CBDCs are created for unemployment purpose

[Silberman]

We can see how traditional banking has helped in creating employment. Many people are employed in the banks. The banks and their employees are paying taxes.

I read this today: CBDCs will gradually displace private banks, says Russian lawmaker

It is about a Russian lawmaker that believes CBDCs will gradually displace fiat and traditional banking.

Can this be what would later happen?

I do not think this is the intention behind the creation of CBDCs, and if anything I think governments are scared of the next wave of automation that is coming and the change on the different economic sectors that is coming as well, as it is rumored the current impetus to try to get people back at the office is an attempt to try to keep the rent of office space high, as otherwise most office jobs could be done remotely and people could move to a city or town that is way cheaper to live in, but if they have to go to the office then they need to live nearby and this increases the demand for properties that are close to their jobs.

[coolcoinz]

Well that looks like the face value or literal conclusion of it that CBDC could phase out fiat and banks, I could be tempted to move towards that allusion but what about the influence of government and control they always want to have on the economy majorly through financial and payment platforms which is fiat and not crypto. So government won't give such leverage for digital currency to take over entirely. Therefore, the banks are going nowhere but we could have reduced staffs at the time CBDC is fully implemented.

I'd be more worried about their control over me and the other people.

I like how someone once said that CBDC means central bank digital control. This is 100% on point and if you see any other explanations or good sides of this crap, you're oblivious to what they really want and what the end game for the governments is. Surveillance, control and subdual of the population, so that you're unable to protest, unable to hide income and do anything unlawful that involves currency, unless you're able to hack the system, or use another form of payment, like barter or crypto.

[Gyfts]

Appears the article link is down, regardless, the government doesn't create jobs, the private sector does. The central banks will inject money into the economy if they want to aid the economy, but they themselves are not actually creating any jobs in the process. CBDC's make it easier to control the money supply, and if the goal were to eliminate private banks, you could start at CBDC's, sure.

[Unbunplease]

In principle, CBDCs can replace electronic money in the long run. The bad thing is that CBDCs use smart contracts and personal account. In the beginning, all this will seem convenient to you, but after a while you should expect to be screwed and forced to switch to CBDC settlements.

[SamReomo]

We can see how traditional banking has helped in creating employment. Many people are employed in the banks. The banks and their employees are paying taxes.

Can this be what would later happen?

Yes, the CBDCs will surely be a little bit harmful for traditional banking systems and also for fiat currencies. The new generation wants currencies that should be digital in nature and CBDCs were introduced by keeping those demands in view. The traditional fiat and banking system will also be working for many upcoming years, but surely they will end one day because each new system ends the traditional ones.

I don't think that the CBDCs will have any impact on the number of jobs and I'm quite sure that CBDCs will also be handled by banks in most countries if not all. I believe that CBDCs may be helpful to create more opportunities of employment in banks if they are integrated with the current banking system. Other than that I don't think that they will harm banks or traditional fiat in any worse way.

[Y3shot]

Banks are not going anywhere. They have been here for centuries and they will continue to be here. What we would witness is an evolution of the fiat and traditional banking to match the latest technological trend. Aside this nothing else.

The bank always have it own roles to be played,  I doubt in time coming if CBDC can complete take over the bank. The CBDC work with the bank and it can be on is own. The bank and CBDC are managed by the same source,  the bank is something that has been their long time before now  and I can't imagine it will get to a time that it won't be existing,  as far as the government exist the bank will still exist because the government benefits from in it . Even if the CBDC succeed in getting more innovations it can play all the roles of the bank .

[letteredhub]

We can see how traditional banking has helped in creating employment. Many people are employed in the banks. The banks and their employees are paying taxes.

I read this today: CBDCs will gradually displace private banks, says Russian lawmaker

It is about a Russian lawmaker that believes CBDCs will gradually displace fiat and traditional banking.

Can this be what would later happen?

So of what difference does it makes ?  In any ways they are both controlled by the government and that makes no difference. The cbdc replacing traditional banking system will be very hard to actualize as adoption will be hampered by trust issues, but if they are allowed to work as an integral part of the traditional banking system coexisting with different functions for digital currency and fiat money it can only but increase employment is the system other than pushing for a replacement.

[Captain Corporate]

This makes no sense at all if you ask me. Banking world definitely employs a lot of people there is no question there, but just because it moves from fiat to CBDC doesn't mean that they will not need any workers. First of all they will keep needing workers for fiat because fiat is not going anywhere, we are not going to move to CBDC and suddenly stop using fiat. Secondly, just as we use fiat today, we are going to end up with CBDC banks as well, which will employ a lot of people too. So its not going to be an issue if you ask me. Unemployment is an issue for sure, but its not going to be because of CBDC, its just that tech is evolving and we are producing more than we can buy.

[Bananington]

We can see how traditional banking has helped in creating employment. Many people are employed in the banks. The banks and their employees are paying taxes.

I read this today: CBDCs will gradually displace private banks, says Russian lawmaker

It is about a Russian lawmaker that believes CBDCs will gradually displace fiat and traditional banking.

Can this be what would later happen?

The most consistent fear factor of CBDC currently is hackers. We can't be bothered about bank charges and be bothered about hackers getting a hold of our account and clearing all our funds.
CBDC remains deficient in solving the unemployment problems as it is just to serve as a digital equivalent of whatever amount of money one has in their bank account name.
I believe it was created simply to compete with cryptocurrencies in stability and consistency of service. Nothing else

[Oshosondy]

This makes no sense at all if you ask me. Banking world definitely employs a lot of people there is no question there, but just because it moves from fiat to CBDC doesn't mean that they will not need any workers.

CBDCs can operate with less workers and that means unemployment or reduced in employment. In my country, there are people going to bank daily and the bank have numerous workers for that. If everything is CBDC, there will be decrease in the number of workers.

The most consistent fear factor of CBDC currently is hackers.

CBDCs are very centralized, hackers will only lose if they try to do anything.

I believe it was created simply to compete with cryptocurrencies in stability and consistency of service. Nothing else

This is what everyone is thinking, but cryptocurrencies are different from fiat while CBDCs are the same as fiat which will make people not to regard to it as cryptocurrencies, they are nothing but just fiat.

[Jegileman]

We can see how traditional banking has helped in creating employment. Many people are employed in the banks. The banks and their employees are paying taxes.

I read this today: CBDCs will gradually displace private banks, says Russian lawmaker

It is about a Russian lawmaker that believes CBDCs will gradually displace fiat and traditional banking.

Can this be what would later happen?

Are CBDCs not just another type of fiat money that is governed by the government and run by the established banking system? What is this lawmaker actually trying to say when he makes this statement? I'm confused.
  
Does he really want the central banks to take over and eliminate the private banking system in favour of CBDCs? If that's the case, the unemployment rate there might rise, which would be bad for the economy and something the government would never want to accept for the future of the nation.

[panganib999]

By the way, the article's no longer up.

How so though? As far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong) CBDCs are nothing but glorified fiat sold as "cryptocurrencies" to the public that's unaware of what crypto really is. If they are to introduce a new economy completely separate from the fiat system that we have right now then sure this might work, but as it's pegged to fiat's value I don't think it's going to be the case. At best it's only going to be another way for you to digitally pay stuff on the go. Even worse, they could use these to furthe oligarchy onto a different plane, and perhaps even contaminate the cryptocurrency world since again, it's expected that CBDC's could be used interoperably with cryptocurrency.

[Smartvirus]

It is about a Russian lawmaker that believes CBDCs will gradually displace fiat and traditional banking.

Can this be what would later happen?

I’ve tried visiting the provided link severally but, am met with a 404 error each time and as such, I couldn’t get the full story.

Still, I don’t see any much difference in having the CBDC functional from what we’ve got here with the mobile banking. CBDC doesn’t have much difference from what we already have in mobile banking.
It’s technically all fiat just in different forms and it’s going to need maintenance from time to time and some one to manage the proceedings.

I wouldn’t act like I know much about CBDC but, in many ways, people remain more comfortable with what they are can hold someone responsible and accountable for.

[serjent05]

We can see how traditional banking has helped in creating employment. Many people are employed in the banks. The banks and their employees are paying taxes.

I read this today: CBDCs will gradually displace private banks, says Russian lawmaker

It is about a Russian lawmaker that believes CBDCs will gradually displace fiat and traditional banking.

Can this be what would later happen?

It will take time to make the thing called unemployment for banks due to CBDC to happen.  Since the future is set for automation and virtual activities, it is inevitable that all industries will be susceptible to unemployment but I think we should not worry about that, solutions for unemployment will present themselves when the time this kind of unemployment starts to promulgate.

Aside from that banks do not function on money transfers alone, they also function as safe stash for important documents and items, aside from that they are also involved in different kinds of investment so I do not think that banks will lose their function once CBDC becomes popular.

[Vaskiy]

At any point banks never gets displaced or something takes over it. Maybe the system followed might change. As CBDC is getting popular, we might see the usage in banking. Banks were the backbone to every country's economy development. We can see the country's economy going down with countries where more banks have gone into bankruptcy. Even now banks were slowly getting into all sort of businesses. This will widen the service availed through banks creating more opportunities. We should also understand CBDC were just a hype given to the traditional fiat so to stop people falling for the goodness of bitcoin.

[danherbias07]

Yes. It is true. Many people will be jobless because of this. No more counting paper money, so there's really not much of a necessity for a bank clerk too. But there will still be some that will be left for customer support although I don't really like the idea of that. It's not different from what they are doing with AI, many people will also lose their jobs once they perfected this kind of technology.

There are already fewer workers in the bank, what more if they will implement the use of CBDC widely in one country? Maybe all we will see is the receptionist and the FAQ holder to answer our queries, worse it is also computerized. The pandemic did change a lot of the perspective of the people. They are trying to create projects that won't need interaction to protect the health of the people but we are also in the phase of being unsociable.

[sokani]

CBDC is one aspect of financial sector that is being explored. Though, It is still under testing and development and I don't think there's any country that has a fully working CBDC enabled banking system, so it might take a while for this to happen, maybe in a decade. But if it is fully developed and the government makes it compulsory for the traditional fiats to be replaced by CBDC, then it would bring an end to an era and put many persons in the banking sector out of work.

[Darker45]

I don't think the banks would be totally displaced by CBDCs. There are probably a number of banking services that remain. Even with CBDCs becoming the mainstream currency, people would still go to the banks for all kinds of loans, for example, or to avail wealth management services, and so on.

Also, the operation of CBDCs entail employment as well. There will certainly be all kinds of staff to be hired to make sure it runs smoothly 24/7.

[EarnOnVictor]

Can this be what would later happen?

I've known Russians for the propaganda, and of course, they have the right to their vision and plans but that doesn't necessarily mean what the whole world will share in these views and plans.

One of the reasons why the US is careful in pursuing further their CBDC is the effect on banks and the earnings of other financial institutions and advisers, this could affect jobs and the economy. I see no how CBDC could employ as much as several banks could employ, and by virtue, it's not going to be a plus to society. The CBDC is still centrally controlled, it has no serious reason for the government to outweigh it over banks, and besides, banks are even saddled with more responsibility that can't be covered by the CBDC.

If at all in the future anything changes because of blockchain technology, banks will rather transition to blockchain operations under their central banks' CBDC but their service remains.

[Gallar]

We can see how traditional banking has helped in creating employment. Many people are employed in the banks. The banks and their employees are paying taxes.

That's right. Because it cannot be denied that a bank, for example in one country, does have many branches. What is certain will require employees in each of these branches. But even so, as far as I know the jobs created by banking are very small/little. Because even though there are quite a lot of branches, the number of people who need work (aka unemployed) is much greater. So, in my personal opinion, banking cannot be said to open up many job opportunities. Even from my personal experience, when I look at job vacancies in my country via the web, I never see job vacancies in banks. So I think it is quite clear that banking does not make a big contribution in creating jobs.

And regarding banks and their employees who always pay taxes. This is very normal, because when living in a country that has a taxation system, everyone is also obliged to pay taxes.

~Snip
It is about a Russian lawmaker that believes CBDCs will gradually displace fiat and traditional banking.

Can this be what would later happen?

I think traditional banking will remain superior to CBDC. Because even though CBDC was created to advance digital-based financial systems, if humanity still really needs fiat currency in physical form like now, then traditional banking will definitely still exist and will not be pushed aside by CBDC. .

Because when you think about it, why do CBDC and traditional banking have to compete. Even though both are owned by the government of the same country. However, the difference is only in the running system, and in terms of objectives, it will definitely remain the same. So basically why do traditional banking and CBDC compete with each other?