Mayor Eric Adams notoriously can’t get enough of the camera. In his mind, it’s all part of his plan to make New York City the crypto capital of the world. A crypto-focused summit, pledges for financial inclusion… it all seems very progressive. Hold your horses for a moment. The big question is this truly a well thought out plan, or simply another political animal following the bling bling of the shiny new object. Even more importantly, whose interests are actually being served here?

Risky Bet or Calculated Gamble?

At the same time, Adams is selling blockchain technology as a panacea to achieve financial inclusion. This is a noble sentiment. Is it realistic? We’re not discussing Apple or Google here, we’re discussing a technology still very much driven by speculation and subject to extreme price volatility. Remember Gooncoin? Some lucky trader turned $332 into $190,000. Good for these winners, but for every one of these winners there are scores of other folks left holding the bag. What about the people Adams says he’s trying to help? Are they truly going to reap the rewards of having to figure out how crypto wallets work and having to pay gas fees? Or are they simply more vulnerable to being preyed upon by scams and rug pulls?

Consider this: while Adams is hosting crypto summits, the Senate can't even agree on how to regulate stablecoins (the GENIUS Act failure). That's a huge red flag. This indicates to us a deep misunderstanding and lack of agreement about the technology, even at the federal levels of government. Are we certain that we want to tie our city’s fortunes to something so volatile? It's like building a skyscraper on quicksand.

Don’t overlook the environmental white elephant in the room. Ethereum’s recent migration to proof-of-stake has drastically reduced its energy use. In comparison, Bitcoin still relies on a resource-intensive proof-of-work infrastructure. That translates to huge energy use, which is a far cry from ambitious climate targets. Environmental responsibility should not be a thing we sacrifice in the name of becoming a “crypto hub.”

Whose Dreams, Whose Benefits?

Here's where things get really interesting. Who stands to gain from NYC becoming a crypto capital It’s definitely not the typical New Yorker just trying to make rent.… it’s not the logistics company, or the small business owner who’s desperately trying to stay afloat. It’s the venture capitalists, the crypto executives, and other tech bros who will make a killing.

Think about it. Even as Galaxy Digital Holdings announced plans to list on the Nasdaq this year after reporting a jaw-dropping $295 million loss in Q1. That should inform you about the priorities, about which this is a priority. It’s not about helping regular folks live better lives, it’s about attracting investment and creating wealth.

Andrew Peel, who most recently was head of digital asset markets at Morgan Stanley, has left the firm. He is planning to open a Swiss DeFi fund. This is yet one more sign that all the action is happening beyond Wall Street’s grasp. Further, that big money tends to flock to jurisdictions with the friendliest regulations.

Adams, a centrist democrat, may be unwittingly setting himself up in support of an industry that typically pushes for more deregulation and libertarian philosophies. This has the potential to really alienate the broader more progressive voter base that is worried about consumer protection, environmental sustainability, and social equity. Is this a strategic miscalculation?

The Paris Connection: A Wake-Up Call?

Now, let's make an unexpected connection. But that doesn’t stop New York City Mayor Eric Adams from actively courting crypto companies. At the same time, relatives of a French crypto industry leader survived an attempted kidnapping in Paris. This can be an important reminder against the shiny things that the industry sometimes offers. Imposter syndrome, tragedies of difference, and the risks of anonymity. Anonymity can be a double-edged sword. It's a world away from financial inclusion.

This is not to imply that every aspect of crypto is somehow evil. We should celebrate it, but tread with caution. This is particularly true when a politician is at the helm. We need to ask tough questions about who benefits, who bears the risks, and what the long-term consequences might be.

Or perhaps Adams truly believes that crypto can help him make NYC a Great and Powerful place. Or perhaps he’s just trying to generate some media buzz and trying to get the media to raise him a few campaign contributions. Either way, it's our job to hold him accountable and make sure that his "crypto dream" doesn't turn into a nightmare for the rest of us.

Perhaps the city should focus on solving the real problems faced by everyday New Yorkers, like affordable housing, accessible healthcare, and quality education. These are the investments that will truly make New York City a better place to live, not chasing the latest crypto fad. What do you think?