@ISIDEWITHQuestionsTechnological10mos ago

Should citizens be allowed to secure their money in self-hosted digital wallets that the government can monitor but not control?

Self-hosted digital wallets are personal, user-managed storage solutions for digital currencies like Bitcoin, which provide individuals with control over their funds without relying on third-party institutions. Monitoring refers to the government having the capability to oversee transactions without the ability to directly control or interfere with the funds. Proponents argue that it ensures personal financial freedom and security while allowing the government to monitor for illegal activities such as money laundering and terrorism financing. Opponents argue that even monitoring infringes on privacy rights and that self-hosted wallets should remain completely private and free from government oversight.

+
Expand
+ Settings x  Right

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 3k Right voters.

47%
Yes
53%
No
40%
Yes
51%
No
7%
Yes, and also allowed to use a privacy layer that prevents monitoring of funds and transactions
2%
No, and ban digital wallets that do not contain backdoor access for government agencies

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 3k Right voters.

Chart
Line chart with 6 lines.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying values. Range: to .
The chart has 2 Y axes displaying values and values.
End of interactive chart.

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 3k Right voters.

Chart
Line chart with 7 lines.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying values. Range: to .
The chart has 2 Y axes displaying values and values.
End of interactive chart.

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Right voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3mos3MO

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  2019 replies5 agree1 disagree6