What do people think about CBDC?

[zasad@]

https://decrypt.co/83124/edward-snowden-cbdcs-are-cryptofascist-currencies-that-could-casually-annihilate-savings
Edward Snowden: CBDCs Are 'Cryptofascist Currencies' That Could 'Casually Annihilate' Savings
"If the American economy were in dire straits, the Fed might impose a negative interest rate on people’s savings, forcing us to spend.

Former whistleblower Edward Snowden responded on Twitter to an article by Cornell political economist Dr. Eswar Prasad.
Dr. Prasad hypothesized a scenario where the US government could impose a negative interest rate and withdraw money directly from people’s savings.
Snowden followed up his tweet with a blog post outlining his concerns in greater detail that people could lose their monetary autonomy."

[fiulpro]

The probelm I have with central bank digital currencies are that they are just extension of fiat are this point, security is something that would be improved hands down and I do think that the government needs to use blockchain technology there, but at the same time they would definitely try and control the existing digital currencies as well, example bitcoins, Altcoins etc, that could be detrimental for the whole situation as well.

https://decrypt.co/83124/edward-snowden-cbdcs-are-cryptofascist-currencies-that-could-casually-annihilate-savings
Edward Snowden: CBDCs Are 'Cryptofascist Currencies' That Could 'Casually Annihilate' Savings
"If the American economy were in dire straits, the Fed might impose a negative interest rate on people’s savings, forcing us to spend.

Former whistleblower Edward Snowden responded on Twitter to an article by Cornell political economist Dr. Eswar Prasad.
Dr. Prasad hypothesized a scenario where the US government could impose a negative interest rate and withdraw money directly from people’s savings.
Snowden followed up his tweet with a blog post outlining his concerns in greater detail that people could lose their monetary autonomy."

Negative interest rate ?
Withdrawing money from people's savings??
This is something where cryptocurrencies could be useful, if something like that is happening then they have to move from the governmental controlled currencies and actually invest their money somewhere where the government cannot control. I do not think this would happen at this point because this would defiantly flip the whole system out of place.

[avikz]

As noted by the OMFIF report the main activities to pursue a large-scale CBDC, closely followed by the answer, lie in improving speed and cost effectiveness. It can also help overcome existing system limitations, especially in terms of system security and resilience. A large scale CBDC can reduce operational risks and operating costs due to capacity building as multiple major assets become tokenized and recorded on scatter boards.

I wonder if a lot of people are interested in it here? But now I am seeing a lot of the central banks of the countries announcing that they will develop CBDC in the near future. Now, personally, I think the leader in this field is China, could this be another race on the cypto front between the USA and China.

Show me your view on a possible upcoming trend.....

CBDCs are just like fiat currency but it also gives the government a number of advantages over fiat. The main advantage is surveillance over their citizens. Every single transaction is trackable, black money hoarders will be effectively discouraged, Money launderers will see new challenges to overcome, can effectively fight counterfeit fiat notes etc. So there are many benefits for the government.

China is doing a pilot but other countries will be quick enough to implement this CBDC. Slowly fiat will be abolished from the system which will save billions of dollar for the government to maintain a printing infrastructure and transportation of the same. This is going to be the future besides cryptos.

[terrorJR]

The probelm I have with central bank digital currencies are that they are just extension of fiat are this point, security is something that would be improved hands down and I do think that the government needs to use blockchain technology there, but at the same time they would definitely try and control the existing digital currencies as well, example bitcoins, Altcoins etc, that could be detrimental for the whole situation as well.

Indirectly, the government's aim seems to be in that direction. maybe the reason for this cdbc apart from being an option when they can't control crypto and with that the government wants to use this as a counter to a similar system but in a different way.
because what you say is true, CDBC actually can be said that fiat with the latest upgrade with almost the same system but used in a different way

[DooMAD]

Edward Snowden: CBDCs Are 'Cryptofascist Currencies' That Could 'Casually Annihilate' Savings
"If the American economy were in dire straits, the Fed might impose a negative interest rate on people’s savings, forcing us to spend.

They can do that already, though.  That's not the threat.  It's the surveillance and being able to block transactions to anything they don't approve of.  You can pretty much guarantee you wouldn't be able to donate to something like Wikileaks using a CBDC.

[Mahanton]

The probelm I have with central bank digital currencies are that they are just extension of fiat are this point, security is something that would be improved hands down and I do think that the government needs to use blockchain technology there, but at the same time they would definitely try and control the existing digital currencies as well, example bitcoins, Altcoins etc, that could be detrimental for the whole situation as well.

Indirectly, the government's aim seems to be in that direction. maybe the reason for this cdbc apart from being an option when they can't control crypto and with that the government wants to use this as a counter to a similar system but in a different way.
because what you say is true, CDBC actually can be said that fiat with the latest upgrade with almost the same system but used in a different way

CBDC's is no different with digital fiat and as long its centralized then its just understandable or just using up your common sense would really be enough for you to tell that theres no much difference.
Its just understandable that government would stick out on something which can be controlled and would totally get rid or avoid on things which cant be controlled.
Sooner or later we would really be seeing CBDC's in the future because government cant just sit out and see for decentralized crypto to dominate.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Edward Snowden: CBDCs Are 'Cryptofascist Currencies' That Could 'Casually Annihilate' Savings
"If the American economy were in dire straits, the Fed might impose a negative interest rate on people’s savings, forcing us to spend.

I was wondering why this thread got bumped, but it's for a good reason and I'm glad you posted the link to that article.

I've not been paying much attention to what governments are doing in terms of creating their own cryptocurrencies, mainly because I don't think I'll ever see one created in the US during my lifetime, but the topic does interest me--and I tend to agree with Snowden about the negative effects they could create.  Any country that made a CBDC their legal tender would be completely stripping its citizens of their privacy, but more importantly their control over their own money (assuming the CBDC didn't exist alongside physical currency).  

Aren't you all glad bitcoin got created first, before banks and the governments they're in bed with thought of cryptocurrency first?  And anyway, anything that gets invented or discovered will inevitably wind up being a tool used by politicians to exercise control over people.  Nuclear bombs, the internet, vaccines, you name it.  I can't even begin to imagine what the world is going to look like 100 years from nwo now.

[terrorJR]

The probelm I have with central bank digital currencies are that they are just extension of fiat are this point, security is something that would be improved hands down and I do think that the government needs to use blockchain technology there, but at the same time they would definitely try and control the existing digital currencies as well, example bitcoins, Altcoins etc, that could be detrimental for the whole situation as well.

Indirectly, the government's aim seems to be in that direction. maybe the reason for this cdbc apart from being an option when they can't control crypto and with that the government wants to use this as a counter to a similar system but in a different way.
because what you say is true, CDBC actually can be said that fiat with the latest upgrade with almost the same system but used in a different way

CBDC's is no different with digital fiat and as long its centralized then its just understandable or just using up your common sense would really be enough for you to tell that theres no much difference.
Its just understandable that government would stick out on something which can be controlled and would totally get rid or avoid on things which cant be controlled.
Sooner or later we would really be seeing CBDC's in the future because government cant just sit out and see for decentralized crypto to dominate.

therefore they make a comparison as if this cdbc is different but in the end everyone knows that they are the same as fiat but with newer upgrades and the only difference between them is the name.
the role of the government is quite clear in this case, the first is that they want to control it but it doesn't work, after that they start to get around by banning it, and it doesn't seem to work either so then inevitably they have to make a match as if it looks better than crypto.

[Fatunad]

The probelm I have with central bank digital currencies are that they are just extension of fiat are this point, security is something that would be improved hands down and I do think that the government needs to use blockchain technology there, but at the same time they would definitely try and control the existing digital currencies as well, example bitcoins, Altcoins etc, that could be detrimental for the whole situation as well.

Indirectly, the government's aim seems to be in that direction. maybe the reason for this cdbc apart from being an option when they can't control crypto and with that the government wants to use this as a counter to a similar system but in a different way.
because what you say is true, CDBC actually can be said that fiat with the latest upgrade with almost the same system but used in a different way

CBDC's is no different with digital fiat and as long its centralized then its just understandable or just using up your common sense would really be enough for you to tell that theres no much difference.
Its just understandable that government would stick out on something which can be controlled and would totally get rid or avoid on things which cant be controlled.
Sooner or later we would really be seeing CBDC's in the future because government cant just sit out and see for decentralized crypto to dominate.

therefore they make a comparison as if this cdbc is different but in the end everyone knows that they are the same as fiat but with newer upgrades and the only difference between them is the name.
the role of the government is quite clear in this case, the first is that they want to control it but it doesn't work, after that they start to get around by banning it, and it doesn't seem to work either so then inevitably they have to make a match as if it looks better than crypto.

How do you consider out on talking about newer upgrades? For sure you are pertaining about on the tech behind applied on CBDC but in overall functionality then they do really just behaved on the same way.
Its heavily centralized and function out similar to fiat itself but in the form of digital aspect.Honestly we've been using digital transactions for a while and it wouldnt really be too far off to compare
in between both centralized things and thats why government do really much prefer these things than with crypto which is totally uncontrollable.

[cafucafucafu]

I think that they are the complete wrong use of blockchain technology.

What CBDCs mean is essentially more control for the government over your day to day spending activities.

They'll be able to track your spending on an immutable ledger, decide to freeze your money at any moment with a click of a button, and debase the currency supply in a heartbeat.

[witcher_sense]

Aren't you all glad bitcoin got created first, before banks and the governments they're in bed with thought of cryptocurrency first?  And anyway, anything that gets invented or discovered will inevitably wind up being a tool used by politicians to exercise control over people.  Nuclear bombs, the internet, vaccines, you name it.  I can't even begin to imagine what the world is going to look like 100 years from nwo now.

If bitcoin hadn't been created first, governments wouldn't have had a worthy opponent to compete with, the idea to create their own version of cryptocurrency wouldn't have crossed their minds. Before bitcoin was created, people had no choice but to use government currency in their everyday transactions. The usage of unapproved currencies was impossible because those were either physical, which means they were easy to confiscate, or virtual, issued by a single party, which means it was trivial for governments to shut down them. There was nothing to compete with, central banks were enjoying their privilege to print money. Until bitcoin happened. Given that bitcoin is hard to confiscate and impossible to shut down, central banks feel they are losing their monopoly on money printing. They now have to compete with bitcoin, they have no choice but try to prolong their existence by creating their own version of bitcoin.

[SquallLeonhart]

The usage of unapproved currencies was impossible because those were either physical, which means they were easy to confiscate, or virtual, issued by a single party, which means it was trivial for governments to shut down them. There was nothing to compete with, central banks were enjoying their privilege to print money. Until bitcoin happened. Given that bitcoin is hard to confiscate and impossible to shut down, central banks feel they are losing their monopoly on money printing. They now have to compete with bitcoin, they have no choice but try to prolong their existence by creating their own version of bitcoin.

Well, that's how innovations work. If youtube wasn't created, then we wouldn't have other netflix type of places neither, but that doesn't make one better than the other, we love them both, I mean I do love them both at least. As long as government sees crypto and thinks that it is a good thing and they want to be a part of it then I am totally fine with it. Let them come and let them participate in our magnificent crypto world.

I personally do love a challenge as well, they will try to not make crypto as cool as it is right now and try to promote their own thing to make as much money as they could, which they will eventually fail, but at least that challenge will be good for us.

[timerland]

I think that it's absolute BS but at the same time it's inevitable.

As long as crypto makes progress, blockchain technology will also be harvested to do some stuff that is less than desirable.

CBDCs is definitely one of these things given that it is pretty much fiat v2.0 which is entirely what bitcoin is trying to eliminate in the first place. But good money will drive out bad money, don't worry about that.

[teosanru]

As noted by the OMFIF report the main activities to pursue a large-scale CBDC, closely followed by the answer, lie in improving speed and cost effectiveness. It can also help overcome existing system limitations, especially in terms of system security and resilience. A large scale CBDC can reduce operational risks and operating costs due to capacity building as multiple major assets become tokenized and recorded on scatter boards.

I wonder if a lot of people are interested in it here? But now I am seeing a lot of the central banks of the countries announcing that they will develop CBDC in the near future. Now, personally, I think the leader in this field is China, could this be another race on the cypto front between the USA and China.

Show me your view on a possible upcoming trend.....

Definitely yes, with more and more countries focusing on their financial inclusion as well as on digitizing their economies, nothing other than CDBCs can provide them with the required level of security, also this will be a great way of showcasing for these countries that they are accepting cryptocurrencies but all you have to do is use our own CDBC which too is a cryptocurrency, the race has already started and seems like China will win it because it started way ahead of others but the implementation of such a system would still be havoc, personally I don't think so highly of CDBC, because I know the governments, they will just give fiats wrapped in an all-new box, they will still add some functionality to control the money supply which means these currencies would once again be inflationary and not deflationary.

[Quickseller]

What do people think about CBDC?

Bitmex research published research on a central bank issued digital coin last March.

A CBDC is a stable coin issued by the country's central bank that the public can use. When you deposit a dollar into your bank account, you are trusting both the bank and the central bank. You are trusting the former to return your deposit, and are trusting the latter because your bank keeps its reserves at the central bank. Currently it is not possible for a member of the general public to open an account at a central bank. If a central bank starts to issue a CBDC available to the public, the central bank would effectively be putting all the banks in the county out of business, as there would be no reason to deposit your money at the bank when you can just use the CBDC.

A CBDC will make it so banks can no longer lend, which will lead to deflation as money leaves the banking system.

[DOH!]

I think CBDC is a government cliché and also represents blockchain as the future as it has been admitted.  CBDCs will reflect market attitudes and will largely affect stablecoins, so I think we will have many major changes in value before CBDCs can be released.

[witcher_sense]

Well, that's how innovations work. If youtube wasn't created, then we wouldn't have other netflix type of places neither, but that doesn't make one better than the other, we love them both, I mean I do love them both at least. As long as government sees crypto and thinks that it is a good thing and they want to be a part of it then I am totally fine with it. Let them come and let them participate in our magnificent crypto world.

I personally do love a challenge as well, they will try to not make crypto as cool as it is right now and try to promote their own thing to make as much money as they could, which they will eventually fail, but at least that challenge will be good for us.

The competition between market players, who are of equal rights and opportunities, is what can be considered a key feature of a free market. Such a market is healthy and natural. As you said, we are witnessing that state of affairs when looking at how tech companies are trying to improve the services they offer to attract more users and gain market share. However, when it comes to money, we don't see any competition. Money printing is monopolized by the governments and central banks, private issuance is strictly prohibited. Given such conditions it is becoming evident that the rights and opportunities of the players are not equal, the government is more equal than others. If we had a free market for money, the government would undoubtedly lose because their product - paper money, is nothing more but paper, which is not very suitable for the role of money. The digital version of paper money is even worse because not only will it have the same characteristics paper money has but also it will allow governments and cdntral banks to gain even more power.

[jrrsparkles]

I think CBDC is a government cliché and also represents blockchain as the future as it has been admitted.  CBDCs will reflect market attitudes and will largely affect stablecoins, so I think we will have many major changes in value before CBDCs can be released.

CBDC are yet to be successful because I don't know how government is going to adapt the changes meanwhile stable coins and other cryptos are working independently so government will try to stop the adoption of cryptocurrencies by restricting cryptocurrency exchanges and other services then they will slowly enforce the people to use cbdc but it will take atleast a decade for the complete roll out.

[worle1bm]

Aren't you all glad bitcoin got created first, before banks and the governments they're in bed with thought of cryptocurrency first?  And anyway, anything that gets invented or discovered will inevitably wind up being a tool used by politicians to exercise control over people.  Nuclear bombs, the internet, vaccines, you name it.  I can't even begin to imagine what the world is going to look like 100 years from nwo now.

If we don't have bitcoin Today we would still be living in fake illusions that fiat and Governments are doing great job because we will not be having any alternative to them but now with bitcoin we came to know about our freedom and main thing financial freedom and we are not anymore central puppets.We cannot imagine what the world will look like after 100 years and maybe bitcoin will not be operational in worse cases and technology would be so advanced beyond our imaginations.But CDBC could not have fascinated me a lot because they are just digital version of worthless fiat and they could not compete with bitcoin anytime.

[kryptqnick]

https://decrypt.co/83124/edward-snowden-cbdcs-are-cryptofascist-currencies-that-could-casually-annihilate-savings
Edward Snowden: CBDCs Are 'Cryptofascist Currencies' That Could 'Casually Annihilate' Savings
"If the American economy were in dire straits, the Fed might impose a negative interest rate on people’s savings, forcing us to spend.

I think he's being too radical here. I understand why he's against it, and it has to do with who he is and what he's famous for, but policy-wise, I don't think they're that bad. It depends on the context. Countries can launch CBDC to replace cryptocurrencies and tell people to use their centralized coin instead of Bitcoin and others, and it's bad in this case. But they can also be like Ukraine that plans to launch CBDC along with making Bitcoin and other cryptos more available, creating a regulatory framework and hoping that Bitcoin will be used as payment for goods here one day. In that case, CBDC can be the first step towards cryptos for the majority of the population who needs the government's reassurance and currency's stability. Then they can slowly adjust and start using decentralized coins as well.