It should be stable with respect to its underlying asset, that is to say, the American dollar. It is a stablecoin whose value is pegged to the dollar, and as long as this peg is maintained, it is rightfully considered stable regardless of how much the dollar itself depreciates. Therefore, you can't say that USDT will be losing "value" along with the dollar. Fundamentally, you are implicitly trying to redefine the idea of a stablecoin but that only destroys it
That is what I am talking about. It s definitely a stable coin in the sense that unless tether as a company bankrupts or runs away with our money (which is a possibility that very few people considered unfortunately) 1 usdt will always worth 1 usd and that is the stable part people talk about.
However I do not like the word stable in this sense since it makes people think that the more usdt you have the richer you will get and that is not the word for rich neither, if you are not beating inflation even if you have more dollars that means you didn't get richer. If I buy a house worth 100k dollars today and in 5 years that house worths 150k while some other guy kept his usdt and his 100k became 120k, he "lost" money while he was still stable and that is what I am talking about
You are only further confusing matters
Stable in stablecoin has a very specific
and established meaning. It means a peg and being stable means being able to keep or maintain this peg. You, on the other hand, are at first implicitly and then openly attributing a totally different meaning like being able to beat, or stay on par with, inflation. For this, there already exists a term which pretty much speaks for itself and which is inflation-protected, say, inflation-protected bonds and, hypothetically, inflation-protected coins
