They will try to do similar things like Italy.
Italy to raise capital gain tax on crypto to 42% from current 26%.

If you invest in a successful one, a company with its stock or Bitcoin project with its native currency bitcoin BTC, it's always true that early investors will benefit most, if they can hold. They can not say this principle only works with Bitcoin market and early Bitcoin investors and holders.

They ignored another fact that if people get richer by Bitcoin investment, they will use money to purchase things, use many services and it's their ways to help economy. They use their own-made money, you can consider it as hard-earned money too, for right things to help many business and people by their spendings. It's better than governments and central banks that only print more money, increase national debts, and use money from citizens, tax payers very unprofessionally and kind of wasting valuable money and resources.
https://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html
https://worlddebtclocks.com/

They must admit that in any market, it's zero sum game, not only Bitcoin market. When they are brave enough to admit this fact, they will feel better with this Bitcoin market and no longer hate it.

The "zero-sum game" argument totally neglects what happens to the greater economic impact of Bitcoin. Its decentralized nature offers new avenues for transferring value across borders without intermediaries, and for this reason alone, it has created new markets, jobs, and investment opportunities that add to the economy.

Moreover, while we are quick to focus on the gains made by the early adopters, it's equally impossible to overlook that the adoption of new technology often starts with those early risk-takers. Similar to the internet or smartphones, early players put their investments at risk with no guarantee of success. Add to that, Bitcoin's technological aspect-blockchain, for one-continues to drive development in everything from finance to supply chains.

It is understandable to be afraid of aggressive regulation such as the tax hikes instituted in Italy. However, regulation can balance innovation and consumer protection to create a healthier environment for growth, rather than stifling it entirely. Bitcoin is not all speculation. it is financial inclusion, mainly among people in regions that have limited access to banking facilities.

Why a new topic when we already have a discussion here?

https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/5513723.0

Tuur is a bit late. The war has started long time ago. Maybe he only noticed it now. Bitcoin is something the govs will never fully embrace. If they can control it through the centralized exchanges they won’t say much against it but the moment they realize that bitcoin can’t be controlled completely, then they will be getting weapons ready to fight us. It probably won’t happen suddenly, but that day will eventually come. Them enforcing KYC on everybody is speeding up the process.

I read this news and I also took a look in the paper itself.

It is not enterily against bitcoin.  It points our some pros of it (like trustless), while also implies that it is a ponzi.

It states also that late comers will make money , as it's values tends to go up

You can read it full here
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4985877

Their judgment is based on their own system, trying to fit Bitcoin into it without understanding what decentralization really is. Central banks, by their name, are centralized, while Bitcoin is the opposite - decentralized.

They call it a Ponzi scheme because they think someone’s at the top controlling it. Sure, Satoshi created Bitcoin and owns a big stash, but he doesn’t control the system since it’s open source. Right now, Bitcoin is already regulated, and honestly, the bigger threat here might be the government. They could create regulations that put Bitcoin at a disadvantage, which could cause panic and lead to a sudden drop in value overnight. But even if that happens, it would only be temporary. It’s nothing like a Ponzi scheme, because when a Ponzi collapses, the people controlling it run away and leave it to crumble. You just can't do that with the Bitcoin network.

No, they're calling it a Ponzi Scheme because for someone to make money from it, another someone should decide to put more money in the system for the original someone to sell for profit. New money must enter the system for the old money to exit at a higher price-point.

They are right to the fact that Bitcoin is a "Ponzi", BUT a naturally-occurring Ponzi like Gold. The same as my post before, if they want to stop the "Ponzi", then they should stop the money-printing.

Yeah, what else is new?

There will always be bitcoin haters trying to claim that Bitcoin will make you poorer, even though all it's ever done is gone up up up over the last 10 years. And it is my belief that they also hate crypto in general.

It is surprising that many people have actually fallen for this false narrative around Bitcoin, and have thus missed out on early gains (which this paper attempts to victimize them for).

these so called "economists" dont know what they are talking about..

they cant even separate "value" talk from "price speculation" talk. thus they are not really good economists by not knowing the difference

the underlying value is based on the economic lowest cost on the planet anyone is willing to sell for, which is based on mining cost.. the value is kinda invisible to the markets and only seen when the market "tests bottom" periodically and it shows the resistance to sell and the support line of buyers

the PRICE is a separate number which wiggles around above value and its the PRICE that speculates visibly in the markets in a more playful way based on people paying more than value

as for being a ponzi. the bitcoin network is not based on a 'mr ponzi' owning all funds and only letting a small amount slip out from new buyers funding old sellers.. there is no 'mr ponzi' holding the big reserve of fiat, bitcoin is not backed by any reserve of fiat and no there is no way a 'mr ponzi' can just disappear with the big reserve leaving everyone else with dead indebted loss, however...
.. each centralised exchange can be treated as mini separate mr ponzi's.. so watch out for centralised exchanges and their business practices about how openly they allows withdrawals and sells

So whose fault is it, the early adopters or the late adopters. It is true that the early adopters are the ones currently benefitting hugely from bitcoin, because they took the risk in the early days to buy bitcoin when other have the opportunity to do the same but they didn't. I could remember that in those early days most government were calling bitcoin scam and that it will not survive. They went as far as creating FUD through social media, why is Europe jealous now, because people took the risk to invest their hard earned money on bitcoin in those early days and now watch their bitcoin investment grow in value. Assuming, bitcoin didn't survive will government say all these. Making wealth is taking advantage of the opportunity when it comes at the right time. Why didn't these so called Economist see that bitcoin price will increase rapidly overtime and advice the government to buy bitcoin then.