查理·芒格文稿/演讲实录：2023年美国为何应禁止加密货币
标题：为什么美国应该禁止加密货币
它不是货币。它是一个庄家胜率接近 100% 的赌博合约。
作者：查理·芒格
2023 年 2 月 1 日下午 6:16（东部时间）
近年来，美国一些私人公司发行了数千种大大小小的新加密货币。这些加密货币后来成为公开交易品种，而它们的披露信息并未事先获得政府批准。
在某些情况下，一大块加密货币几乎以零价格卖给了一位推广人，随后公众以高得多的价格买进，却并不完全了解推广人享有的预稀释权益。
这种狂野随性的资本主义，很像一句常被归到马克·吐温名下的评论所说的那样，据说他曾说过：“矿就是地上一个洞，上面站着一个骗子。”
这种极端过度的行为之所以持续存在，是因为监管存在空白。加密货币不是货币，不是商品，也不是证券。相反，它是一份庄家胜率接近 100% 的赌博合约，签约地在一个赌博合约传统上只由那些在宽松度上相互竞争的州来监管的国家。显然，美国现在应该制定一项新的联邦法律来阻止这种情况发生。
有两个有趣的先例可以指引我们采取明智的行动。第一个先例，共产主义政府中国最近禁止了加密货币，因为它明智地得出结论，加密货币弊大于利。第二个先例来自 18 世纪初，当时英国对一场可怕的经济萧条做出了反应，那场萧条源于一个推广计划的破产，该计划试图利用缓慢航行的帆船与地球另一端极其贫穷的人们进行贸易，以获取巨额利润。
当这场疯狂的推广计划破产时，英国议会在痛苦中采取的行动直接而简单：它禁止了所有新普通股的公开交易，并将这项禁令维持了大约 100 年。而在这 100 年里，英国在启蒙运动和工业革命中都起到了强有力的引领作用，为文明进程做出了迄今为止最大的国家贡献，此外，它还孕育了一个前途无量的叫做美利坚合众国的小国家。
在加密货币被禁止之后，美国还应该做什么？嗯，还有一件事也许是有意义的：感谢中国共产党的领导人，他提供了卓越的非同寻常常识的典范。
芒格先生是伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司的副董事长。
Why America Should Ban Crypto It isn’t currency. It’s a gambling contract with a nearly 100% edge for the house. By Charlie Munger Feb. 1, 2023 6:16 pm ET In the U.S. in recent years, privately owned companies have issued thousands of new cryptocurrencies, large and small. These have later become publicly traded without any governmental pre-approval of disclosures. In some cases, a big block of cryptocurrency has been sold to a promoter for almost nothing, after which the public buys in at much higher prices without fully understanding the predilution in favor of the promoter. All this wild and wooly capitalism is much like that described in a remark often attributed to Mark Twain, who was thought to have said that “a mine is a hole in the ground with a liar on top.” Such wretched excess has gone on because there is a gap in regulation. A cryptocurrency is not a currency, not a commodity, and not a security. Instead, it’s a gambling contract with a nearly 100% edge for the house, entered into in a country where gambling contracts are traditionally regulated only by states that compete in laxity. Obviously the U.S. should now enact a new federal law that prevents this from happening. Two interesting precedents may guide us into sound action. In the first precedent, the communist government of China recently banned cryptocurrencies because it wisely concluded that they would provide more harm than benefit. And, in the second precedent, from the early 1700s, England reacted to a horrible depression that followed the blow up of a promotional plan to get vast profits by using slow-moving sailing ships to trade with very poor people halfway around the world. What the English Parliament did in its anguish when this crazy promotion blew up, was direct and simple: It banned all public trading in new common stocks and kept this ban in place for about 100 years. And, in that 100 years, England made by far the biggest national contribution to the march of civilization as it led strongly in both the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution and, to boot, spawned off a promising little country called the United States. What should the U.S. do after a ban of cryptocurrencies is in place? Well, one more action might make sense: Thank the Chinese communist leader for his splendid example of uncommon sense. Mr. Munger is vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway.