Will CBDCs be the end of stablecoins?

avatar

All of us who are related to the crypto world are in contact in one way or another with stablecoins. They basically became the pillar that allowed exchanges to establish themselves and made life so much easier for traders. But will they be here for much longer, or is his life drawing to a close?

stablecoins
Image form Unsplash

Truth be told, stablecoins exist because it is very difficult to link the traditional financial system to the characteristics of cryptocurrencies. Mainly the autonomy of the user to manage their money without the intervention of a third party.

However, the impact of stablecoins may fade with the rise of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). Although these may have greater control by the Central Banks, they will also have greater support and confidence from the general public.

The reason is that it is not the same to be backed by the authority in charge of issuing money than to be backed by a private organization with little transparency. And it is that, although the stablecoins are relatively new, just the first one appeared in 2014, some scandals associated with their support and their creators have already arisen. Here I give you some examples:

  • Tether: the most popular stablecoin, designed to maintain a stable value against the US dollar. However, there are concerns about the transparency of Tether and its financial backing. In 2019, the New York attorney general filed a lawsuit against Tether and its parent company, accusing them of concealing a loss of around $850 million in customer funds.
    This lawsuit came about due to the 2018 scandal where it was reported that Bitfinex (a cryptocurrency exchange) had lost access to some $850 million in funds from its clients, and that it had used Tether funds to cover the loss.

  • Circle: is a company that issues various stablecoins, including USDC, which is (allegedly) backed by US dollars. Well, in 2020, it was reported that Circle had scaled back its operations and laid off a third of its staff due to declining demand for its stablecoins. And the company was suspected of using USDC funds to support its cash shortfall in a bank account, raising concerns about the currency's solvency.

These scandals (without count algorithmic stablecoins disasters like LUNA y UST) have raised concerns about the transparency, financial backing, and regulation of stablecoins. Therefore, the introduction of CBDCs and their integration in some Exchanges may cause stablecoins to disappear, since everything is based on trust.

federalreserve
Image from Unsplash

And here we return to the point in question, if the investors have in the CBDC digital currencies issued by the central banks and backed by the government authority that issues them, that they can self-manage without needing a bank and that are integrated into the Exchanges, for what would they need a stablecoin from a private company with no transparency behind it?

After all, for privacy, decentralization and anonymity, Bitcoin and the other cryptocurrencies will remain. So the debate is served:

Will CBDCs be the end of stablecoins?

Let me know your opinion in the comments.

Support this content

  • Reblog the post.
  • Share on social networks #Web2 and earn $POSH.
  • Comment to discuss and help me grow.
  • Tag me in your own posts to support each other.

Follow me on social networks:

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

crypto money stablecoins opinion cbdc proofofbrain posh hive-engine leofinance
0
0
0.000
2 comments
avatar

well... the stablecoins are already CBDCs... as you probably won't believe, i stuck with the accepted version by the public, so just the wikipedia link. (they don't hide anything, they 'trust' in the fooled masses... :) ) you can find the rest very fast.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_(company)

so who are the owners, investors: GoldmanSachs, Fidelty, BlackRock... and many more, all deeply tight to the system, whether they are banks or govs, big corps. (anyway, banks and govs just special corporations)

if they turn all the cryptos into CBDC (what is very visibly their target) + create their gov, central bank ones (leaving only the illusion of choice for the people), nothing will change. everything will get worse. they are going to continue all their dirty crap, and even more, as the chance for consequences for them will be zero, they don't have to print money, they just modify it in the digital space within minutes and not even scandals, circus must go on about it (still without consequences), how it happens nowadays, and happened in the last century.

this is like the vax show, you can argue, which one is the better or worse (meantime, it is all the same crap), but you can't argue against the really important part, that generally, all are the same crap... divide and conquer by creating an illusion of choice...

privacy coins are the future, unless you don't want to live in a psychos led technocrath modern gulag, prison worldwide.

probably you don't know, but FTX was also a fully bankers, govs backed exchange. of course indirectly through noname funds, corporations... nobody ever talked about that in the 'news' and rarely somewhere else, same like stablecoins, nobody mentions, they were created, and owned by banks, govs, big corps from the beginning. then what is the difference??? :) :) :)

so you may ask the question: what for the 'attacking' crypto narrative, if it is owned by the same people? circus for the people.

these bankers, govs, big corps earn much more from crypto, than simply from banking (in profit %), you may ask, how come they are against it, but they let use visa, mc cards with crypto? (maybe huge profit from 3 direction (debit card usage, crypto transfer + the 'good old' banking)

i am not going to continue, it is so visible and simple... take care!

0
0
0.000
Reply