Stablecoins or CBDCs?

[Moeda]

With the advent of Tether (USDT), the stablecoin industry has advanced at a very fast pace. There are now many stablecoins on the market aiming to bring the stability of traditional Fiat currencies with the security and reliability of crypto/Blockchain tech. Traders can use stablecoins as an alternative to existing Fiat without having to cash out directly to a bank. To say the least, stablecoins are the new digital Fiat system where companies hold all of the power (instead of the government). Yet, central banks have announced their intentions to launch CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies) of their own. If stablecoins are already proven to be successful, why re-invent the wheel with the launch of a new government-backed digital currency? Can't just governments back stablecoins themselves and avoid all of the hassle of creating new digital Fiat currencies from scratch?

What do you think the future of stablecoins will look like after CBDCs are launched? Will they die in the end or will they co-exist with CBDCs? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

I see government financial services authorities getting jealous of the success of private companies specifically in the field of blockchain technology.
Basically the financial services authorities have rejected the existence of crypto on the grounds of a bubble. But it didn't work. In the end they themselves also plunged into the world of blockchain.
In this case I am not talking about the success of the crypto stable, but rather about the fate of other stable coins. I'm just worried that their existence will complicate private companies.

[marcous]

I see government financial services authorities getting jealous of the success of private companies specifically in the field of blockchain technology.
Basically the financial services authorities have rejected the existence of crypto on the grounds of a bubble. But it didn't work. In the end they themselves also plunged into the world of blockchain.
In this case I am not talking about the success of the crypto stable, but rather about the fate of other stable coins. I'm just worried that their existence will complicate private companies.

Private companies also know that they will experience difficulties due to the presence of financial services authorities into the crypto space, but basically private companies also have safer ways and ways to maintain their products such as stablecoins.
So in this case I would still believe in stablecoins over CBDCs

[jokers10]

And I'd say that it is a huge difference: CBDC is fiat by itself and stablecoin is a commodity which is promised to be exchanged for fiat. Different levels of reliability: if I don't trust fiat I don't trust surrogate of fiat even more. Less a month ago Cashio Dollar become zero and it supposed to be stable... If dollar one day become zero all stablecoins connected to it will do the same, but bankruptcy of Cashio Dollar didn't lead to bankruptcy of USD.

CBDCs will have more credibility than stablecoins, simply because they're backed by the full faith and credit of the government. I doubt centralized stablecoins will survive as people will prefer CBDCs instead. Only decentralized stablecoins will stand against CBDCs as they don't have any central operator (issuer) behind them. They will prove to be an excellent alternative for those looking to escape government surveillance. I'd focus more on traditional cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin or Ethereum since they're not directly tied to Fiat. As long as decentralization wins, there should be nothing to worry about. Just my thoughts

Cashio Dollar I mentioned is a kind of decentralized decisions but that didn't prevents its failure. There reasons of failure will be just different for different types of stable coins but I suppose that sooner or later all existing stable coins will disappear in contradistinction to bitcoin.

[wxa7115]

With the advent of Tether (USDT), the stablecoin industry has advanced at a very fast pace. There are now many stablecoins on the market aiming to bring the stability of traditional Fiat currencies with the security and reliability of crypto/Blockchain tech. Traders can use stablecoins as an alternative to existing Fiat without having to cash out directly to a bank. To say the least, stablecoins are the new digital Fiat system where companies hold all of the power (instead of the government). Yet, central banks have announced their intentions to launch CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies) of their own. If stablecoins are already proven to be successful, why re-invent the wheel with the launch of a new government-backed digital currency? Can't just governments back stablecoins themselves and avoid all of the hassle of creating new digital Fiat currencies from scratch?

What do you think the future of stablecoins will look like after CBDCs are launched? Will they die in the end or will they co-exist with CBDCs? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Well we know that more than anything what government want is power, and that power can only be obtained by controlling more and more people, so even if stable coins already exist backing a stable coin will be the same as recognizing that stable coin as their new fiat, which I think it will never happen.

But then what would happen with stable coins issued by private companies? Personally I think there will be a very strong effort by the governments to eliminate them, after all they are owned by centralized exchanges which can be easily regulated by them under the threat of imprison their most important board members, so I do no think it would be a problem for governments to eliminate them.

[DOH!]

What do you think the future of stablecoins will look like after CBDCs are launched? Will they die in the end or will they co-exist with CBDCs?

As far as I understand, CBDC is a tool for government to control the market in the way that it exists which will create friction and pressure on pure stablecoins like USDT, etc., so it is no coincidence that the release  The advent of more scalable and decentralized stablecoins has been warmly supported in recent times.  CBDC is not compatible with Defi because it cannot.  The purpose of applying CBDC is to trigger the transition from correspondent banks, creating a spiral for them to come to the central bank = easy control.  One more reason that decentralization will be the next future.
So, See how the market reacts to CBDC and it's almost ready!

[kryptqnick]

I guess the govs are not okay with stablecoins being under someone else's control and not truly being backed by fiat or anything of value on the required level, so they want to do it their way. But internationally, I think there's more trust to stable coins because they are not controlled by governments. CBDCs work for local markets largely, IMO, whereas CBDCs are something used internationally. So even they, IMO, aren't competing against one another, even though they have some similarities.

[Xal0lex]

If we are talking about centralized steblecoins backed by dollars, I am not sure that all the power belongs to the companies. All the collateral is on a bank deposit, and if the bank decides to freeze these assets, there is nothing the company can do. Another thing is if we are talking about decentralized stablcoins like DAI and also algorithmic stablcoins which are pegged to dollar but have bitcoin or altcoin reserve, like UST from Terra.

I'm not sure that CBDCs will completely replace stabelcoins. Maybe the binding will change, which used to be fiat based and now will be CBDC based. Although many stablcoins are tied to the dollar and we won't see a digital dollar anytime soon.

[tvplus006]

Stablecoins, as well as other cryptocurrencies, are subject to price manipulation. This is clearly noticeable with the recent fuss over the Waves USDN stablecoin, which has lost 40% of its value in price. The price of the GBR fell by about the same amount in 1992, and accordingly, if this happens again now, then the cost of CBDC will accordingly fall by the same percentage. So nothing is perfect as long as the possibility of manipulation remains.

[Emitdama]

They are almost the same right? But the only difference is that CBDCs are new, it was like we are comparing an old altcoin to the new altcoin but people will have more trust on the old one so no, stablecoins will not die but if there is one that is going to die that will be the CBDC.

There are different kinds of stable coins to choose from, not just about the name but there is also a decentralized based stable coin. This is one of the things why people will stick on the old stable coins. And is that possible to backed something that they don't own? Maybe it isn't, that is why they are planning to create their own currency in the form of CBDCs, where they can have a full control.

[SirLancelot]

Stablecoins, as well as other cryptocurrencies, are subject to price manipulation. This is clearly noticeable with the recent fuss over the Waves USDN stablecoin, which has lost 40% of its value in price. The price of the GBR fell by about the same amount in 1992, and accordingly, if this happens again now, then the cost of CBDC will accordingly fall by the same percentage. So nothing is perfect as long as the possibility of manipulation remains.

CBDC value cannot be manipulated, saying this is just like you saying that forex can he manipulated when that’s not the case. The cryptocurrency market can he be manipulated and that’s because of how they are decentralized and totally out of the control of the government so the community is what controls it, when people are investing more money in it, the value will be increasing. In the case of the CBDC it is pegged with fiat so it is only the government that can decide the value, they can either inflate or deflate it if whenever they want.

[stepwilli]

With the advent of Tether (USDT), the stablecoin industry has advanced at a very fast pace. There are now many stablecoins on the market aiming to bring the stability of traditional Fiat currencies with the security and reliability of crypto/Blockchain tech. Traders can use stablecoins as an alternative to existing Fiat without having to cash out directly to a bank. To say the least, stablecoins are the new digital Fiat system where companies hold all of the power (instead of the government). Yet, central banks have announced their intentions to launch CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies) of their own. If stablecoins are already proven to be successful, why re-invent the wheel with the launch of a new government-backed digital currency? Can't just governments back stablecoins themselves and avoid all of the hassle of creating new digital Fiat currencies from scratch?

Well, I guess the government just wants to have something that belongs to them entirely, because stable coins are being run by individuals and not the directly by the government, so they can’t make the full decision on what happens with these stable coins.

But you still have a point, most of these stable coins are centralized, and that includes USDT, so the government should have just backed them rather creating CBDC. Even CBDC are still fiat, I do wonder the need for having all these things, totally unnecessary to me. But between the two and If I’m to choose, I am going to choose Stable coins, especially the decentralized ones like DAI.

[tvplus006]

Stablecoins, as well as other cryptocurrencies, are subject to price manipulation. This is clearly noticeable with the recent fuss over the Waves USDN stablecoin, which has lost 40% of its value in price. The price of the GBR fell by about the same amount in 1992, and accordingly, if this happens again now, then the cost of CBDC will accordingly fall by the same percentage. So nothing is perfect as long as the possibility of manipulation remains.

CBDC value cannot be manipulated, saying this is just like you saying that forex can he manipulated when that’s not the case. The cryptocurrency market can he be manipulated and that’s because of how they are decentralized and totally out of the control of the government so the community is what controls it, when people are investing more money in it, the value will be increasing. In the case of the CBDC it is pegged with fiat so it is only the government that can decide the value, they can either inflate or deflate it if whenever they want.

I previously gave an example of a real fact when there was manipulation of the price of the pound sterling. And this manipulation of the fiat price is carried out by governments, unlike the cryptocurrency market, where price manipulation is carried out by large capital. It is the government that indirectly influences the discount rate and the issue, changing the value of fiat money. And the market in this case is the international financial system. In this case, the cost of CBDC will also change, since it is directly related to fiat.

[mindrust]

What do you think the future of stablecoins will look like after CBDCs are launched? Will they die in the end or will they co-exist with CBDCs? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Both suck but somehow I would prefer CBDC's to Tether because tether is a shady token without and legal ground. In the end neither of those entities are going to back their tokens with any real assets. Bitfinex is already known for printing USDT out of thin air and the CB's will not be any different in this matter. The difference is, Bitfinex has no right to print currency legally. The central banks do.

So even though the inflation will still hurt the CBDC's and eat away your savings, it is still better than losing everything overnight.

[someone703]

... If stablecoins are already proven to be successful, why re-invent the wheel with the launch of a new government-backed digital currency? Can't just governments back stablecoins themselves and avoid all of the hassle of creating new digital Fiat currencies from scratch?

I'm not sure if I'm thinking it right, but personally, the current stablecoins I've seen are focusing on fiat, specifically USD. The emergence of CBDC is almost accepted with many other fiat currencies. We have not only USD but many other currencies, so if the government does not accept it, the money flows into the market. Given that this will only have limited adoption, I am optimistic the field can reach new heights in the economy.

[Anonylz]

Stablecoins are not in the control of government but cbdc is, we all know government are not very friendly with what they don't have a total control of. On the other hand, I think cbdc will be quickly adopted and be successful over stablecoins, why, it is government approved unlike Stablecoins, most organisations, wealthy individuals and even none wealthy ones will prefer using cbdc than Stablecoins because it is official and government approved.
Same reason why crypto adoption is stalling, most people are more comfortable with anything 'governments approved'.

[Furious 7]

in this case maybe i won't be in both (long term) but for temporary trading like when the crush market is like now of course i will be on stablecoin to minimize margin when i have a loss but that's about it. I'm not really interested in them for now. Because there are indeed some coins in alt that are more worthy when compared to them for investment

[Abiky]

Both suck but somehow I would prefer CBDC's to Tether because tether is a shady token without and legal ground. In the end neither of those entities are going to back their tokens with any real assets. Bitfinex is already known for printing USDT out of thin air and the CB's will not be any different in this matter. The difference is, Bitfinex has no right to print currency legally. The central banks do.

So even though the inflation will still hurt the CBDC's and eat away your savings, it is still better than losing everything overnight.

People will trust CBDCs more than any ordinary stablecoin simply because they're backed by the full faith and credit of the government. I never liked Tether's shady practices as it manipulates the market for its own benefit. CBDCs would be a much better option, even though they will still be subject to the negative effects of inflation. The inception of CBDCs would mean the end of paper money for good. Everything else will be most likely the same as it is right now.

With increasing pressure from governments and central banks against crypto/Blockchain tech, stablecoins might cease to exist in the long term. Ultimately, what matters is decentralization. As long as decentralized cryptocurrencies exist, nothing else matters. Just my opinion

[tbct_mt2]

CBDCs will have more credibility than stablecoins, simply because they're backed by the full faith and credit of the government.

At least CBDCs won't be killed by governments but the bad thing is total supply of CBDC is unlimited. Governments can mint infinite total supply and I believe they will feel more easily to mint new supply batch in CBDC than print new supply batch in fiat currency. Minting CBDC from thin air is easier than printing new fiat currency.

I doubt centralized stablecoins will survive as people will prefer CBDCs instead. Only decentralized stablecoins will stand against CBDCs as they don't have any central operator (issuer) behind them. They will prove to be an excellent alternative for those looking to escape government surveillance. I'd focus more on traditional cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin or Ethereum since they're not directly tied to Fiat. As long as decentralization wins, there should be nothing to worry about. Just my thoughts

Governments will try to protect their CBDCs and to do so, they will do more regulations on centralized stable coins. Companies that provide centralized stable coins will cope with more governmental regulations but I think they will still survive.

Centralized stable coins are still better than CBDCs because you will have public ledgers with which you can trace transactions, top holders, etc. With CBDCs, I don't believe governments will give us similar public ledgers.

[GreatArkansas]

I am afraid that government will start to attack these stablecoins or even non-stablecoins cryptocurrencies just to promote their CBDC. But it is already proven over time, especially Bitcoin, that it is more likely the power decentralization.
Stablecoins is much better for me especially now there are lot of stablecoins are popping beside USDT which is more transparent and decentralize.

[fullhdpixel]

I am afraid that government will start to attack these stablecoins or even non-stablecoins cryptocurrencies just to promote their CBDC. But it is already proven over time, especially Bitcoin, that it is more likely the power decentralization.
Stablecoins is much better for me especially now there are lot of stablecoins are popping beside USDT which is more transparent and decentralize.

We need stable coins, especially for the fact that they are the only ones that you can trade on cryptocurrency exchanges. Government CBDC cannot be traded on cryptocurrency exchanges, you do not get to see them anywhere there. So that is why stable coins are very important for us, because they make trading easy and you wouldn’t have to be withdrawing money to Fiat, you just easily convert it to stable coin and you are done.

And of course we all know that the government would try to kick against other cryptocurrencies, but this wouldn’t be in every country, because I know for sure that there are governments who are in support of cryptocurrency. But even if they do try, we know for sure that cryptocurrencies that are truly decentralized wouldn’t be affected. Only the centralized ones would be their main target and they would be easily to take them down.