Generally speaking, they differ in terms of direct control (government vs private sector), access (permissioned vs permissionless), identity requirements (government ID vs pseudonymity), and reach (geofenced vs global).
That's not to say there are no similarities. Neither truly embodies open and free monetary technology. However, only CBDCs give the government direct access and control over your financial activity by default.
If a stablecoin issuer has to buy US treasuries to back the token, and has to report to the government, and can seize or shut down any account at the government's request, I don't see any fundamental difference between them and CBDC's.
After all, the Federal Reserve isn't a government agency any more than Tether is.
And one of the main reasons any of us got into Bitcoin was the limited supply, stablecoins are infinite.
No, there is zero tangible difference between a CBDC and a stablecoin.
Cato LOL
Idk how they sold out so hard, but they sure as fuck did
If that's your argument, then there is no difference between using a debit card and using a CBDC. Is that your stance?
Yeah. The current financial system is fucked. People have their funds seized by the state frequently. Your bank records are turned over as evidence in court cases. You have to KYC to open an account. And, at the base layer is the ever inflating US dollar.
We are here to smash this system to pieces, burn it to the ground, and plant the seeds of the New World in the ashes.
Well, I appreciate the consistency in that case
.gov can claim that de jure usdt isn't USD. But de facto it is.
