John Haar, a former member of the traditional finance community, claims that Wall Street’s reluctance to accept Bitcoin is due to a basic knowledge of “sound money.”
The lack of backing for Bitcoin from “traditional finance,” according to John Haar, a former asset manager at the financial firm Goldman Sachs, is the result of a lack of knowledge of the cryptocurrency.
On August 14, an essay written by Haar and distributed to private Swan Bitcoin clients first contained his opinions. Before joining Swan Bitcoin as managing director of Private Client Services in April 2022, Haar previously worked for Wall Street powerhouse Goldman Sachs for 13 years.
The essay adds that not only do those in “legacy finance” not comprehend what Haar believes to be one of Bitcoin’s (BTC) core concepts, but they also don’t understand the concept of sound money in general, which Haar claims causes them to have unfavorable ideas about the cryptocurrency.
“After many conversations, I can say that if there are people in legacy finance who have a well-researched stance on why Bitcoin is not a good form of money or why Bitcoin will not succeed, I was not able to find them.”
According to Haar, the hoopla surrounding Bitcoin in traditional media in 2017 piqued his curiosity.
He asserts that Bitcoin “improves upon the weaknesses of gold” and claims that learning about its background and underlying principles has made him eager to talk about it with anyone.
On the other side, Haar points out that Wall Street’s pessimism is a result of six main factors resulting from a lack of historical and Bitcoin study. He recognized that familiarizing oneself with the language of Bitcoin and its guiding principles is a “daunting endeavor,” but that those in legacy finance harm themselves by acting as though they do.
“It’s much more common for one to pretend to be well-versed on a given topic and take a strong opinion regardless of one’s underlying knowledge — and this is especially true for a topic that touches the world of investing.”
Additionally, he thinks that central planning by governments and individuals generally goes along with the flow, focusing mainly on its implementation in industrialized nations, and a desire to keep things as they are all contributing reasons. According to Haar, these final four factors work together in a variety of ways to serve as a shield for legacy finance to use to support the current financial systems.
Although Haar continues, “There is nothing inherently wrong with these things,” he points out that these actions inhibit individuals in legacy finance from developing their own opinions and becoming early adopters of cutting-edge technologies.
He also made note of the fact that persons working in legacy finance are frequently very specialized, which, in his opinion, might lead to their developing a tunnel view of their own world.
“They earn a living by knowing the specifics of their corner of the financial services sector. There is little incentive for them to examine the fundamentals of the system.”
