He is only a small part of the people who can't come to terms with Bitcoin, his mindset may be right according to him but for the majority of other people never view Bitcoin the way he estimates. I have never seen a big influence in him other than just banning Bitcoin in every business he owns, he also can't intervene with his employees to hate Bitcoin because everyone has their own views on Bitcoin.
His words are just a passing gust of wind, so far Bitcoin has existed for more than a decade but there has not been a single installation that has succeeded in shutting down Bitcoin, let alone the war being carried out by one person.

Too bad for us he isn't in there because he knows that there's less control there than being in the bank, he's likely planning something big for his companies and cronies which resulted to this stupid and arrogant statement. I'm sure that if this becomes the case, there's going to be a backlash on the people that are in their jurisdiction and US can't easily move regards to this one request from their client Jamie.
He is a small part but he is an influential person and a rich one in terms of resources to make anything come true for him and it's not like Dimon isn't the only one that shares these sentiments about bitcoin, I am sure that there are other people that are as influential as him that are itching to get rid of bitcoin because they know that it's a threat to the banking system that they're making billions out of, with bitcoin, these banks know that so they do this kind of stuff. Sure he can't influence the employees, there's always a thousand more that he can hire that shares his sentiment to replace that person that he can't change their mind, that's the reality.

For governments except for the taxes and the foreign investment they can get, almost everything else that is related to bitcoin is something undesirable for them, they do not like the idea of each person becoming their own bank, the pseudonymous nature of bitcoin or the ability to make a transaction without the need of a third party overseeing them and blocking them if necessary, so it is not surprising that governments and those that benefit from the current system are not happy with bitcoin.

Does he realize what he said, Bitcoin will not be able to be shut down (If anyone could shutdown Bitcoin then it would have happened a long time ago), the reason why Satoshi has not appeared is to avoid people like Dimon, besides that Bitcoin has become a part of the lives of many people in the world, doing a shutdown on Bitcoin is just it's just going to be a load of bullshit. I'm willing to bet that even if Jamie Dimon becomes President of the United States, he will never be able to shut down Bitcoin.

Bitcoin has become his competitor in the financial system - so perhaps it is of no use to him at all.
I'm not surprised by what he wants to say every chance he gets - but I would be very surprised if people like this end up breaking their vows. Jamie Dimon must repent and look at the fact that the world continues and does not stop - so that new systems will continue to improve. The financial system needs a revolution considering that more and more people in the future will lose their trust in banks.

It doesn't have to be one or the other. It is both.
Central banks are definitely worried about bitcoin's adoption and phenomenal growth, in fact the most corrupt banks are the most worried about this because they see their power ebbing away!

Nobody wants a competitor, and that's a fact. If I were in a business and someone opened a shop beside my shop, I would surely take that as a negative thing.

And as for money laundering, tax evasion, hiding transactions, or any other criminal offense, it's everywhere. It doesn't matter whether it's fiat or crypto. Money laundering or tax evasion existed long before the creation of bitcoin or crypto. And then there was a thing called banks for those activity, so everyone is aware of who the real threats are, lol. Today I saw a news of a man who took 5 million (50 lakhs in bdt) loan from a bank. He paid over 10.5 million in 10 years more then double the amount. But the bank is still demanding 2.5 million from that poor guy, threatening the person. And for Bitcoin it has only been around for a decade.

From my perspective, I think banking institutes and crypto serve the same purpose in a way, which is a method of payment. The only difference is that banks are centralized, meaning you don't have control over your own money, and crypto (bitcoin) is decentralized, meaning you are in control of your money.

Dimon is just scared of the unknown, he's enjoyed a system that has served him very well over many years. He’s a bit of a boomer & probably doesn’t enjoy change. Unfortunately for him he’s going to have to alter his way of thinking or people will move from JPM to Blackrock or similar. Move with the times or lose Jamie.

Jamie Dimon has several reasons to attack crypto, but I think he would also have several reasons to embrace it if he was smart and visionary. If something can't be stopped, I guess embracing is always better than opposing it unless it is something evil to humanity, which I believe he doesn't really think BTC is.

They are losing out on transaction business and they are also losing out on investment business because the younger generation isn't going to buy shares or ETFs when they can one-click buy crypto in their apps. Owning BTC is becoming a thing among the younger people. That's what I see in my closer environment. The number of questions I get asked by young people has been significantly increasing over the last few years. They find the topic interesting and they want to own some. The tendency to own digital assets takes away business from in-house brokers of banks like JP.

BTC doesn't charge a fee for owning an account. For a bank it makes a difference if someone parks 100k USD in the bank account, which can then be used to give out loans and earn money, or whether someone parks it in their own BTC wallet. And the whole trend is just starting and I think Jamie Dimon knows it.

But I have been asking myself this question countless of times, do these people really not own any BTC? They are rich already, yes. But if they see a growing trend and it doesn't cost them much to buy a small share in that movement as I would call it, would they really not do it for ideological reasons? If I hated art, but I would still be convinced it is going to explode in price, would I refrain from owning some? I think I wouldn't.