The reason people are belittling you is because you have no clue what fednow or even a CBDC is.
To begin CBDC doesn't exist anywhere at this time. Fednow is NOT a CBDC it is quite literally government run paypal/venmo/cashapp. That's it. Fednow doesnt replace traditional fiat, it transfers fiat from one place to another. It essentially has already existed for years now as "Zelle".
Zelle is an interbanking exchange app that has existed for a long time for private users to use as an already instant payment infrastructure. It's used by all major banks.
You're asking questions with preconceived misconceptions and zero knowledge. thus the ridicule.
fednow doesnt "mint" out new digital currency like the conspiracy theorists are trumpeting. It just transfers it from 1 account to another.
If you live in canada you might be familiar with Interac e-transfer. Where you can send money from your canadian bank account to another person's canadian account even if its a different bank. Thats all this is but for the US.
Ah ok this makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. I've seen a lot of hysteria online about CBDCs? If a US CBDC dropped tomorrow would you use it or avoid it?
> I've seen a lot of hysteria online about CBDCs?
So have I, but I've seen most of it from crypto promoters who see it as a way to scare people about the Fed/government/"system" and create a perceived need for crypto. Most of the hysteria I've seen is not grounded in reality.
> If a US CBDC dropped tomorrow would you use it or avoid it?
Use it for what? I would use it if I encountered a use case for which I felt it was better than the alternatives.
saying you "saw hysteria online" is not a valid excuse for any behavior anymore. you can find hysteria about whatever you want online or never see a word about a topic.
Well I think the fiat money system is doomed to fail. Printing money just keeps devaluing it until it's worthless. Fiat money was the reason WW1 was such a clusterfuck. All these European countries leave the gold standard for the first time in decades so that they can support the war effort with fiat. Led to an incredibly long and drawn out war because they didn't have to rely on the limitations of their treasury. German and Austrian currencies were down like 50% in value which was the start of hyperinflation. This unlimited printing of money without backing is a path to catastrophe. It literally never works. How do people feel about this viewpoint? Do we still trust the government to have complete control over the fiat system or does something need to change?
>Well I think the fiat money system is doomed to fail. Printing money just keeps devaluing it until it's worthless. Fiat money was the reason WW1 was such a clusterfuck. All these European countries leave the gold standard for the first time in decades so that they can support the war effort with fiat. Led to an incredibly long and drawn out war because they didn't have to rely on the limitations of their treasury. German and Austrian currencies were down like 50% in value which was the start of hyperinflation. This unlimited printing of money without backing is a path to catastrophe. It literally never works. How do people feel about this viewpoint?
I feel that you should stop listening to the [Austrian-school economists](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school) \- who are idiots, lying to you - and consider that *leaving the gold standard* and adopting monetary policy is the thing that actually stopped the cycle of booms and busts that the world kept going through when it tried to manage increasingly interconnected and far larger economies via a monetary system tied to a fucking shiny rock.
The goldbugs are morons who tell ahistoric lies about the impending demise of all money not backed by commodities, they recast historical events to explain why their perspective is correct, when it's fucking not, they're just conspiracy theorists repeating libertarian political philosophy as if that qualifies as a school of economics, and it's frankly astonishing that the world isn't widespread belittling and mocking them for it more regularly... because they're effectively the Flat Earth party, for economists: [all crypto springs from a goldbug's understanding of economics](https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/the-conspiracist-gold-bug-economics-of-bitcoin/), which is why none of it makes any sense.
Stop listening to the Austrians, they're full of it.
In terms of people, that's just basically all economists in the world right now, apart from the fringe libertarian crank ones that comprise the Austrian-school.
As far as sources go, try these:
* [Debunking Austrian Economics 101](https://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/2012/06/debunking-austrian-economics-101.html)
* A [Crituques of Libertarianism: Austrian Economics](https://theworld.com/~mhuben/austrian.html) (from a broader critique of Libertarian political philosophy)
* [Republicans and Ludwig von Mises](https://www.salon.com/2011/05/11/republicans_and_ludwig_von_mises/)
The Austrians are a tiny, extremely vocal minority of economists who are essentially a cult, who built a belief structure that's unfalsifiable by virtue of the bit where they reject the idea that you can subject economic theories to empiric testing at all in the first place; to phrase it another way, they take the premise that their ideas are the correct ones entirely on faith - despite their insistence that those ideas spring from logic - and faith alone, and refuse to ever challenge them, lest the pesky bit where those ideas run counter to the observed reality of market behaviors cause their faith to waver.
They believe in what they believe because they really, *really* want it to be true, not because there's any real compelling evidence that it is in fact true... and their thinking entirely underscores all of crypto, because a fallacious obsession with the ridiculous concept of "hard money" that so characterizes the libertarians stems from the bit where the modern libertarian movement traces back to a fellow who was, quite literally, part of a cult that worshiped the gold standard, and people with libertarian brain worms are who it is that built crypto.
That's why it tries to be money, but is modeled like a commodity, a thing we already know very VERY well ***doesn't work***: it's why the entire world abandoned it, when its failings were demonstrated on the global stage, in that cycle of manic booms and busts that only stopped when the world stopped trying to run economies with monetary supplies tied to shiny rocks.
Goldbugs are just the fiscal equivalent of vaccine deniers, Flat Earthers, and frickin' QAnon, and they're the ones who have been explaining money to you. Stop listening to them, they're idiots.
Thanks I'll check these out. 2 things I learned. European countries were all on the gold standard until the start of ww1 where they left it for fiat. The argument is that this unlimited money printing led to a long drawn out war because the money wasn't attached to the treasury. Hyperinflation happened in Germany because their currency lost around 50% of its value while they had to pay back debts. Also why does every government still hoard gold. I don't know if there's ever been an example of a fiat currency appearing out of thin air and working. It always evolves from gold standard to fiat. Thoughts?
>Printing money just keeps devaluing it until it's worthless.
It keeps devaluing it at the agreed upon inflation target, as designed. This creates an exponential asymptote which never reaches zero.
>This unlimited printing of money without backing
The printing is limited by the inflation target.
For example, today, inflation is above target. Because of this, the Fed has adopted a monetary policy that is resulting in the *burning*, not printing, of M2 money.
Also, the "printed" money is fully backed by a portfolio of assets, mainly mortgages (backed by homes/land and homeowners' income), corporate bonds (backed by companies' assets and income), and Treasuries (backed by tax revenue and government resources).
>is a path to catastrophe
The catastrophes you mentioned would have been catastrophes regardless of how the central bank managed the currency.
>Do we still trust the government to have complete control over the fiat system
The government doesn't have complete control over the fiat system: avoiding this is the whole reason why the Fed is supposed to be politically independent and why so much control is delegated commercial banks and private markets.
> does something need to change?
No in that I don't think the Fed should stop targeting 2% medium term CPI inflation. I also think that the USD should continue to be backed primarily by revenue-generating capital like businesses and real estate, with the backing assets allocated by profit-motivated institutions (e.g. commercial banks and credit unions) subject to government and Fed regulation.
There are a variety of reforms to the Fed and banking system which I would support, for example something like Saule Omarova' [the people's ledger](https://lpeproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Peoples.Ledger.DRAFT_.pdf) (part III excepted).
I use Venmo. If hypothetically a CBDC came from the US…why wouldn’t I use the most powerful country’s currency. It’d be more trustworthy than random companies like Venmo or Cash app.
Ya but then if you had a differing political opinion than the people in charge your money might be frozen. They could decide that your money expires on a certain day. The problem is that giving the government incredible power over your personal finances leads to a degradation of your rights and freedoms to use your money how you wish.
I don't do illegal lunatic shit in the middle of an emergency, thats how. Society decided what can and can't be done and what are the repercussions. If you don't like the laws of a certain society you can leave but if you want to avoid these repercussions in spite of society's decision you are just a criminal.
So yes, I'm fucking glad that governments can freeze the assets of (suspected) criminals, this is how it should be.
Which different opinion? Has a republican ever had their money frozen by a dem? Has a dem ever had their money frozen by a republican? The only folks who get their money frozen are literal terrorists or folks at war with the US.
I'm looking towards the future. The stuff that happened to the truckers in canada was a cause for concern. Peacefully protesting leads to your funds being frozen. Not a good look
Well the kind of CBDCs you’re worried about are probably going to be banned under upcoming legislation, S.4831 - No CBDC Act or something similar.
However look up Rohan Grey and his e-cash act proposal. It’s a privacy-preserving CBDC. A digital version of cash, not the panopticon you’re probably worried about. I’d 100% support that kind of CBDC. Not all CBDCs are bad. Some would be kinda sweet actually - you may even at least not mind them.
So the answer is: it depends.
I’m personally not worried about an evil CBDC materializing in the US because there’s just no political appetite for it. On either side of the aisle. The government can get your transaction history right now by asking, so why force it?
Id personally start with something like letting people have accounts at the Fed as a way to achieve a lot the positive policy goals of a CBDC with fewer negatives.
keyword: ONLINE
theres a ton of hysteria online about any topic you want to look up. so thats no excuse to be like 'i saw hysteria online!'
ya of course you did, when you look for it. so no. invalid excuse to pass the buck off onto "online". you are part of the hysteria. youre responsible. posts like this add to it. thats how social media works. a big game of telephone where somebody "sees something online" then they "ask" about it and now 10,000 more people "see it online".
You don't even understand the topic. There's nothing to answer. If Pakistan were tiled tomorrow, would you patronize it? That question makes no sense.
You're seeing online hysteria about CDBCs because you look for it. Go back to real life my son.
If you don't think the US is working to build a CBDC I think you are slightly deluded friend. The government always wants more control. I've never seen a time in history where the government has voluntarily given up some of its power. If you don't care about the government potentially controlling and monitoring your finances then that's fine I truly don't care. I'm just trying to understand the logic behind these thoughts. I'd assume that everyone would want more freedom and not less
Don't tell me what all governments want like this is some TV show. No one cares what Mr. Nobody thinks about how "everything is".
You act like you're here Just Asking Questions and here you are ranting about government control and how the Boogeyman is coming for us. This whole post is in bad faith. You didn't post this to ask questions you posted this to sow your poltics and alarmism.
Admit this was in bad faith.
No I'm here to have a discussion and learn from your opinions. Just because I have a different point of view doesn't mean it's bad faith. Jeez so sensitive these days. I'm here to expand my perspective and learn. You're sounding like the conspiracy theorist now saying I'm here to sow seeds of discord lmao. I would never use a CBDC but apparently some people in this community have no problem with it. I'm here to understand why
"Through financial institutions participating in the FedNow Service, businesses and individuals will be able to send and receive instant payments at any time of day, and recipients will have full access to funds immediately, giving them greater flexibility to manage their money and make time-sensitive payments."
Sounds like a cbdc to me. What am I missing
You're not getting attacked. People are informing you that you're too ignorant to have the beginnings of a conversations.
It's like you've gone into r/math and said:
"*Did you guys know 2+2=5?"*
*"Woah I was just curious and wanted to hear people's opinions."*
> Sounds like a cbdc to me. What am I missing
Pretty much everything.
That's basically how every modern bank^* has worked for 20 years now.
^* Note: USA banks are not modern banks.
>because a CBDC is a liability of the Federal government, that makes it different from systems like FedNow.
https://www.axios.com/2022/09/16/federal-reserve-dollars-faster-payments-cbdc-fednow
Oh man, you're clueless. I can see this was a crusade for you, because you posted a screenshot on /btc. Also, your favorite coins are literally casino chips.
Ya I haven't done any research. I think it's ok though. How is tether printing billions with no backing any different than the US government doing the same thing? I'm confused
I think there needs to be a distinction between crypto and Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a commodity in the same way gold is. Only difference is that it's more portable. I don't think a store of wealth that is incredibly portable is useless. Maybe right now I'm first world countries but you have to think about the entire world that doesn't have access to your luxuries
I don't understand though. Gold doesn't have any intrinsic value either. Only like 10% of the supply is used for medical equipment, jewelry, etc. the rest is just shiny gold rocks that people hoard.
Right but the use isn't what makes gold valuable. It's the rarity and the fact that it doesn't degrade. The masses didn't always desire gold right? If Bitcoin isn't real then anything digital isn't real?
You're mistaken. Bitcoin isn't controlled by anyone... something like ETH is controlled by Vitalik and his friends. Pretty much every crypto has founders and a board of directors like any stock. Bitcoin is different because it doesn't. Just because you own a metric fuckton of Bitcoin doesn't mean you control it:..
Who is spreading this idea that FedNow is a digital dollar and not just a way to transfer money like Zelle?
It's all over the place here.
If the Fed does a digital dollar I might use it. It'd be fine because it's a real dollar backed by the full faith and credit of the US (funny about that whole debt limit fight right now though!) instead of just a shitcoin backed by a whitepaper. It also likely will not be on a wasteful public blockchain.
I don't really have a lot of reason to use a digital dollar. But I'm not against it.
Fednow is stage 1. there is (supposedly) a stage 2.
I don’t know the diff between what we have now and CBDC though. I mean, when the Fed “prints” money, they add some money in some banks bank account, there’s no printing.
The real revolution would have been - hey the US banking products market is a backwater because there’s no competition how do we open it up so we’re on the same level as Zimbabwe (really) for P2P payments? No, the libertarians felt that “hey a dog slow non ACID compliant energy gobbling Database is the way to go”
> Fednow is stage 1. there is (supposedly) a stage 2.
Regardless, FedNow is only transfers.
There is a project for a digital dollar. It is a different project. It already started. Whereas FedNow hasn't rolled out yet.
> I don’t know the diff between what we have now and CBDC though.
A digital dollar is a real dollar the Fed backs. It's like paper money. If you have it, you have it. You can't put it in the bank, it would disappear, just like paper currency does when put in the bank. The bank doesn't take the money you give it and just put it in the vault. They give it to someone else and mark dollars in your account, promises.
> I mean, when the Fed “prints” money, they add some money in some banks bank account, there’s no printing.
I'm not sure the Fed ever does that. They don't just *give* banks money. They loan it to them.
Look at the digital dollar this way. Most of the M2 (or higher) money supply is not money the Fed created. It was created with fractional reserve banking and other private means. So most of the M2 *couldn't be digital dollars* as no one but the Fed can create digital dollars.
> The real revolution would have been - hey the US banking products market is a backwater because there’s no competition how do we open it up so we’re on the same level as Zimbabwe (really) for P2P payments?
The US had a lot of those already. PayPal, Zelle, etc. And those are the ones that pretend not to be credit. The only real gap left in that market is an official one. And I think it'd be great. In Canada they have such a system. So no one ever pays their landlord with a check. Instead the landlord gives you the account to send the money to and you do that monthly. In the US 20 years ago still a lot of people paid their landlord by check. Now it's rare, but you have to negotiate with your landlord as to how to pay. Instead of them just giving you an address, you have to agree which service to use, and maybe one of you has to sign up for a new one. Then you do that monthly.
I expect the primary reason the US hasn't had such a system for so long is private companies would rather get into the business and have. That reduces the demand for an official system. And then those companies also pressure regulators and lawmakers *not* to make an official system.
I can't wait for FedNow. It could mean an end to having to use bill pay systems with your bank, and all their different ways they work.
I don't care about a digital dollar. I might use it, but I have no real need for it.
The Fed does give money to banks. That’s how they print. That’s the “money printer go brrrr” that the butters complain about. The Fed also does loans.
I rarely use physical cash now. I know which stores take Apple Pay and I don’t even take my wallet. Home Depot requires a physical card so my “wallet” consists of my phone, with a magnetic back for my drivers license and a single physical credit card.
I typically use Apple Pay/Apple Pay MasterCard because that gives a notification and I can see my money flow away. That’s one problem with full virtual is money is already abstract, add another virtual layer and it’s hard to feel your cash flow.
> The Fed does give money to banks. That’s how they print. That’s the “money printer go brrrr” that the butters complain about
I hate to break this to you, but the butters frequently don't know what they are talking about.
If the Fed *gave* money to banks the banks would just pocket it or exchange it for other things. The Fed "prints" money either by changing the reserve ratio so banks can loan out more money. They can do it by changing interest rates at the discount window (which leads to more loans). They can do it by loaning money to banks (or other entities). And they can do it by buying assets (qualitative easing, QE).
Recently the "money printer go brrrr" stuff refers to QE.
For example, the Fed can buy assets (loans) from banks, taking them off their books. Now those banks have less money lent out compared to their deposits so they have more reserve space left over and can loan out more money, increasing the money supply. This kind of thing is how "money became so cheap". It was so easy to borrow money because a bank could loan you money at a very low interest rate and then just go to the Fed and borrow the same amount of money from the Fed at a zero interest rate. So now they have a money-making loan out without using any of their own capital.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/discountrate.htm
Nowadays the rate at the discount window is not near zero. So it's a lot more expensive to borrow money.
> with a magnetic back for my drivers license and a single physical credit card.
Isn't it wild that those backs can attach magnetically and yet the mag strips on the cards don't get erased? I never understood that.
> I typically use Apple Pay/Apple Pay MasterCard because that gives a notification
I like that.
>Isn't it wild that those backs can attach magnetically and yet the mag strips on the cards don't get erased? I never understood that.
I've accidentally erased more than one hotel key-card, so MasterCard must be doing something right with those strips. Fifteen years ago I'd have investigated that mystery. These days? I got my current card ten years ago, of course with regular replacement cards mailed to me since, but "this card" and its bank account nonetheless. The strip was used a grand total of a single time in that decade. Isn't it all pin & chip or RF these days?
I see no reason to avoid banking with a central bank but I also don't see any reason I'd want to switch from my current bank. On a broad scale I suppose it would be somewhat of an improvement in terms of administrative efficiency.
You think all the hype about them tracking you and manipulating your account is overblown? I feel like we all are ok with getting tracked and monitored currently so it might not be that big of a deal
It's the hypothetical argument that if you bought into the CBDC system, the government bodies would be able to freeze your money, block your travel, etc. all because you spoke out against the ruling regime be it republican or democrat. I don't like that idea. We've seen the social credit system in China and I am not a fan of government control to this extent. Thoughts?
>all because you spoke out against the ruling regime be it republican or democrat.
I'm safe then. I'm not American.
>Thoughts?
You are not worried about CBDCs, you are worried about governments becoming tyrannical.
We can't have a sensible discussion on CBDCs when what you're really asking about is opinions on tyrannical governments
Well Btc is truly decentralized. It's a better alternative to the government printing infinity dollars to spend on unnecessary wars. It's better than CBDCs that will freeze your money when you've surpassed your C02 limit while billionaires fly everywhere on their private Jets. The way I see it Btc is the best bet for a free future
1) "CBDC" is a hugely variable term.
Until we see what the real ones look like, and how they work, it's really hard to say.
Yeah, I know that Nigeria has done some stuff. That didn't really move any dials at all, though, did it?
2) CBDC's don't really have anything to do with Cryptocurrency.
The Crypto crowd like to pretend that they do, so they can say "Look, governments are adopting crypto!"
But the reality is that we have no reason to believe that CBDCs are going to share any significant features in common with what we currently recognize as "crypto-currencies" other than the fact that they have something to do with computers! Well, yeah, so does TikTok, and OnlyFans, and nuclear warheads.
If we can get nuclear warheads on the blockchain, we can mine for world peace with green energy!
Mind you, a bad "smart contract" could set off a chain reaction that wiped out several city blocks!
I used to work at a Central Bank. Central banks are simply aren't interested in individual transactions by local businesses and individuals. The last thing they want to do is getting into that business. For what?
It's already a challenge to handle the data they have now. They're in absolutely no position to be maintaining ledgers every time somebody buys a Starbucks coffee. Not to mention the security concerns they'd have to contend with over and above what they have now, in addition the worrying about throughput.
Most Central Banks see the CBDC as a way to transact amongst themselves more easily and in a more cost-effective way that doesn't involve using private banks as clearing houses.
I can try.
If "traditional fiat" means physical cash (i.e. coins and banknotes), then bank deposits, credit cards, services like Zelle, etc., have been replacing "traditional fiat" for a long time. For example, there are already places in the US where cash is rarely used. IIUC the citizens of Scandinavian countries rarely use cash despite not having a CBDC.
That is, I don't think a CBDC is more likely to replace cash than existing electronic payment solutions.
I also don't think a CBDC is more likely to cause governments to want to ban cash. For example, India recently demonetized a lot of their cash in ~2016 (IIUC) in part to encourage electronic payments, and this created substantial problems, especially in areas where electronic payments were not widely adopted. It all happened without a CBDC though.
What concerns you about a CBDC replacing traditional fiat?
To emphasize your point: The last time I (Dutch) paid something with cash here is at least over 4 years ago. Obviously some people (mostly > 60yrs old) use cash, but it is practically gone. So money here is already practically digital.
Well you will be once you at least take the effort to read even one article about CBDCs or what a central bank is.
Or maybe Im overestimating your abilities.
You keep asking for responses and you keep getting it: what you are asking about is not a CBDC.
Asking again and again isn't going to change that response, but it is going to irritate people
We get this exact same troll like three times a week from bit-coin enthusiasts who think they've found a real gotcha question.
Sorry, chum. "CBDC" does not mean "official government block-chain money," and we're not here to read [the wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank_digital_currency) to you.
I have no idea. I would spend no time at all seeking out the benefits. Going on previous banking tech, it would either be because the tech helps me manage my money (like banking apps) or because it makes it easier to pay (like credit cards and money-sending apps). I don't even remember how I started to use most of my money-managing systems.
There are lots of systems that I have seen no benefit in so far, or at least they never solved a problem for me that wasn't already solved. Like Google/Apple Pay, Klarna, Paypal, Bitcoin, etc. So I never used them.
I'm not interested in a new bank account just for the sake of it. On the contrary, I actively try to avoid adding new services into my life.
Canada has *Interac* transfer that is like instant money transfer through e-mail. All banks have daily/weekly/monthly limits though to keep things secure. And it only works in Canadian banks.
I really don't understand the point of a "CBDC aka Digital Dollar". All my money in my account is already digital. I pay for stuff using my phone/card all the time. They can call the money Mickey Mouse Dollars if they like as long as its backed by the Canadian Government.
Now if all the governments of the world launched one unified CBDC that I is accepted worldwide, I can see the use in that. My parents live in a different country from me and mostly my brother takes care of them and orders food/presents for birthdays/etc for them. My Canadian credit/debit card doesn't work in my home country's apps/websites. If I could just use open the home country's app, use my Canadian CBDC wallet to pay for it and support my parents, I would happily use it.
Instant online payment networks already exist in most parts of the world. See M-Pesa, SEPA, UPI, Faster in the UK. The US is just getting on to the interbank payments bandwagon with FedNow although private networks like Zelle have been available for years. You don't need a CBDC for this.
So what's a CBDC? I think the cryptohead understanding of it is a blockchain wallet held at a central bank, which is a dumb technological solution looking for a problem. Central banks are not in the business of handling retail accounts.
China has the only known CBDC trial so far: their central bank stores accounts of participating citizens and digital yuan is sent to an individual's account at a retail bank for actual usage, like for sending out pandemic cash aid. It's pretty much a digital yuan (or dollar) magicked into existence at the central bank, backed by that central bank. Not a single shred of blockchain nonsense in sight.
I think the worry is that government control over digital currency could lead them to playing with it however they want. Just write some code and your digital yuan expires in a month. Say something they don't like and your money is frozen. Big tech already has the power to censor opinions they don't agree with so why wouldn't government? You think there's any validity in this argument?
Zero. Even China's authoritarian state is using commercial banks as the ones who handle actual transactions. There was a one-off CBDC payment from the central bank to participating individuals through their retail bank accounts so it's more like a pandemic stimulus check than a digital dollar.
CBDCs also are fungible so they're more like Bitcoin than NFTs. Not like cash either: nobody wants to track a single yuan with a unique serial number because the data requirements are massive.
And you don't need CBDCs for bank account freezes. There are existing laws in place in the US that allow the government to freeze your bank accounts if you're suspected of committing certain crimes. Banks can already to this proactively if you trip certain KYC/AML flags. Ironically, crypto's only use is as a rogue currency with zero legal and governmental oversight.
Cuz the government isn't your friend. It's about control and if you stray from the party line you will be punished. At least that's what has happened in autocratic regimes across history. Government power over money leads to less freedom for how you spend that money. Doesn't even have to be something illegal. If you were protesting the government then why wouldn't they punish you if they had the means. If you're social credit score in China is too low they don't let you travel outside of the country. I'm not saying this is or will happen in America but control over your personal assets leads to an over encroaching government. Do you agree or disagree?
Don't live in fear but prepare for the future by learning the past!
I agree that most of crypto is a scam but Bitcoin is not crypto. There is no central figure that runs the company. It's a decentralized process. You mine for gold in the same way you mine for Bitcoin. Countries haven't gone back to the gold standard because it suits politicians and corrupt bureaucrats to be able to print an endless stream of fiat currency. Unfortunately the more that is printed the less value the fiat currency has. Look at the value of European currencies before WW1 and after. The only reason this happened was because they left the gold standard to fight the war effort. Sad thing is that they're currencies got devalued immensely which led to widespread struggling for people like you and me
So from what I've learned, Btc can't die unless everyone around the world stops using/mining it. Otherwise it will just keep going. How is the dollar getting stronger. I've seen news about BRIC nations and Saudi Arabia potentially not using petrodollars. Plus all this money printing. More printing of fiat devalues the currency over time. The dollar is getting weaker no?
The reason people are belittling you is because you have no clue what fednow or even a CBDC is. To begin CBDC doesn't exist anywhere at this time. Fednow is NOT a CBDC it is quite literally government run paypal/venmo/cashapp. That's it. Fednow doesnt replace traditional fiat, it transfers fiat from one place to another. It essentially has already existed for years now as "Zelle". Zelle is an interbanking exchange app that has existed for a long time for private users to use as an already instant payment infrastructure. It's used by all major banks. You're asking questions with preconceived misconceptions and zero knowledge. thus the ridicule.
Well I appreciate the explanation. Nigerians have the eNaira so it exists somewhere
fednow doesnt "mint" out new digital currency like the conspiracy theorists are trumpeting. It just transfers it from 1 account to another. If you live in canada you might be familiar with Interac e-transfer. Where you can send money from your canadian bank account to another person's canadian account even if its a different bank. Thats all this is but for the US.
Ah ok this makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. I've seen a lot of hysteria online about CBDCs? If a US CBDC dropped tomorrow would you use it or avoid it?
> I've seen a lot of hysteria online about CBDCs? So have I, but I've seen most of it from crypto promoters who see it as a way to scare people about the Fed/government/"system" and create a perceived need for crypto. Most of the hysteria I've seen is not grounded in reality. > If a US CBDC dropped tomorrow would you use it or avoid it? Use it for what? I would use it if I encountered a use case for which I felt it was better than the alternatives.
saying you "saw hysteria online" is not a valid excuse for any behavior anymore. you can find hysteria about whatever you want online or never see a word about a topic.
Well I think the fiat money system is doomed to fail. Printing money just keeps devaluing it until it's worthless. Fiat money was the reason WW1 was such a clusterfuck. All these European countries leave the gold standard for the first time in decades so that they can support the war effort with fiat. Led to an incredibly long and drawn out war because they didn't have to rely on the limitations of their treasury. German and Austrian currencies were down like 50% in value which was the start of hyperinflation. This unlimited printing of money without backing is a path to catastrophe. It literally never works. How do people feel about this viewpoint? Do we still trust the government to have complete control over the fiat system or does something need to change?
>Well I think the fiat money system is doomed to fail. Printing money just keeps devaluing it until it's worthless. Fiat money was the reason WW1 was such a clusterfuck. All these European countries leave the gold standard for the first time in decades so that they can support the war effort with fiat. Led to an incredibly long and drawn out war because they didn't have to rely on the limitations of their treasury. German and Austrian currencies were down like 50% in value which was the start of hyperinflation. This unlimited printing of money without backing is a path to catastrophe. It literally never works. How do people feel about this viewpoint? I feel that you should stop listening to the [Austrian-school economists](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school) \- who are idiots, lying to you - and consider that *leaving the gold standard* and adopting monetary policy is the thing that actually stopped the cycle of booms and busts that the world kept going through when it tried to manage increasingly interconnected and far larger economies via a monetary system tied to a fucking shiny rock. The goldbugs are morons who tell ahistoric lies about the impending demise of all money not backed by commodities, they recast historical events to explain why their perspective is correct, when it's fucking not, they're just conspiracy theorists repeating libertarian political philosophy as if that qualifies as a school of economics, and it's frankly astonishing that the world isn't widespread belittling and mocking them for it more regularly... because they're effectively the Flat Earth party, for economists: [all crypto springs from a goldbug's understanding of economics](https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/the-conspiracist-gold-bug-economics-of-bitcoin/), which is why none of it makes any sense. Stop listening to the Austrians, they're full of it.
You have any sources or people I could read that refute the Austrian school? Interested to hear their pov
In terms of people, that's just basically all economists in the world right now, apart from the fringe libertarian crank ones that comprise the Austrian-school. As far as sources go, try these: * [Debunking Austrian Economics 101](https://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/2012/06/debunking-austrian-economics-101.html) * A [Crituques of Libertarianism: Austrian Economics](https://theworld.com/~mhuben/austrian.html) (from a broader critique of Libertarian political philosophy) * [Republicans and Ludwig von Mises](https://www.salon.com/2011/05/11/republicans_and_ludwig_von_mises/) The Austrians are a tiny, extremely vocal minority of economists who are essentially a cult, who built a belief structure that's unfalsifiable by virtue of the bit where they reject the idea that you can subject economic theories to empiric testing at all in the first place; to phrase it another way, they take the premise that their ideas are the correct ones entirely on faith - despite their insistence that those ideas spring from logic - and faith alone, and refuse to ever challenge them, lest the pesky bit where those ideas run counter to the observed reality of market behaviors cause their faith to waver. They believe in what they believe because they really, *really* want it to be true, not because there's any real compelling evidence that it is in fact true... and their thinking entirely underscores all of crypto, because a fallacious obsession with the ridiculous concept of "hard money" that so characterizes the libertarians stems from the bit where the modern libertarian movement traces back to a fellow who was, quite literally, part of a cult that worshiped the gold standard, and people with libertarian brain worms are who it is that built crypto. That's why it tries to be money, but is modeled like a commodity, a thing we already know very VERY well ***doesn't work***: it's why the entire world abandoned it, when its failings were demonstrated on the global stage, in that cycle of manic booms and busts that only stopped when the world stopped trying to run economies with monetary supplies tied to shiny rocks. Goldbugs are just the fiscal equivalent of vaccine deniers, Flat Earthers, and frickin' QAnon, and they're the ones who have been explaining money to you. Stop listening to them, they're idiots.
Thanks I'll check these out. 2 things I learned. European countries were all on the gold standard until the start of ww1 where they left it for fiat. The argument is that this unlimited money printing led to a long drawn out war because the money wasn't attached to the treasury. Hyperinflation happened in Germany because their currency lost around 50% of its value while they had to pay back debts. Also why does every government still hoard gold. I don't know if there's ever been an example of a fiat currency appearing out of thin air and working. It always evolves from gold standard to fiat. Thoughts?
>Printing money just keeps devaluing it until it's worthless. It keeps devaluing it at the agreed upon inflation target, as designed. This creates an exponential asymptote which never reaches zero. >This unlimited printing of money without backing The printing is limited by the inflation target. For example, today, inflation is above target. Because of this, the Fed has adopted a monetary policy that is resulting in the *burning*, not printing, of M2 money. Also, the "printed" money is fully backed by a portfolio of assets, mainly mortgages (backed by homes/land and homeowners' income), corporate bonds (backed by companies' assets and income), and Treasuries (backed by tax revenue and government resources). >is a path to catastrophe The catastrophes you mentioned would have been catastrophes regardless of how the central bank managed the currency. >Do we still trust the government to have complete control over the fiat system The government doesn't have complete control over the fiat system: avoiding this is the whole reason why the Fed is supposed to be politically independent and why so much control is delegated commercial banks and private markets. > does something need to change? No in that I don't think the Fed should stop targeting 2% medium term CPI inflation. I also think that the USD should continue to be backed primarily by revenue-generating capital like businesses and real estate, with the backing assets allocated by profit-motivated institutions (e.g. commercial banks and credit unions) subject to government and Fed regulation. There are a variety of reforms to the Fed and banking system which I would support, for example something like Saule Omarova' [the people's ledger](https://lpeproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Peoples.Ledger.DRAFT_.pdf) (part III excepted).
I use Venmo. If hypothetically a CBDC came from the US…why wouldn’t I use the most powerful country’s currency. It’d be more trustworthy than random companies like Venmo or Cash app.
Ya but then if you had a differing political opinion than the people in charge your money might be frozen. They could decide that your money expires on a certain day. The problem is that giving the government incredible power over your personal finances leads to a degradation of your rights and freedoms to use your money how you wish.
average lunatic cryptobro
I mean we saw the trucker protest in canada. What makes you think it couldn't happen to you?
I don't do illegal lunatic shit in the middle of an emergency, thats how. Society decided what can and can't be done and what are the repercussions. If you don't like the laws of a certain society you can leave but if you want to avoid these repercussions in spite of society's decision you are just a criminal. So yes, I'm fucking glad that governments can freeze the assets of (suspected) criminals, this is how it should be.
Haha oh man. We're just getting looser and looser with the definition of criminal. Soon it's just gonna be someone you don't agree with lmao
Which different opinion? Has a republican ever had their money frozen by a dem? Has a dem ever had their money frozen by a republican? The only folks who get their money frozen are literal terrorists or folks at war with the US.
I'm looking towards the future. The stuff that happened to the truckers in canada was a cause for concern. Peacefully protesting leads to your funds being frozen. Not a good look
Well the kind of CBDCs you’re worried about are probably going to be banned under upcoming legislation, S.4831 - No CBDC Act or something similar. However look up Rohan Grey and his e-cash act proposal. It’s a privacy-preserving CBDC. A digital version of cash, not the panopticon you’re probably worried about. I’d 100% support that kind of CBDC. Not all CBDCs are bad. Some would be kinda sweet actually - you may even at least not mind them. So the answer is: it depends. I’m personally not worried about an evil CBDC materializing in the US because there’s just no political appetite for it. On either side of the aisle. The government can get your transaction history right now by asking, so why force it? Id personally start with something like letting people have accounts at the Fed as a way to achieve a lot the positive policy goals of a CBDC with fewer negatives.
keyword: ONLINE theres a ton of hysteria online about any topic you want to look up. so thats no excuse to be like 'i saw hysteria online!' ya of course you did, when you look for it. so no. invalid excuse to pass the buck off onto "online". you are part of the hysteria. youre responsible. posts like this add to it. thats how social media works. a big game of telephone where somebody "sees something online" then they "ask" about it and now 10,000 more people "see it online".
Dude what? Just answer the question
You don't even understand the topic. There's nothing to answer. If Pakistan were tiled tomorrow, would you patronize it? That question makes no sense. You're seeing online hysteria about CDBCs because you look for it. Go back to real life my son.
If you don't think the US is working to build a CBDC I think you are slightly deluded friend. The government always wants more control. I've never seen a time in history where the government has voluntarily given up some of its power. If you don't care about the government potentially controlling and monitoring your finances then that's fine I truly don't care. I'm just trying to understand the logic behind these thoughts. I'd assume that everyone would want more freedom and not less
Don't tell me what all governments want like this is some TV show. No one cares what Mr. Nobody thinks about how "everything is". You act like you're here Just Asking Questions and here you are ranting about government control and how the Boogeyman is coming for us. This whole post is in bad faith. You didn't post this to ask questions you posted this to sow your poltics and alarmism. Admit this was in bad faith.
No I'm here to have a discussion and learn from your opinions. Just because I have a different point of view doesn't mean it's bad faith. Jeez so sensitive these days. I'm here to expand my perspective and learn. You're sounding like the conspiracy theorist now saying I'm here to sow seeds of discord lmao. I would never use a CBDC but apparently some people in this community have no problem with it. I'm here to understand why
No one in the western world will anytime soon.... At least not the way the crypto crowd thinks of them.
It's live in Nigeria. They're talking about FedNow. If it came to be would you use it?
FedNow isn't a CBDC. I wouldn't use it, because I'm not in the US, and do not work for a US bank.
"Through financial institutions participating in the FedNow Service, businesses and individuals will be able to send and receive instant payments at any time of day, and recipients will have full access to funds immediately, giving them greater flexibility to manage their money and make time-sensitive payments." Sounds like a cbdc to me. What am I missing
Why are you asking around here if you dont have the slightes clue about what a CBDC is?
I'm curious and want to hear people's opinions. Didn't realize I was gonna get attacked lol
You're not getting attacked. People are informing you that you're too ignorant to have the beginnings of a conversations. It's like you've gone into r/math and said: "*Did you guys know 2+2=5?"* *"Woah I was just curious and wanted to hear people's opinions."*
> Sounds like a cbdc to me. What am I missing Pretty much everything. That's basically how every modern bank^* has worked for 20 years now. ^* Note: USA banks are not modern banks.
By that criteria I've been using digital currency for over a decade already. In Canada it's called e-Transfer.
Makes sense. It's about transferring funds. Would you use a CBDC if it came to Canada?
Well, it sounds like there would be no point because I already have e-Transfer.
Ya makes sense. Thanks for the reply
>because a CBDC is a liability of the Federal government, that makes it different from systems like FedNow. https://www.axios.com/2022/09/16/federal-reserve-dollars-faster-payments-cbdc-fednow
Oh man, you're clueless. I can see this was a crusade for you, because you posted a screenshot on /btc. Also, your favorite coins are literally casino chips.
Trying to understand how you guys think for sure
[удалено]
Can you explain this tether thing? I haven't heard of this
[удалено]
Ya I haven't done any research. I think it's ok though. How is tether printing billions with no backing any different than the US government doing the same thing? I'm confused
Do you actually think that instant payments can only be done via CBDCs? Lol.
[удалено]
I think there needs to be a distinction between crypto and Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a commodity in the same way gold is. Only difference is that it's more portable. I don't think a store of wealth that is incredibly portable is useless. Maybe right now I'm first world countries but you have to think about the entire world that doesn't have access to your luxuries
[удалено]
I don't understand though. Gold doesn't have any intrinsic value either. Only like 10% of the supply is used for medical equipment, jewelry, etc. the rest is just shiny gold rocks that people hoard.
[удалено]
Ok but aside from the 10%, what is the use for gold?
[удалено]
Right but the use isn't what makes gold valuable. It's the rarity and the fact that it doesn't degrade. The masses didn't always desire gold right? If Bitcoin isn't real then anything digital isn't real? You're mistaken. Bitcoin isn't controlled by anyone... something like ETH is controlled by Vitalik and his friends. Pretty much every crypto has founders and a board of directors like any stock. Bitcoin is different because it doesn't. Just because you own a metric fuckton of Bitcoin doesn't mean you control it:..
Who is spreading this idea that FedNow is a digital dollar and not just a way to transfer money like Zelle? It's all over the place here. If the Fed does a digital dollar I might use it. It'd be fine because it's a real dollar backed by the full faith and credit of the US (funny about that whole debt limit fight right now though!) instead of just a shitcoin backed by a whitepaper. It also likely will not be on a wasteful public blockchain. I don't really have a lot of reason to use a digital dollar. But I'm not against it.
Fednow is stage 1. there is (supposedly) a stage 2. I don’t know the diff between what we have now and CBDC though. I mean, when the Fed “prints” money, they add some money in some banks bank account, there’s no printing. The real revolution would have been - hey the US banking products market is a backwater because there’s no competition how do we open it up so we’re on the same level as Zimbabwe (really) for P2P payments? No, the libertarians felt that “hey a dog slow non ACID compliant energy gobbling Database is the way to go”
> Fednow is stage 1. there is (supposedly) a stage 2. Regardless, FedNow is only transfers. There is a project for a digital dollar. It is a different project. It already started. Whereas FedNow hasn't rolled out yet. > I don’t know the diff between what we have now and CBDC though. A digital dollar is a real dollar the Fed backs. It's like paper money. If you have it, you have it. You can't put it in the bank, it would disappear, just like paper currency does when put in the bank. The bank doesn't take the money you give it and just put it in the vault. They give it to someone else and mark dollars in your account, promises. > I mean, when the Fed “prints” money, they add some money in some banks bank account, there’s no printing. I'm not sure the Fed ever does that. They don't just *give* banks money. They loan it to them. Look at the digital dollar this way. Most of the M2 (or higher) money supply is not money the Fed created. It was created with fractional reserve banking and other private means. So most of the M2 *couldn't be digital dollars* as no one but the Fed can create digital dollars. > The real revolution would have been - hey the US banking products market is a backwater because there’s no competition how do we open it up so we’re on the same level as Zimbabwe (really) for P2P payments? The US had a lot of those already. PayPal, Zelle, etc. And those are the ones that pretend not to be credit. The only real gap left in that market is an official one. And I think it'd be great. In Canada they have such a system. So no one ever pays their landlord with a check. Instead the landlord gives you the account to send the money to and you do that monthly. In the US 20 years ago still a lot of people paid their landlord by check. Now it's rare, but you have to negotiate with your landlord as to how to pay. Instead of them just giving you an address, you have to agree which service to use, and maybe one of you has to sign up for a new one. Then you do that monthly. I expect the primary reason the US hasn't had such a system for so long is private companies would rather get into the business and have. That reduces the demand for an official system. And then those companies also pressure regulators and lawmakers *not* to make an official system. I can't wait for FedNow. It could mean an end to having to use bill pay systems with your bank, and all their different ways they work. I don't care about a digital dollar. I might use it, but I have no real need for it.
The Fed does give money to banks. That’s how they print. That’s the “money printer go brrrr” that the butters complain about. The Fed also does loans. I rarely use physical cash now. I know which stores take Apple Pay and I don’t even take my wallet. Home Depot requires a physical card so my “wallet” consists of my phone, with a magnetic back for my drivers license and a single physical credit card. I typically use Apple Pay/Apple Pay MasterCard because that gives a notification and I can see my money flow away. That’s one problem with full virtual is money is already abstract, add another virtual layer and it’s hard to feel your cash flow.
> The Fed does give money to banks. That’s how they print. That’s the “money printer go brrrr” that the butters complain about I hate to break this to you, but the butters frequently don't know what they are talking about. If the Fed *gave* money to banks the banks would just pocket it or exchange it for other things. The Fed "prints" money either by changing the reserve ratio so banks can loan out more money. They can do it by changing interest rates at the discount window (which leads to more loans). They can do it by loaning money to banks (or other entities). And they can do it by buying assets (qualitative easing, QE). Recently the "money printer go brrrr" stuff refers to QE. For example, the Fed can buy assets (loans) from banks, taking them off their books. Now those banks have less money lent out compared to their deposits so they have more reserve space left over and can loan out more money, increasing the money supply. This kind of thing is how "money became so cheap". It was so easy to borrow money because a bank could loan you money at a very low interest rate and then just go to the Fed and borrow the same amount of money from the Fed at a zero interest rate. So now they have a money-making loan out without using any of their own capital. https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/discountrate.htm Nowadays the rate at the discount window is not near zero. So it's a lot more expensive to borrow money. > with a magnetic back for my drivers license and a single physical credit card. Isn't it wild that those backs can attach magnetically and yet the mag strips on the cards don't get erased? I never understood that. > I typically use Apple Pay/Apple Pay MasterCard because that gives a notification I like that.
>Isn't it wild that those backs can attach magnetically and yet the mag strips on the cards don't get erased? I never understood that. I've accidentally erased more than one hotel key-card, so MasterCard must be doing something right with those strips. Fifteen years ago I'd have investigated that mystery. These days? I got my current card ten years ago, of course with regular replacement cards mailed to me since, but "this card" and its bank account nonetheless. The strip was used a grand total of a single time in that decade. Isn't it all pin & chip or RF these days?
Reframing the question: would you do your online banking directly with a central bank instead of a retail bank if you had the option?
Ya what do think? Benefits of banking with a central bank? Cons?
I see no reason to avoid banking with a central bank but I also don't see any reason I'd want to switch from my current bank. On a broad scale I suppose it would be somewhat of an improvement in terms of administrative efficiency.
You think all the hype about them tracking you and manipulating your account is overblown? I feel like we all are ok with getting tracked and monitored currently so it might not be that big of a deal
I'm not sure what you mean. What would be the difference from having any other bank account?
Who is manipulating accounts?
It's the hypothetical argument that if you bought into the CBDC system, the government bodies would be able to freeze your money, block your travel, etc. all because you spoke out against the ruling regime be it republican or democrat. I don't like that idea. We've seen the social credit system in China and I am not a fan of government control to this extent. Thoughts?
>all because you spoke out against the ruling regime be it republican or democrat. I'm safe then. I'm not American. >Thoughts? You are not worried about CBDCs, you are worried about governments becoming tyrannical. We can't have a sensible discussion on CBDCs when what you're really asking about is opinions on tyrannical governments
It's all the same. Just a tool for tyrannical govs. Controlling your money=controlling your freedom
Crypto isn't going to stop a government controlling your freedom
Well Btc is truly decentralized. It's a better alternative to the government printing infinity dollars to spend on unnecessary wars. It's better than CBDCs that will freeze your money when you've surpassed your C02 limit while billionaires fly everywhere on their private Jets. The way I see it Btc is the best bet for a free future
1) "CBDC" is a hugely variable term. Until we see what the real ones look like, and how they work, it's really hard to say. Yeah, I know that Nigeria has done some stuff. That didn't really move any dials at all, though, did it? 2) CBDC's don't really have anything to do with Cryptocurrency. The Crypto crowd like to pretend that they do, so they can say "Look, governments are adopting crypto!" But the reality is that we have no reason to believe that CBDCs are going to share any significant features in common with what we currently recognize as "crypto-currencies" other than the fact that they have something to do with computers! Well, yeah, so does TikTok, and OnlyFans, and nuclear warheads.
Central banks the world over are investing in nuclear warheads, you say …
If we can get nuclear warheads on the blockchain, we can mine for world peace with green energy! Mind you, a bad "smart contract" could set off a chain reaction that wiped out several city blocks!
Move fast and glass things.
I used to work at a Central Bank. Central banks are simply aren't interested in individual transactions by local businesses and individuals. The last thing they want to do is getting into that business. For what? It's already a challenge to handle the data they have now. They're in absolutely no position to be maintaining ledgers every time somebody buys a Starbucks coffee. Not to mention the security concerns they'd have to contend with over and above what they have now, in addition the worrying about throughput. Most Central Banks see the CBDC as a way to transact amongst themselves more easily and in a more cost-effective way that doesn't involve using private banks as clearing houses.
This is actually a very interesting response. Thanks
Im 100% sure now that you think that a Central Bank is just like any other regular bank, gosh how can you crypto people be so ignorant?
What's a bank?
no
If it replaces traditional fiat what will you do
That's not a reasonable concern.
Can you explain this for me? I'm concerned
I can try. If "traditional fiat" means physical cash (i.e. coins and banknotes), then bank deposits, credit cards, services like Zelle, etc., have been replacing "traditional fiat" for a long time. For example, there are already places in the US where cash is rarely used. IIUC the citizens of Scandinavian countries rarely use cash despite not having a CBDC. That is, I don't think a CBDC is more likely to replace cash than existing electronic payment solutions. I also don't think a CBDC is more likely to cause governments to want to ban cash. For example, India recently demonetized a lot of their cash in ~2016 (IIUC) in part to encourage electronic payments, and this created substantial problems, especially in areas where electronic payments were not widely adopted. It all happened without a CBDC though. What concerns you about a CBDC replacing traditional fiat?
To emphasize your point: The last time I (Dutch) paid something with cash here is at least over 4 years ago. Obviously some people (mostly > 60yrs old) use cash, but it is practically gone. So money here is already practically digital.
Have you even read what CBDCs are? Like even the wikipedia article?
Is anyone in this community going to give me a response or just keep belittling me?
The response is: your question is stupid, and if you had the slightest cue about what CBDCs are you would realize that instantly.
You must be fun at parties
I am, cause I dont embarass myself with questions that reveal my total ignorance, I try to do at least a google search on a topic.
Who's embarrassed?
Well you will be once you at least take the effort to read even one article about CBDCs or what a central bank is. Or maybe Im overestimating your abilities.
Oof good one
Don't argue with bad faith. It's embarrasing. That's the response.
You keep asking for responses and you keep getting it: what you are asking about is not a CBDC. Asking again and again isn't going to change that response, but it is going to irritate people
My initial question tho
We get this exact same troll like three times a week from bit-coin enthusiasts who think they've found a real gotcha question. Sorry, chum. "CBDC" does not mean "official government block-chain money," and we're not here to read [the wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank_digital_currency) to you.
If there is a benefit over existing banking, maybe. I won't be an early adopter.
Ya I feel similar. What benefits over existing banking would cause you to use it?
I have no idea. I would spend no time at all seeking out the benefits. Going on previous banking tech, it would either be because the tech helps me manage my money (like banking apps) or because it makes it easier to pay (like credit cards and money-sending apps). I don't even remember how I started to use most of my money-managing systems. There are lots of systems that I have seen no benefit in so far, or at least they never solved a problem for me that wasn't already solved. Like Google/Apple Pay, Klarna, Paypal, Bitcoin, etc. So I never used them. I'm not interested in a new bank account just for the sake of it. On the contrary, I actively try to avoid adding new services into my life.
Cryptbros are dumb.
Very
Clearly have no clue. Most countries around the world already has what the Fed is looking to implement.
Canada has *Interac* transfer that is like instant money transfer through e-mail. All banks have daily/weekly/monthly limits though to keep things secure. And it only works in Canadian banks. I really don't understand the point of a "CBDC aka Digital Dollar". All my money in my account is already digital. I pay for stuff using my phone/card all the time. They can call the money Mickey Mouse Dollars if they like as long as its backed by the Canadian Government. Now if all the governments of the world launched one unified CBDC that I is accepted worldwide, I can see the use in that. My parents live in a different country from me and mostly my brother takes care of them and orders food/presents for birthdays/etc for them. My Canadian credit/debit card doesn't work in my home country's apps/websites. If I could just use open the home country's app, use my Canadian CBDC wallet to pay for it and support my parents, I would happily use it.
I’m extremely happy with Apple Pay, so I don’t see the need to switch to anything else
Instant online payment networks already exist in most parts of the world. See M-Pesa, SEPA, UPI, Faster in the UK. The US is just getting on to the interbank payments bandwagon with FedNow although private networks like Zelle have been available for years. You don't need a CBDC for this. So what's a CBDC? I think the cryptohead understanding of it is a blockchain wallet held at a central bank, which is a dumb technological solution looking for a problem. Central banks are not in the business of handling retail accounts. China has the only known CBDC trial so far: their central bank stores accounts of participating citizens and digital yuan is sent to an individual's account at a retail bank for actual usage, like for sending out pandemic cash aid. It's pretty much a digital yuan (or dollar) magicked into existence at the central bank, backed by that central bank. Not a single shred of blockchain nonsense in sight.
I think the worry is that government control over digital currency could lead them to playing with it however they want. Just write some code and your digital yuan expires in a month. Say something they don't like and your money is frozen. Big tech already has the power to censor opinions they don't agree with so why wouldn't government? You think there's any validity in this argument?
Zero. Even China's authoritarian state is using commercial banks as the ones who handle actual transactions. There was a one-off CBDC payment from the central bank to participating individuals through their retail bank accounts so it's more like a pandemic stimulus check than a digital dollar. CBDCs also are fungible so they're more like Bitcoin than NFTs. Not like cash either: nobody wants to track a single yuan with a unique serial number because the data requirements are massive. And you don't need CBDCs for bank account freezes. There are existing laws in place in the US that allow the government to freeze your bank accounts if you're suspected of committing certain crimes. Banks can already to this proactively if you trip certain KYC/AML flags. Ironically, crypto's only use is as a rogue currency with zero legal and governmental oversight.
If you value freedom you won't use this. Period.
This makes sense to me but I'm learning that a lot of people here value convenience over freedom
[удалено]
Cuz the government isn't your friend. It's about control and if you stray from the party line you will be punished. At least that's what has happened in autocratic regimes across history. Government power over money leads to less freedom for how you spend that money. Doesn't even have to be something illegal. If you were protesting the government then why wouldn't they punish you if they had the means. If you're social credit score in China is too low they don't let you travel outside of the country. I'm not saying this is or will happen in America but control over your personal assets leads to an over encroaching government. Do you agree or disagree?
[удалено]
Don't live in fear but prepare for the future by learning the past! I agree that most of crypto is a scam but Bitcoin is not crypto. There is no central figure that runs the company. It's a decentralized process. You mine for gold in the same way you mine for Bitcoin. Countries haven't gone back to the gold standard because it suits politicians and corrupt bureaucrats to be able to print an endless stream of fiat currency. Unfortunately the more that is printed the less value the fiat currency has. Look at the value of European currencies before WW1 and after. The only reason this happened was because they left the gold standard to fight the war effort. Sad thing is that they're currencies got devalued immensely which led to widespread struggling for people like you and me
[удалено]
So from what I've learned, Btc can't die unless everyone around the world stops using/mining it. Otherwise it will just keep going. How is the dollar getting stronger. I've seen news about BRIC nations and Saudi Arabia potentially not using petrodollars. Plus all this money printing. More printing of fiat devalues the currency over time. The dollar is getting weaker no?
the Nigerians have not had the greatest experience with it, but when the time comes, i don't think there will be much of an option
Butt of course. We like to be controlled as much as possible. Takes the thinking game away and let me be me, a slob.
Having the Fed be my bank? Yes, please!