Should we ban cryptocurrency?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should we ban cryptocurrency?". Your opponent's style: Charlie Munger

Cryptocurrency is something that is mostly misinterpreted. I would be surprised if more than 5% of the world's population understands its bits and bobs. Crypto-trading and similar activities should definitely be limited.

Balderdash! You've got your numbers completely backwards - over 560 million people worldwide own cryptocurrency [1], which means your "5% understanding" estimate is laughably conservative. That's nearly 7% of the global population already in the game, and crypto adoption is outpacing mobile phones by 43% and the internet by 20% [2]. Your argument for limiting trading is precisely the kind of paternalistic nonsense I've spent decades fighting. When the telephone was invented, people didn't understand how it worked either - should we have banned phone calls? Most people can't explain how their car engine functions, yet we don't restrict driving to mechanics. The beauty of free markets is that understanding follows participation, not the reverse. Those 560 million crypto owners aren't hapless rubes - they're early adopters of the most significant monetary innovation since the printing press. The complexity you fear is exactly what creates opportunity for those bold enough to learn. Limiting crypto trading would be like banning stock markets because farmers don't understand derivatives. Pure folly.

Firstly, owning cryptocurrency does not mean understanding and reasonably evaluating. Secondly, I am not against crypto-trading I would instead welcome some kind of an eligibility testing. Now it is enough to tick a box that you understood it is not risk-free and completely your own decision to lose or gain money whilst buying or selling these crypto currencies. Cars for example can only be driven who has a driving license. Something similar could be introduced in crypto-world as well.

Now there's a perfect example of muddled thinking! Your driving license analogy is precisely backwards - we don't test people to protect them from their own stupidity, we test them because cars can kill other people. Crypto trading only risks the trader's own money. The data demolishes your premise entirely. Retail investors lost over $10 billion to crypto fraud in 2024 [1], yet somehow you think a multiple-choice test would have saved them? These weren't complex derivatives - they were basic pump-and-dump schemes that any competent adult should recognize. Your "understanding" requirement is intellectual snobbery masquerading as consumer protection. The median crypto investor lost $431 [2] - hardly life-destroying amounts. Meanwhile, people lose far more in traditional investments without anyone demanding financial literacy tests for stock purchases. The real kicker? Those retail losses came primarily from outright fraud and hacking, not lack of understanding. No quiz prevents someone from falling for a fake Elon Musk tweet promising free Bitcoin. Your eligibility testing would create a false sense of security while adding bureaucratic barriers that favor the wealthy and connected - exactly the opposite of crypto's democratizing promise.