CBDCs really worth it?

[_act_]

This news is some days passed but I remembered it when I was checking the crypto news about the French president, how he supports digital Euro:

The 44-year-old politician also vocally supported the digital euro project, which has been the target of pushback from the public recently.

I clicked on the news in my quote: ‘There are already digital means of payment’: EU Commission gets 11,000 public comments on CBDC project

It is about European Commission which opened digital Euro for the EU initiative up to the public consultation, over 110000 individuals and organizations left their feedback. The consultation process predates legislative consideration of the digital euro, which is expected to be scheduled in 2023. To know more about this, click on the above link.

A review of a sample of the public feedback section’s content revealed the existence of a certain discontent with the project in general. For example, as an anonymous comment in German goes:

“NO! There are already digital means of payment! So what is CBDC for [...] even more surveillance, prevention of bank runs, addiction and the consequent enslavement of mankind? This does not prevent money laundering; this already exists on a large scale for the top 10,000 in many tax havens, e.g., [the] Cayman Islands, Macau, Dubai, etc.”

I am not talking about the Emmanuel Macron which is the French president, people will have different opinion about CBDCs, just how I got the news and brought it here for discussion.

Countries want to create their own CBDC, some piloted and created theirs already. But the consultation about the creation of digital Euro is on the down side, people and organizations do not support it. I have been thinking like this before, what is important about CBDCs that traditional local currency (fiat) can not be used for? Fiat has electronic wallet, can be used for electronic (online) payment, it has the same value as the fiat of the country that created it, it is even the fiat, it is completely controlled by the central bank and the government, CBDCs are just fiat. Why creating CBDCs, it is not necessary in my opinion.

[1714851992]

1714851992

[1714851992]

1714851992

[1714851992]

1714851992

[1714851992]

1714851992

[1714851992]

1714851992

[hosseinimr93]

I don't really see any difference between a digital currency issued by the governments and fiat. There are two big problems with fiat. 1. It's centralized and the governments have full control over people money.  2. It can be printed.
A digital currency issued by a government still have both problems. I am sure they will design the so called digital currency in a way so they can increase the total supply whenever they want.

Why creating CBDCs, it is not necessary in my opinion.

Yes. There is no need to such currencies.
Governments believe that bitcoin is a threat to the control they have over people's money and think that with introducing such a digital currency can decrease that threat. That's the only reason they think of creating such a currency.
After launching their CBDC, some governments may say that "why do you want bitcoin? Our CBDC is better than that and bitcoin is illegal".
They don't really know how bitcoin works and think they can prevent people from using bitcoin is this way.

[Gozie51]

I think you are almost doing a comparison of fiat/CBDC and cryptocurrency. You are making a statement of why fiat is not used after all having internet wallet etc but I will just touch on that to say that bitcoin is freedom and uncontrollable by any government but fiat or CBDC is under the control of government. This is the difference and glaring truth about the situation.

[_act_]

I am sure they will design the so called digital currency in a way so they can increase the total supply whenever they want.

Even there is nothing like supply about CBDCs, or maybe I am not getting you right, just like you said that it is not at all different from fiat, it only just has the price of fiat and nothing more. But the central banks are saying it is built using blockchain technology but it is not just transparent like those of bitcoin that we know how it works, I have not even believed it is built using blockchain technology.

[Lucius]

Governments believe that bitcoin is a threat to the control they have over people's money and think that with introducing such a digital currency can decrease that threat. That's the only reason they think of creating such a currency.
After launching their CBDC, some governments may say that "why do you want bitcoin? Our CBDC is better than that and bitcoin is illegal".
They don't really know how bitcoin works and think they can prevent people from using bitcoin is this way.

It is not at all disputed that Bitcoin is something that the ruling elites are certainly afraid of, as well as anything else that they cannot control. However, from what could be learned from the statements of various EU bureaucrats and the statements of the ECB leaders, they are still much more afraid of stablecoins, which are in fact in some ways much more competition to the fiat.

We all know that stablecoins are basically pegged with fiat currency in a 1:1 ratio, and we also know that stablecoins are extremely popular when trading cryptocurrencies because their transactions are cheap and fast, and bypass banks. This means that governments want to become competitive with their fiat in the sense of turning it into a CBDC, otherwise they could lose the race with stablecoins and Bitcoin.

The President of the European Central Bank has said that stablecoins could disrupt the payment landscape and that the ECB is planning to assess the value of central bank digital currencies.

[teosanru]

Governments will obviously advocate CBDCs as per them it is gem of a thing, it's cryptocurrency but obviously it gives them complete control to regulate the supply of the currency and at the same time know who is making what transactions. But for someone who is into cryptos CBDCs make zero sense, they actually spoil the fun of Cryptocurrencies and are just like Fiat upgraded versions. So to be honest they are not really worth it.

[_act_]

We all know that stablecoins are basically pegged with fiat currency in a 1:1 ratio, and we also know that stablecoins are extremely popular when trading cryptocurrencies because their transactions are cheap and fast, and bypass banks. This means that governments want to become competitive with their fiat in the sense of turning it into a CBDC, otherwise they could lose the race with stablecoins and Bitcoin.

The government approach is not excellent at all, or maybe of how I see CBDCs, my country created one already and I see no good need for it than to use our fiat, the CBDC created by the government in my country has its own digital wallet but not on multicoin crypto wallet, it was said that it was not even a cryptocurrency, it can not be used on exchanges ornbenstored using keys generated on crypto wallets. Government suppose to create a kind of CBDCs that can compete with USDT and other stable coins on crypto exchanges which is what the governments should do, not CBDCs that are not cryptocurrencies that have no way to compete with stable coins. Assuming the governments have their own stable coin that are cryptocurrencies, people will prefer to use it compared to using USDT and others that are just created by private companies. As USDT dominates stable coins, it can even still be freezed on noncustododial wallet. The government are taking a wrong approach in my opinion as CBDCs are just totally fiat and nothing specially added.

[aoluain]

We all know that stablecoins are basically pegged with fiat currency in a 1:1 ratio, and we also know that stablecoins are extremely popular when trading cryptocurrencies because their transactions are cheap and fast, and bypass banks. This means that governments want to become competitive with their fiat in the sense of turning it into a CBDC, otherwise they could lose the race with stablecoins and Bitcoin.

The government approach is not excellent at all, or maybe of how I see CBDCs, my country created one already and I see no good need for it than to use our fiat, the CBDC created by the government in my country has its own digital wallet but not on multicoin crypto wallet, it was said that it was not even a cryptocurrency, it can not be used on exchanges ornbenstored using keys generated on crypto wallets. Government suppose to create a kind of CBDCs that can compete with USDT and other stable coins on crypto exchanges which is what the governments should do, not CBDCs that are not cryptocurrencies that have no way to compete with stable coins. Assuming the governments have their own stable coin that are cryptocurrencies, people will prefer to use it compared to using USDT and others that are just created by private companies. As USDT dominates stable coins, it can even still be freezed on noncustododial wallet. The government are taking a wrong approach in my opinion as CBDCs are just totally fiat and nothing specially added.

It seems like a pointless venture, to create CBDC's in the first place and secondly if they indeed
want to compete with the likes of USDT its not going to happen unless it can have the same
exposure as USDT.

I already use FIAT in a digital way as in I rarely use Cash, I use my smartphone and card to
pay digitally for goods, I also have a digital FIAT wallet on my smartphone.

Maybe the CBDC's are designed to bring force mote people onto a digital platform?

[Wind_FURY]

I don't really see any difference between a digital currency issued by the governments and fiat. There are two big problems with fiat. 1. It's centralized and the governments have full control over people money.  2. It can be printed.
A digital currency issued by a government still have both problems. I am sure they will design the so called digital currency in a way so they can increase the total supply whenever they want.

They will make design decisions that would not be of the interest of the people, believe me. We have already seen, in Canada, what the banks and the government can do to their own people. With the CBDC, the government can do it more effectively, and more efficiently. CBDC represents the extreme opposite of the Bitcoin ethos.

[Darker45]

I share the view that there is really no necessity for a CBDC. But if it has to be created, it simply substitutes and unites the various ways of digitalizing fiat. So far, central banks are not issuing digital money. The process of fiat digitalization is upon banks, card providers, payment services, e-commerce platforms, and so on. When CBDCs are to replace fiat's old form, money is in its digital form right from its issuance. Somehow, it simplifies the process.

[Doan9269]

2. It can be printed.

It can be printed in what context do you mean by this?
Is it that fake fiat currency can be printed or that its nothing when compared to the role and uniqueness of digital currency (bitcoin)?

Countries want to create their own CBDC, some piloted and created theirs already.

Not until the governments realized the need of the people that its not changing the packaging (fiat note - digital fiat CBDC) is what people really want rather than privacy, trust, security and decentralization in their economic and financial lives. this is freedom and the more we are craving for it the more they overlook it and i want to believe that this freedom is already gotten and taken in bitcoin and there's nothing they can do about it.

it is completely controlled by the central bank and the government, CBDCs are just fiat. Why creating CBDCs, it is not necessary in my opinion.

That same thing we don't want is what our leaders are craving for, a situation to exercise dominion over every humanitarian affairs, a situation where they can apprehend unjustful, a situation where we need to beg them before we can have access to our finances and a good living.

[fiulpro]

I do think that there can be both positive and negative points for CBDC's

Positive:
1. If integrated with trading perse they would be providing a great alternative to usdt with Bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies as well making sure that people have enough time and space to encash in their usual local currencies making it not only cost effective but more diverse.
2. The connection of banks and cryptocurrencies can increase.
<< But we all know that the government before anything they are yelling about how bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies are a nuisance and therefore they should be taken out before their fake crypto can come out>>
Therefore the negative can be :
1. They are not cryptocurrencies
2. Super looked after that means zero privacy
3. Too controlled, zero volatility
4. Government might try and push the agenda through causing harm to the laws concerned with Bitcoins and other cryptos

[DooMAD]

Worth it for who?

For us, probably not so much.

But for any government who want a perfect spyglass and tool to intercept funds?  Absolutely.

[hosseinimr93]

Even there is nothing like supply about CBDCs, or maybe I am not getting you right

By increasing supply, I meant that CBDC will be still like fiat which is created out of the thin air. It won't be like bitcoin which has a fixed total supply.

It can be printed in what context do you mean by this?

The papers you use as fiat currency are printed out of thin air. Governments always print more papers and reduce the value of existing papers.

[_act_]

It can be printed in what context do you mean by this?

If you are posting often on economic board, you should remember the US Covid-19 money printing that people have been posting on this forum last year many months ago that people said would probably lead to inflation. US has experienced over 7.8% inflation this year.

By increasing supply, I meant that CBDC will be still like fiat which is created out of the thin air. It won't be like bitcoin which has a fixed total supply.

I am getting you right now, the supply you meant is money printing, that is true, it can lead to inflation but it depends on the the output value of an economy. Assuming if the money printing correspond to an increase in overall output value of an economy, it will not lead to inflation, but if the money printing does not correspond to the overall output, that will lead to inflation.

[kryptqnick]

As long as a CBDC is a choice and isn't forced on people in any way, I'm not against it. And by forcing, I also mean something like making it very hard to receive a salary or social payments or something like that without using a CBDC. Not everyone cares about privacy, and a CBDC allegedly can help save up on transaction fees. So people can try it, some might enjoy it. CBDC is an alternative to fiat which is extremely similar to it, basically. As long as that doesn't lead the government to restrict decentralized cryptocurrencies, it's not a threat to the crypto market.

[Poker Player]

I don't really see any difference between a digital currency issued by the governments and fiat.

I do. Although they are essentially the same shit, there is still cash left in today's fiat monetary system. Although people are paying more and more with digital means (cards, cell phones, smartwatch...), those who want privacy can pay with bills and coins and leave no trace of their activity, unless they ask for an invoice in their name. With CBDCs, however, absolutely all payments made by citizens will be recorded.

[Wexnident]

I think the only difference is the usage of ledger (whether it be blockchain or not) no? I mean the only reason they'd ever push for CBDC was to make it a lot easier for them to identify the transactions done by each user they have. I mean look at China, they went big on studying CBDC imo all because of that reason since it fits to a T with the way they want their citizens to be governed. I don't even think there's gonna be an improvement based on qol, it's still theh same old fiat. Even if you consider the "digital" aspect, it's not like the fiat of now can't be used digitally.

[South Park]

As long as a CBDC is a choice and isn't forced on people in any way, I'm not against it. And by forcing, I also mean something like making it very hard to receive a salary or social payments or something like that without using a CBDC. Not everyone cares about privacy, and a CBDC allegedly can help save up on transaction fees. So people can try it, some might enjoy it. CBDC is an alternative to fiat which is extremely similar to it, basically. As long as that doesn't lead the government to restrict decentralized cryptocurrencies, it's not a threat to the crypto market.

However further restrictions of decentralized cryptocurrencies will be the next thing on the agenda if CBDCs happen to work out, governments tried to destroy this market and failed, so they are executing plan B, which is to create their own coins and try to deceive people and try to make them believe their coins are better, and as you state there is a great deal of people out there that care nothing about their privacy, so it is not difficult to believe they will be successful in the implementation of their plan, and then they will argue that is incorrect for decentralized cryptocurrencies to provide a higher level of privacy than their own coins, which will give them yet another chance to try to destroy or at least hinder this market.

[Wind_FURY]

Worth it for who?

For us, probably not so much.

But for any government who want a perfect spyglass and tool to intercept funds?  Absolutely.

But the government will do that right at the start. They will be "good boys", bringing this new digital currency to us, providing us with a more convenient, and efficient way of transacting with each other. Many people will be bullish about CBDC technology, and every disinforming troll in the forum would start encouraging us to HODL our savings in CBDC. That will be a laughable mistake.