
    14 December 2020 @ 09:02
    Key takeaway: BTC now is cheap. Get you some before the rush!
    • GH
      Gregory H.
      17 December 2020 @ 21:48
      LOL. Two days later it goes for a good first hop to new all time highs.....still cheap.
  • EL
    Eric L.
    17 December 2020 @ 08:28
    I like her.
  • AS
    Andrew S.
    11 December 2020 @ 04:18
    I don't understand why stablecoins solve the velocity issue? How do stablecoins allow us to increase velocity of reserves?
    • WD
      William D.
      11 December 2020 @ 13:18
      they give people money directly, with restrictions on how money can be spent. if you recieve $500 CBDC that can only buy legal goods, it's far more effective for GDP and hence velocity of money than the Fed buying public securities. the downside is that money essentially becomes a coupon, rather than a fully fungible asset, so its use is limited to approved uses.... would the Fed approve the recipient spending their $600 on Occidental call options? would the Fed have given Thomas Edison $600 to tinker around and spend time inventing things?
    • JL
      J L.
      15 December 2020 @ 23:45
      There was in fact some confusion here. Congress has the power of the purse, whereas the Federal Reserve technically does not. Dollar stablecoin injections from the Fed would just be more bank reserves as swapped out with government securities -- unless the laws were changed. The path of creative policy via CBDCs runs through fiscal policy, not monetary -- unless the two merge together somehow in a future arrangement that changes the system.
  • JL
    J L.
    15 December 2020 @ 23:27
    What a refreshingly razor sharp individual. The hypothesis on stablecoins is very interesting. I would also argue Caitlin is, in some ways, pro-MMT without realizing it. (This is not meant as an insult.) Some reasoning: Dollars and treasury bonds are both government securities. They just have different maturity dates. A 10-year treasury matures in ten years. One could say a dollar has a maturity of zero years. This is why nobody sensible saves their dollars by burying them in the backyard. If you don't need your dollars immediately, you swap them for a longer maturity government security that has the same amount of reliability. Currency and debt are the same thing in this respect. So when the Federal Reserve swaps out dollars for treasuries, they are not actually spending any money. They are just adjusting the asset mix of government securities in the system. They are swapping longer-term maturities for shorter-term (or zero-term) dollars. This raises the question of how the central bank would put stablecoins into the system. If they are swapping the asset mix, it is the same old system. The banks are then simply sitting on stablecoins instead of old-fashioned dollars. Why would this increase velocity? The stablecoins are still reserves. Congress, however, has the ability to actually create new legal tender. That is because congress can spend at will. They spend by deciding to fund whatever project or obligation. Then they issue government securities, and receive currency, and spend the currency to fund whatever they just authorized. This is the true ex nihilo creation process. So if stablecoins were to be injected ex nihilo into the system, the would still need to come through congress. This would be a function of fiscal policy. Monetary policy almost by definition can't add velocity to the system — not really — because the Fed cannot "spend" directly. Only congress can do that. Unless the Fed finds creative ways to break rules. Re the currencies of past empires experiencing collapse, that was actually an MMT-style observation. Why? Because MMT argues that inflation is the ultimate constraint on a sovereign currency issuer. If you issue too much currency relative to the real resources available to your economy, then supply versus demand issues will create a loss of faith in the currency. That is what creates the collapse. But here is the thing, issuing currency is only one half of the currency collapse equation. The other half is not having enough real resources and productive outputs within the economy for the supply of currency to match the demand at a stable rate of velocity. To see why this is true, imagine a national economy where the amount of currency stayed in the same but the productive output fell by half. This economy, too, would likely experience a currency collapse, even though no new currency was issued. Why? Because within a sovereign currency system, the currency retains value through a balance of supply versus demand relative to the resources and output of the underlying national economy that uses that currency. As for "the equity built up" that our parents and grandparents bequeathed us, I would argue what she was talking about there was, in actuality, the productive resources of the economy as a whole. If your economy has real resources and productive output, you can issue currency and debt (which are the same thing) in a balanced amount that attaches proper velocity to those productive resources. But it isn't the stored savings that is being leveraged against, it is the actual output of people with jobs and companies producing desirable goods and services. In a sovereign system, the real resources and outputs are what gets leveraged against in terms of new debt and currency issuance (with debt and currency being the same thing). This is, again, a very MMT-centric view, because inflation tells you that you got the supply and demand balance wrong, either by having too much currency relative to resources and output or having your real resources and output decline. This view is also very cognizant of balance sheets, by the way — it is just that inflation and velocity (too much or too little of either) are markers of health or illness, rather than traditional notions of profit and loss — because how can a national government have profit in a currency that it issues which is the same as the debt it issues, and why would the proper marker of a nation's prosperity not be the degree of real resource use and productive output that it has?
  • AK
    Ado K.
    15 December 2020 @ 11:23
    Exceptional, just brilliant. Caitlin is something extra. Intellectual knowledge and honesty that is just off the charts. Enjoyed this a lot.
  • JR
    John R.
    15 December 2020 @ 07:46
    I find it so inspiring that folks as smart as you two walk the earth. SUCH a great interview. Thanks very much.
  • BS
    Benjamin S.
    15 December 2020 @ 04:11
    Some very important issues discussed here. Looking forward to having Caitlin Long again.
  • cm
    carlos m.
    15 December 2020 @ 03:33
    The importance of oracles continue to come up during these conversations 👌#chainlink
  • ZM
    Zachary M.
    13 December 2020 @ 00:35
    What happened to leverage and crypto not mixing?
    • DS
      David S.
      13 December 2020 @ 03:47
      To be honest, we all know the rationale behind that. Too much volatility.
    • JD
      John D.
      14 December 2020 @ 12:15
      yep Volatility and also no lender of last resort. Owing Bitcoin to somebody when the price doubles every year. It is an impossible place to be in. Anybody shorting Bitcoin will inevitably blow up.
  • JE
    John E.
    14 December 2020 @ 00:05
    wow
  • Sp
    Scott p.
    13 December 2020 @ 23:18
    Cool, where can I get some liquid tokens? What? Blockchains work just fine without tokens?
  • Sp
    Scott p.
    13 December 2020 @ 23:18
    Cool, where can I get some liquid tokens? What? Blockchains work just fine without tokens?
  • AB
    Ali B.
    13 December 2020 @ 22:42
    RV, can you guys specifically have an interview with her about technicality of lien and the risks she talks about? That seems to be a great risk for BTC adoption by retail investors.
    • AB
      Ali B.
      13 December 2020 @ 22:52
      BTW, for sure one of your best interviews about BTC and crypto, hands down to her knowledge
  • DK
    Dylan K.
    13 December 2020 @ 20:30
    Does anyone have the link to the article that Caitlin mentioned around minute 35?
  • RC
    RUBEN C.
    13 December 2020 @ 14:44
    Very good interview. It would be amazing to get a more practical approach to the law technicalities. We could have examples of cases where the bitcoin we purchase could be claimed back (for different countries), and cases where our purchases are very safe. R
  • DS
    David S.
    13 December 2020 @ 01:25
    Caitlin is a fountain of knowledge. I am in awe. RV, please have her back asap. This was one of the best and most informative and empowering interviews I've ever watched on this platform.
  • SS
    Socrates S.
    9 December 2020 @ 14:23
    There were a couple of things Caitlin said that show how little cryptos are understood. I'm not saying Caitlin doesn't understand them: rather that they are misunderstood by existing institutions. For example, Caitlin spoke of bitcoins being located in Wyoming and that this would bring them within the jurisdiction of Wyoming. Bitcoins don't have a location. With commodities, there is a distinction between where the commodity is located and where the record of it is located. With cryptos, this distinction does not exist. A bitcoin is just a number on a ledger and it exists everywhere a full bitcoin node exists. Geographical or political jurisdiction can extend at most to the location of the person who has access to the keys. Similarly when she spoke of liens on bitcoins. Bitcoins are fungible, same as dollars. Liens are normally made against specific items of property. If bitcoins are acquired and disposed of, who is to say whose bitcoins they were and now are? Especially if some anonymizing service has been used to effectively obfuscate the transactions.
    • JL
      Jason L.
      9 December 2020 @ 19:30
      I'd love to hear her unpack the "located in Wyoming" reference and liens. I took location to mean any of the following: 1) where the custodian is 2) where business was transacted 3) where the holder is located. You right, the blockchain is not location-specific, but the private keys to unlock the bitcoin have a location. Caitlin definitely knows all of this. She's just several steps ahead of the rest of us. As for the liens, I'm more uncertain ... maybe it was saying that at some point in time you had the bitcoin and that makes it eligible to service the lien. But you're right, it seems difficult to enforce with something like a coinjoin or even if it was simply sold to another party.
    • RC
      Ricardo C.
      9 December 2020 @ 21:27
      I guess she meant "fiscal residency" for a certain bitcoin holder.
    • WD
      William D.
      10 December 2020 @ 05:47
      The key point, probably a disappointment for many, is that while a Bitcoin has no location, laws and people do, and bitcoin must interact with laws and people, otherwise it has no utility. Therefore under law bitcoin will have a location, likely based on the residence of the custodian.
    • PC
      Peter C.
      10 December 2020 @ 06:52
      I took it as being covered as a resident of Wyoming or also, Avanti being a custodian, those who custody with an WY institution.
    • YZ
      Young Z.
      10 December 2020 @ 06:56
      Actually, you're misinformed. Bitcoins are NOT fungible (for that, you need Monero) - BTC, like a physical currency note, and can be tracked from the current owner, through every single previous owner, all the way back to the miner. So yes, BTCs that have been used in, say, Silk Road, are "tainted" and could theoretically have liens placed upon them. Good luck trying to get the lien serviced though, but the current BTC holder of that tainted coin better not travel through the jurisdiction in question just in case.
    • YZ
      Young Z.
      10 December 2020 @ 07:02
      See concept of Virgin BTC https://vertexmarket.medium.com/what-are-virgin-bitcoins-and-where-can-i-buy-them-d6eab0f669e0 Caitlin knows far more that you give her credit for.
    • ZM
      Zachary M.
      13 December 2020 @ 00:43
      BTC NOT fungible. XRP IS fungible. No unique identifier.
  • MD
    Michael D.
    12 December 2020 @ 21:21
    What an absolutely fabulous interview. While there has been some degradation in the quality of interviews on RV over the past year, this one is outstanding and reminiscent of the best from prior years. Caitlin, as a person and as an intellect, gives me hope for our future. Her combination of brilliance and willingness to take action is too rare.
  • IH
    Ian H.
    12 December 2020 @ 20:45
    Best video of the week.
  • DS
    David S.
    12 December 2020 @ 19:34
    Holy God! This is must-see Bitcoin TV. This is already my second comment and I'm only 8 mins in. Lol. Anyway, anyone who's watched Raoul's RV videos knows that one of the principal virtues he touts about BTC is that it offers average, retail investors the rare opportunity to front-run the large institutions. Ok. We hear that and all nod our heads, smile mischievously, and perhaps even log into an exchange and pick up a few more Sats on a surge of optimism, and Raoul moves on to his next point. But, Caitlin just gave the critical insight into one of the important reasons as to why this is, namely, the market structure of institutional settlements is incompatible and contrary to the settlement structure in crypto.
  • SM
    Siddharth M.
    12 December 2020 @ 19:10
    Great to hear Caitlin!
  • DS
    David S.
    12 December 2020 @ 19:09
    Wow! What a superb interview with such a superb guest. Caitlin had me rapt with attention starting right from her explanation of the "Cluster of Errors Theory" and how artificially controlled interest rates created erroneous investment traffic signals. Extrapolate this forward to the implications today's market wherein the absence of a classic market mechanism of buyers and sellers has never been so severe.
  • TW
    Theodore W.
    12 December 2020 @ 15:18
    One of your best episodes ever. Caitlin is the ultimate resource for connecting banks to crypto in the U.S. please consider Denelle Dixon for the show. Bankhaus von der Heydt announced they (bank) launching a Euro stablecoin this week. TW
  • sd
    steve d.
    12 December 2020 @ 13:14
    Great content again - thank you
  • DK
    Danny K.
    12 December 2020 @ 10:46
    I've seen Caitlin on Max Keiser! Class act.
  • JB
    Jared B.
    12 December 2020 @ 06:41
    Just signed up today. This is my new favorite website!
  • IH
    Ian H.
    12 December 2020 @ 04:58
    World class
    • IH
      Ian H.
      12 December 2020 @ 05:02
      We need a RV syndicate to invest in Caitlin and Avanti
  • CS
    Christopher S.
    12 December 2020 @ 04:41
    Run Caitlin Run! Run Caitlin Run! Run Caitlin Run!
  • sc
    sung c.
    10 December 2020 @ 02:22
    This interview proves to me why I like GBTC as a trading vehicle. Not only is it easy to trade at will, I don't have any worries about custody, ownership, nor taxation issues. I only need to pay taxes on my profits from the sale of GBTC. Sure there is a premium, but even that can be gamed and used to my advantage, which I regularly do to add an additional 5-15% to my profits.
    • MP
      Matthew P.
      10 December 2020 @ 19:33
      After listening to that I’d say you’ve got a valid argument. Could get messy.
    • EB
      Edward B.
      12 December 2020 @ 04:16
      I own GBTC too for greater security. But, I own more in cold storage outside of my IRA. Those GBTC fees are MASSIVE. I don't mind paying the fees now when its growing so fast and high. But, as soon as more competitively priced vendors come into the space, I will jump ship.
  • TT
    Theo T.
    11 December 2020 @ 04:14
    Wow this interview just keeps getting better. She is so knowledgable on the law and crypto and how they intertwine.
    • EB
      Edward B.
      12 December 2020 @ 04:04
      I can hardly believe this information is free. I would gladly pay for this type of quality intel.
  • RC
    Richard C.
    12 December 2020 @ 00:36
    Excellent content. Price predictions and economic philosophy in other pieces are entertaining, but this sort of nuts and bolts analysis of the framework and implications of investing in Bitcoin should be essential viewing. Well done. Would love to see Caitlin's analysis on a recurring basis on the platform.
  • JB
    Jill B.
    11 December 2020 @ 22:20
    I would really like to read the law review article she references. Was there a link to it posted anywhere?
  • JB
    Joel B.
    11 December 2020 @ 19:32
    Who the hell down voted this?
  • TL
    Tom L.
    11 December 2020 @ 19:10
    Excellent interview. Looking forward to follow up conversations with Caitlin.
  • BL
    BEYOND L.
    11 December 2020 @ 10:24
    insanely smart conversation, thank you soooo much for doing this
  • MJ
    Marius J.
    11 December 2020 @ 10:01
    Great and Thanks!!!
  • TT
    Theo T.
    11 December 2020 @ 04:00
    She presented the value so clearly that it can't be refuted.
  • AC
    Andres C.
    11 December 2020 @ 02:25
    As someone who is relatively new to the crypto space, this interview was quite simply mind-blowing. I would love to see Caitlin back for many more interviews, as I learned much and I'm sure I would learn even more. Thank you Raoul and Real Vision, and thank you Caitlin!
  • JT
    John T.
    11 December 2020 @ 01:52
    This was positively fantastic. Simply the best video I've seen on my short time here. Please feature Caitlin Long on here. I learned so much from this.
  • LB
    Lance B.
    11 December 2020 @ 00:11
    VERY informative and thought provoking. Thank you.
  • GF
    George F.
    9 December 2020 @ 15:55
    Fantastic Interview. I would LOVE it if Caitlin became a regular on RV. She is so in the weeds from a crypto regulatory standpoint. Her clear and concise communication is a HUGE value add for myself and the RV crypto community IMO.
    • NW
      Nathan W.
      9 December 2020 @ 17:51
      agree +1
    • PU
      Peter U.
      9 December 2020 @ 22:09
      Agree, we should hear from Caitlin at least once a month!
    • NI
      Nate I.
      10 December 2020 @ 23:10
      100% - although she's probably too busy with Avanti.
  • NI
    Nate I.
    10 December 2020 @ 23:06
    You hit that one out of the park Raoul. I hope Caitlin is back soon. She was an extraordinary guest.
  • DW
    Dean W.
    10 December 2020 @ 22:50
    The idea that someone might have a lien on my BTC is nightmarish!
  • VP
    Veselin P.
    10 December 2020 @ 22:30
    Wow, just wow
  • RW
    Raymond W.
    10 December 2020 @ 21:06
    Great talk.
  • BS
    Bobby S.
    10 December 2020 @ 19:49
    Caitlin knows her stuff and with Raoul Pal setting the scene this is prime viewing!
  • MA
    Mateo A.
    10 December 2020 @ 19:49
    @Raol - You're a wonderful interviewer, my friend. Thank you for sharing this with us.
  • EL
    Evan L.
    10 December 2020 @ 19:02
    I know that it's been mentioned. But I would really like Caitlin to come back on and discuss leveraging Bitcoin. Sounds like she was reallyyyy turned off by it. Specifically interested because I am sure that like many people here, I keep some of my Bitcoin in Blockfi. And taking on that risk (however small) was a hard decision for me to make.
  • KF
    Kim F.
    10 December 2020 @ 16:53
    Wow!!! That was worth an hour of my time. Excellent!
  • PG
    Patrick G.
    10 December 2020 @ 16:49
    Great job Caitlin. As always, great content Raoul and Real Vision.
  • CO
    Carlos O.
    10 December 2020 @ 16:34
    Always a pleasure to listen to Catlin break it down.
  • KH
    Keith H.
    10 December 2020 @ 15:16
    This was brilliant. Who the f#ck are these people who are giving this video a 'thumbs down' rating?? Bloody hell...
  • LW
    Logan W.
    10 December 2020 @ 15:10
    Wow, super compelling. Thank you.
  • JA
    John A.
    10 December 2020 @ 15:06
    Caitlin seems to be ahead of the game when it comes to the desire for future crypto custodians. My personal view is that custodianship is the primary value add institutions will provide in a world where people move in and out of fiat currency. This was an excellent interview.
  • DM
    David M.
    10 December 2020 @ 14:53
    Great interview
  • MM
    Martyn M.
    10 December 2020 @ 14:27
    Excellent!
  • JH
    Joseph H.
    10 December 2020 @ 12:48
    Well how about that, go Wyoming!! That’s a fantastic interview. Thank you Caitlin & Raoul
  • TZ
    Toomas Z.
    9 December 2020 @ 19:46
    To be completely honest I was expecting a limited knowledge congresswoman who simply wanted to attract more business to Wyoming to later tax it, so went along with the whole crypto thing, like many other non-US jurisdictions have. I mean, there probably is some of that thinking in Wyoming policymaking circles, but wow am I impressed with her knowledge, unique input and new viewpoints she has introduced to my own thinking while navigating this space. One of the best interviews on here.
    • TZ
      Toomas Z.
      9 December 2020 @ 20:16
      Just to add, does anyone know anything more with regards to any "lean" laws in the UK? Is there any legal precedents for bearer asset confiscation as a consequence of bankruptcy/theft/loss from a pervious holder?
    • PH
      Prabin H.
      10 December 2020 @ 02:49
      bro are you saying that if I bought some bitcoin from coinbase and put it on cold storage, I dont actually own that bitcoin? Someone also has claim on that bitcoin? I thought that type of stuff happened on paper gold.
    • TZ
      Toomas Z.
      10 December 2020 @ 11:59
      Prabin: I am not sure what the laws on this are in different jurisdictions (I am from the UK), but it sounds like in the US that is a distinct possibility in certain states. If you buy a bearer asset from an individual that acquired it illegaly/does not own the asset, it could be confiscated to return to original owner. I'm not a lawyer but this does appear to be a thing in some places, which is why I was asking.
  • MW
    Mike W.
    10 December 2020 @ 10:29
    Wow.... think I might need to watch that again !
  • VF
    Vassilios F.
    10 December 2020 @ 08:22
    Caitlin has fantastic explanation skills. She was even capable of getting politicians to understand her!
  • SG
    Sven G.
    10 December 2020 @ 07:31
    So good! Very informative.
  • DP
    Divyesh P.
    10 December 2020 @ 07:26
    Brilliant.
  • CF
    Christopher F.
    10 December 2020 @ 07:00
    Wow! Extremely valuable content. Have to have her back on next year!!
  • SS
    Shane S.
    10 December 2020 @ 05:00
    Amazing interview but wanted to hear Caitlin's views on the Cred situation. I hope that was not deflected because of the RV relationship with Blockfi.
    • mB
      marc B.
      10 December 2020 @ 06:12
      Yes me too. What actually happened.
  • mB
    marc B.
    10 December 2020 @ 06:11
    This was an amazing interview she is a badass! Looking forward to following her business endeavors. Cred fucked me good. Tiny amount but still. More following of legal regulation much appreciated. Fuck old wall and the old system.
  • CJ
    Clinton J.
    10 December 2020 @ 05:46
    I am from Wyoming and still have ties there. Recently have discovered the wonder of Bitcoin. It's the nearest thing in the world for me to see a Wyoming woman lead the way here. Caitlin is a rock star!
  • JS
    John S.
    10 December 2020 @ 05:07
    Raoul Pal is clearly dialed in to explaining the potential of programmable CBDC. Caitlin Long concurred after adding some additional points. If anyone from the US government is listening, some possible solutions to the current fiscal mess were brilliantly explored by Caitlin and Raoul. RealVision is positively contributing to crypto and financial understanding with interviews like this.
  • bb
    bernard b.
    10 December 2020 @ 04:51
    The most interesting Crypto vid on RV so far. The existing mess around custody should come as no surprise.... I was still surprised how messy it currently is. (I'd like to share this with non RV members - I'll send this https://www.realvision.com/shows/the-interview-crypto/videos/caitlin-long-bitcoin-the-future-of-regulation - but I don't see any elegant squeeze page taking new users through sign up to video in question. (I tried as non RV user)... not a problem to me of course.... might get RV some more potential customers)
  • LW
    Lawrence W.
    10 December 2020 @ 03:45
    Fantastic interview! Incredibly insightful and my favorite Crypto interview.
  • TH
    Troy H.
    10 December 2020 @ 03:25
    This was sensational. I hope Caitlin is back frequently! But did they touch on crypto and leverage? Around the 32 minute mark Caitlin mentioned Cred filing for chapter 11 and that they should come back to the topic of leverage and BTC/crypto, but I'm not sure they circled back to it. Maybe I missed something but I was really hoping to hear a deeper dive into this.
  • JD
    JM D.
    10 December 2020 @ 02:58
    Fantastic! Thank you guys!
  • MD
    Michael D.
    10 December 2020 @ 02:55
    Quite possibly he most intelligent person in all of crypto - Caitlin is an absolute beast, great interview
  • DF
    Daniel F.
    9 December 2020 @ 18:52
    Caitlin said something along the lines of "the person who controls the private key owns the bitcoin". What would happen if the private key is compromised by a thief who then transfers the coins to his own address. What would be the legal recourse under Wyoming law and how can the original owner of the bitcoin prove that he is the rightful owner?
    • PH
      Prabin H.
      10 December 2020 @ 02:45
      bro i saw a crazy story on youtube about a guy who bought bitcoin before 2017 bull market and stored in his old computer harddrive. Through his negligence that computer ended up in some junkyard. Now he cant access his bitcoin becouse his private key is store on that computer and he is not allowed to search the junkyard. LOL there are so many missing bitcoins just like that which can not be accessed due to loss of private key.
  • RN
    Richard N.
    10 December 2020 @ 02:36
    Loved Caitlin!! She's absolutely brilliant. Would love to get the link to the law review article about custodian default she eluded to at 22 minutes in. Could yall provide?
  • RD
    Rui D.
    10 December 2020 @ 02:32
    Big take away for me was that the FOMO doesn't have to be just with people who are thinking about buying the coin. Perhaps some of the indicators to look pay attention is the FOMO in areas around crypto such as regulatory, custodial services, retail, aka people building axes and shovels.
  • KL
    Kerrie L.
    10 December 2020 @ 02:22
    Caitlin is unbelievably knowledgable. This is one of the most important Crypto interviews on RV.
  • sc
    sung c.
    10 December 2020 @ 02:13
    That's it, I'm retiring in Wyoming!
  • MS
    Michael S.
    10 December 2020 @ 01:35
    Another great interview, Thanks!!
  • BT
    Billy T.
    10 December 2020 @ 00:38
    Only 15 minutes in and has already blown my mind.
  • KK
    Kyle K.
    10 December 2020 @ 00:22
    An Absolutely Brilliant interview! Thank You
  • JH
    Jesse H.
    9 December 2020 @ 23:19
    Fantastic and the first part is semi-terrifying, to put it mildly. I had no idea how this « clearance » and « custodianship » system actually worked. Like most investors, I had always just assumed that one « owned » the shares outright. Oops.
  • CD
    Chris D.
    9 December 2020 @ 22:38
    A tremendous interview. Caitlin is creating the future in Wyoming. Bravo! There was one place where the "ultimate issue" was circled but not addressed: Caitlin expertly laid out how brokenness of bearer asset ownership laws leads to crazy outcomes. Her example was about furniture purchased by bitcoin from Overstock, where litigation comes after the bitcoin used in the transaction years later. If Wyoming is unique in having fixed this bug, does this mean that BlockFi, Celsius, and other custodians *must* move their businesses to Wyoming? Is it fair to say that in NY, a so-called "custodian" is not, because the bitcoin they hold can be taken via a judge's order due to a past event? I'd like to hear what BlockFi and Celsius have to say about this.
  • AP
    Alex P.
    9 December 2020 @ 13:35
    I personally believe in Bitcoin’s capabilities. I would love for Caitlyn to come back and take a deep dive as to how she views BTC/Blockstream implemented tech (LN and Liquid) capable of handling the world of transactions that comes with a reserve currency and/or tokenization of everything?
    • BF
      Biffle F.
      9 December 2020 @ 17:34
      Blockchain doesn’t support that. Read “The Bitcoin Standard” by Saifedean Ammous.
    • AP
      Alex P.
      9 December 2020 @ 22:27
      Bitcoin doesn’t support a world of transactions and tokenization? Hmm...Bitcoin: A peer to peer electronic cash by Satoshi Nakamoto. Read that before you read “The Bitcoin Standard”, Biffle.
  • PU
    Peter U.
    9 December 2020 @ 22:05
    Honestly, I am speechless. Such an outstanding interview! Bravo!
  • TZ
    Toomas Z.
    9 December 2020 @ 21:55
    Loved the point about a completely transformed way to do fiscal stimulus via CBDC without the need for adding leverage on base money by financial institutions. One point I'd like to add, and please correct me if someone sees something wrong with the way I see things. One of the big issues with the way stimulus has been done in the past 10 years especially via QE, is that it basically increases bank reserves which then lend out money, some of which ends up in derivatives/other methods of piling on leverage as Caitlin mentioned, and you have reflation in various assets. This has Cantillion effect, where the first people to have access to that base money are the ones to gain the most benefit as they get to spend that money on investments/assets that generate a return before any inflation/reflation is seen in the real economy, which usually happens with a delay. These people are generally the 0.1%, and thus wealth inequality expands as has been seen from 1971. By providing fiscal stimulus through CBDCs directly to the general populous, in theory, the wealth inequality effects from previous stimulus programmes are likely to be less pronounced, because the capital is going to people that need it most rather than the fed relying on a trickle down effect, which is questionable at best, but this is at the cost of much faster inflation effects seen in the real economy.
  • RP
    Ron P.
    9 December 2020 @ 21:24
    This smart lady says a lot of words and every single one is important. Great insight
  • bw
    brent w.
    9 December 2020 @ 21:01
    Caitlin knows her stuff. Excellent.
  • JD
    James D.
    9 December 2020 @ 20:10
    Caitlin Long never fails to impress. She is always in tune with the obstacles on the horizon. Must watch.
  • AP
    Antonio P.
    9 December 2020 @ 20:02
    Just excellent stuff! How brilliant Caitlin is!
  • AP
    Ann P.
    9 December 2020 @ 19:52
    Wow, amazing interview. i learned an incredible amount but a lot went over my head. One key question for my personal choice regards the custodian issue vis a vis Blockfi. I'm moved my bitcoin there and would like to know 1) how safe it is long term, 2) what triggers/events should i look for to move my bitcoin to cold storage? Thanks!
  • KL
    Kim L.
    9 December 2020 @ 19:28
    Would you be able to post a link to the law review article Caitlin mentioned?
  • JL
    JAMES L.
    9 December 2020 @ 19:15
    Concerning central banks etc ... XinFin $XDC HybridBlockchain is doing all this right now with fintech globiance and validus already onboarding ... banks coming soon ... ISO 20022 compliant ... SWIFT ... CBDC ... hybrid stable coin backed by MAS (Monetary Authority of Singapore) ... a new block every 2 seconds ... 2,000 transactions per second ... https://finance.yahoo.com/news/globiance-launches-fiat-pegged-stable-141200488.html
  • JW
    Jonathan W.
    9 December 2020 @ 18:36
    That was simply Awesome! Hands down the best interview I’ve seen in the crypto space!
  • TP
    Timothy P.
    9 December 2020 @ 18:14
    Cogent, articulate and presenting ideas in a granular format that enabled learning new topics easily. More guests like Ms. Long, please. Wyoming is on my radar thanks to her, I look forward to more.
  • KT
    Ken T.
    9 December 2020 @ 17:33
    Excellent discussion of the current custodian system for securities and other assets. It opened my eyes to ownership issues and possible downside outcomes in our current banking and brokerage processes.
  • EK
    Eric K.
    9 December 2020 @ 16:55
    This was a fabulous discussion! Caitlin is so knowledgable, but she's also superbly fluent so even frighteningly complex issues can be understood. I agree, she needs to be a regular.
  • BF
    Biffle F.
    9 December 2020 @ 14:43
    As someone who is relatively new to Bitcoin what I find to be a glaring weak point is the fact that buying and selling requires the use of an exchange. It’s easy to move my coins onto my hardware wallet after the exchange gives me ownership but moving a large amount of money to Coinbase, for example, requires a degree of trust that I sadly lack. I would like to see a segment from you addressing that defect and recommendations about strategies to safely overcome it.
  • SW
    Steve W.
    9 December 2020 @ 11:56
    THE most amazing interview I've ever seen on RV. Raoul I think you've met your match ;) Caitlin is so intelligent and enthusiastic!
  • JF
    Joachim F.
    9 December 2020 @ 11:24
    The most enlightening Crypto/CBDC discussion I have ever seen. Thank you Caitlin and Raoul!
  • JV
    Jerry V.
    9 December 2020 @ 11:11
    I am neither a lawyer or a banker yet I was able to understand every element of this conversation. I am very impressed with Caitlin - RV / Raoul you have hit another homerun.
  • DH
    David H.
    9 December 2020 @ 09:25
    Hands down, THE BEST RV Crypto so far. She is awesome.
  • SF
    Simon F.
    9 December 2020 @ 09:08
    As a Brit, this lady is my new poster child for the enduring capacity of Americans to pioneer the future. Her ability to look past the Luddite legacy establishment and chop the forest of wood required to build an entity that can facilitate our digital future is awesome. Her optimism and drive, clarity of insight, and grasp of detail is combined with a steadfast belief she will make it happen. Truly impressive.