Stable coin - a threat to the international monetary system and bitcoin

[Mandoy]

https://www.bis.org/cpmi/publ/d187.htm

The report of Bank of International Settlements or BIS have found out some alarming negative impacts of the stable coin towards  competition policy, financial stability, monetary policy and the international monetary system.

But this issues were not seen as a hindrance but a challenge to overcome thus a meeting with the stablecoin developers and the public sector authorities were called to tackle solutions to such challenges.

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin. If they will be successful then bitcoin will be left behind and will only be viewed as a tradable cryptocurrency and can no longer be used as a means of payment due to the presence of stablecoins.

[mk4]

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin. If they will be successful then bitcoin will be left behind and will only be viewed as a tradable cryptocurrency and can no longer be used as a means of payment due to the presence of stablecoins.

Bitcoin and stablecoins aren't even in a competition. They have their own purposes. Sure stablecoins are "stable" in price, but it's not a non-correlated asset like bitcoin and gold are; which is one of the main advantages of bitcoin- being unprintable in mass amounts like the fed does with fiat. Stablecoins just makes sense right now because the economy is currently fine in the US.

In the end, bitcoin > stablecoins > bank fiat

[pooya87]

if a stable coin is truly backed by fiat 1:1 there is no threat to anything or anyone. it is going to be working just like other online payment processors such as PayPal, if you think about it PayPal is also a "stable coin" without the blockchain part! the only fear they have which they are calling "threat" is lack of regulations and compliance with baking laws.

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin.

first of all this is not about "stable coins" it is mostly about Libra!
secondly it is not going to "mainstream", this is just drama.
and finally you are missing the most important difference: centralization

[Argoo]

This is the latest report of the G7 countries working group and the Bank for International Settlements regarding stable coins and bitcoins. In general, for the first time I see such a negative assessment regarding stable coins, including bitcoins. It seems that banks are concerned about the increasing role of stable coins in financial relations. Most likely, this is just the subjective opinion of the members of this group.

[joniboini]

It seems that banks are concerned about the increasing role of stable coins in financial relations.

If they're worried, one of the reasons is probably because there are lots of stablecoin 'supplier'. That would bring you another question, is the fiat that's backing the coins real or fake? Tether has been accused of manipulating their data, which is why a bank would probably do it themselves to prevent such thing from happening, or to do that on their own.

And btw, have you read the report till the end?

[Darker45]

first of all this is not about "stable coins" it is mostly about Libra!

It is also my hunch that if not with this Libra Project, stable coins are not going to become the talk among international banks, their associations and their fronts-- the governments. But I am also thinking that due to this celebrated project and the "threat" that it accordingly brings to them and the old traditional system they are aggressively keeping, they are now calling for a digital currency of their own.^[1] This may not really be progress at all but this is a sign of them following the trend set by cryptocurrency. This might be the beginning of something interesting.

[1] https://www.coindesk.com/us-congressmen-ask-fed-to-consider-developing-national-digital-currency

~snip~

Nobody's threatened. Bitcoin is not and will never be threatened by any altcoin, especially by those that are merely representing fiat.

[Artemis3]

The report of Bank of International Settlements or BIS have found out some alarming negative impacts of the stable coin towards  competition policy, financial stability, monetary policy and the international monetary system.

But this issues were not seen as a hindrance but a challenge to overcome thus a meeting with the stablecoin developers and the public sector authorities were called to tackle solutions to such challenges.

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin. If they will be successful then bitcoin will be left behind and will only be viewed as a tradable cryptocurrency and can no longer be used as a means of payment due to the presence of stablecoins.

You are delusional.

Stablecoins? Really? You have not the slightest idea what you are saying. "Stablecoins" are backed in vapor, a bomb waiting to detonate. Why? Because like State backed Fiat, it depends on a (human) promise, by whoever manage them, and not code, like Bitcoin. Therefore, it takes a human mistake, or intention for it to break into pieces, just like fiat.

"Stablecoins" are as bad (if not more) than conventional State backed fiats. You don't get it, deluded by the apparent idea that all coins should magically be pegged to each other, because you are too lazy to deal with fluctuations (free market). But, you fail to realize that your fantasy can and will break when you least expect it, and by then it will be too late. Yes, just like fiat.

Furthermore, "stablecoins" practice fractional reserve. If you don't even know what that is, you should abstain from making these absurd claims.

Bitcoin has nothing to worry about these "stablecoins", they are but a passing fad, perhaps a tool to use in exchanges by traders at most. No one will give up their USD for fakeUSD "we promise to peg it to USD" tokens that don't even have their own blockchain.

If those altcoins are able to mess a bit the fiats, so be it. Bitcoin doesn't care, its following its code not depending on the whims of individuals or institutions.

All fiats are inflationary and these are pegged to them, therefore they are also all inflationary. The worst of both worlds, the benefits of neither.

[JeromeTash]

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin. If they will be successful then bitcoin will be left behind and will only be viewed as a tradable cryptocurrency and can no longer be used as a means of payment due to the presence of stablecoins.

I don't think it's about main streaming them. Perhaps government is looking for a way of controlling the stablecoins which is not vision of bitcoin and other blockchain assets which is decentralizations.

I still don't think any stablecoin can be more popular than bitcoin. People who are running away from centralization will always go for bitcoin.

[AniviaBtc]

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin. If they will be successful then bitcoin will be left behind and will only be viewed as a tradable cryptocurrency and can no longer be used as a means of payment due to the presence of stablecoins.

Bitcoin and stablecoins aren't even in a competition. They have their own purposes. Sure stablecoins are "stable" in price, but it's not a non-correlated asset like bitcoin and gold are; which is one of the main advantages of bitcoin- being unprintable in mass amounts like the fed does with fiat. Stablecoins just makes sense right now because the economy is currently fine in the US.

In the end, bitcoin > stablecoins > bank fiat

I agree, they have different purposes. Stable coins is much needed in transactions to gain assurance and quality. But the bitcoin is much more faster and easy to use in transactions. It is unprintable and can send digitally without any conflict. So whenever you've given a chance to choose the platform in your transactions, always remember that bitcoin is much easier and faster.

[Coin_trader]

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin. If they will be successful then bitcoin will be left behind and will only be viewed as a tradable cryptocurrency and can no longer be used as a means of payment due to the presence of stablecoins.

First of all. Being volatile of Bitcoin is the reason why regulators is against it since it involves great risk for investors. Stable coin is the defense of fiat backer group to abolish bitcoin in the future. But I highly doubt that bitcoin will left behind. Bitcoin already show the potential to have a tremoundous profit for investors and people will never be satisfied for stable coin and will look for something to risk and have a huge profit. In my opinion. Stable coin will just be the way for institutional investors to enter in crypto then buy Bitcoin.

[peter0425]

They seems to be affected lol 😂,are the banks is the most concerned about this?
 But I don’t see any competition about bitcoin and stable coin I think this is just being complicated by banks and other investors that hated or don’t believe in cryptocurrency that’s why it’s being called out but no related at all IMO

[mk4]

I agree, they have different purposes. Stable coins is much needed in transactions to gain assurance and quality. But the bitcoin is much more faster and easy to use in transactions. It is unprintable and can send digitally without any conflict. So whenever you've given a chance to choose the platform in your transactions, always remember that bitcoin is much easier and faster.

I mostly agree, but bitcoin isn't necessarily faster(not taking into consideration lightning). With an equal fee in the ethereum network(in USD), ETH can be faster though it completely depends on how congested the mempools of both blockchains are. But yea, bitcoin > stablecoins for sure.

[Hoyt5W]

The price of Bitcoin is now zooming up to the stratosphere, making it either a huge speculative bubble or its acceptance as a real currency.

[ChrisPop]

This is where an analogy between Gold-Fiat and Bitcoin-Stablecoins would be right. Stablecoins are nothing than another try to "digitalize" the fiat currency, but the problems still remain: it is an inflationary currency, probably controlled by a central entity aka governments, etc. So in conclusion what are we really doing here? Trading one bad asset for a somehow better one? - No, thank you. I prefer Bitcoin.

[7788bitcoin]

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin. If they will be successful then bitcoin will be left behind and will only be viewed as a tradable cryptocurrency and can no longer be used as a means of payment due to the presence of stablecoins.

The problem here is that will the authorities will allow these stable coins to be regulated as we all know what is going with Libra when they announced their version of stable coin. Bitcoin is a decentralized currency and we need a regulated stable coin to hold our money and i cannot find any coins that can be trusted and hence i usually convert them to USD or EUR depending on the exchange, the banking sector will put pressure on the authorities as they will loose a lot of business if they allow stable currencies being regulated.

[Leonardo7]

Even if the stablecoins are mainstreamed, bitcoin will still be heavily relevant and well traded. Stablecoins are majorly for payment and holding of fund against a volatile market, but bitcoin serves as a better store of value against inflation. Because of bitcoin volatility, it will be more traded and relevant than stablecoins. Traders stand to gain more from bitcoin than stablecoins.

[Kyraishi]

https://www.bis.org/cpmi/publ/d187.htm

The report of Bank of International Settlements or BIS have found out some alarming negative impacts of the stable coin towards  competition policy, financial stability, monetary policy and the international monetary system.

But this issues were not seen as a hindrance but a challenge to overcome thus a meeting with the stablecoin developers and the public sector authorities were called to tackle solutions to such challenges.

Somehow it is annoying to see that stablecoins will be the first to be mainstreamed rather than bitcoin. If they will be successful then bitcoin will be left behind and will only be viewed as a tradable cryptocurrency and can no longer be used as a means of payment due to the presence of stablecoins.

It's not that surpising to be honest - think to yourself, would the government rather promote a decentralized crypto-currency that they would never be able to control, or should they accept and try and work on a stable option that would likely be able to be controlled by them? It sucks, but the second option is the only option the government will ever pick.

I think there are obviously negative impacts we see from stablecoins, they don't really provide anything new to the crypto-sphere and they aren't going to change the world like bitcoin is, just more incorporate blockchain technologies.

Unfortunately, this is the best we can do and we have to settle for small adoption before Bitcoin adoption can be focused on - be happy this is happening, and it might lead to bigger things in the future.

[Red-Apple]

it is easy to figure out how false this is. have you ever used a stable coin, or do you know anybody who uses these stable coins for anything EXCEPT trading on exchanges?
you see, they are useless if altcoin day trading wasn't a thing and if altcoin exchanges were capable of adding fiat deposits without needing their users to jump through hoops. it is something that will change in the near future and these stable coins will lose their only usage and die.

[EdvinZ]

If cryptocurrency can really become a means for everyday settlements, it is possible only with its stable rate. This role is best suited just stable coins. I think Bitcoin with its high price volatility is perceived by people as a valuable asset in which you can invest for profit, but not as a means for daily payments for goods and services. I think stable coins and Bitcoin have completely different tasks. And for Bitcoin to be considered as a coin for everyday use, its rate must become stable.  

[Ucy]

Stablecoin has a unique purpose— its main purpose is to protect traders from crypto volatility. I don't see why they can't exist side by side with Bitcoin/cryptocurrencies. Stablecoins are pegged to fiat currencies, especially dollar. They depend on the centralized value of fiat. Bitcoin and other Cryptocurrencies are independent of fiat.