Replying to Avatar Guy Swann

Tether is not a CBDC.

It's literally a BDC

Tether is not a central bank, they don't issue notes of an independent monetary unit. They aren't associated with any govt. Tether is just a modern banknote with most of the same problems, risks, and trust issues. The difference being it is available to anyone with a smart phone without an account -- which is actually a significant improvement over the old garbage.

Tether is custodian issued digital banknotes. Literally in every use of those terms this is the accurate thing to call it. "Cash" has always just referred to banknotes issued that were redeemable in gold or at a bank that was a bearer asset. The difference with a stablecoin like Tether and physical cash is the oversight/surveillance that the institution has for the digital alternative. This is why ecash is actually the only thing that digitally shares basically all the characteristics of physical cash (txn privacy from issuer and bearer asset). Tether is far easier to freeze accounts and spy on what everyone is doing. Obviously why people want to label it "something bad."

My point is that the CBDC label is NOT accurate, and when we use words and labels arbitrarily, it desensitizes people to them. If people just become "whatever" about Tether (because if you don't use it, who cares), and everyone calls it a CBDC, then after a few years of this people are just going to think "CBDCs are fine, who cares?"

Calling everything we don't like a CBDC is a HUGE BENEFIT to actual CBDCs.

Bank digital currencies are not a problem. They will remain solvent as long as the "bank" does. They are a much better option than credit cards, and the option of being able to issue ecash is even better.

BDCs are certainly a far cry from the #Bitcoin sovereign world that we are building and have nothing to do with it, but they are ALSO a far cry from a genuine CBDC.

So please, stop using words that matter in a stupid and cheap way, because when we REALLY need them, you'll have sucked them of all of their power and meaning.

When like 70-80% of Tether's holdings are in U.S. treasuries, I'd say it's very misleading to claim no association to any govt. Due to this dependence - along with the mentioned ability to freeze and surveil activity - the practical difference between USDT and a CBDC lies only in what the U.S. government has yet to decide to exercise. (the same would go for any BDC that's also beholding to the demands of a govt).

I agree, however, that it's not good to inaccurately label anything - even if it's only inaccurate on a technicality... Someone needs to coin another term for government-cucked digital currency to cover them all.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Nothing about what I said made any suggestion one way or another about "association with a govt." It's literally a USD stablecoin. Why would anyone claim that it's not US related?

That said from the company standpoint specifically, they are scared shitless about doing any business with any US company or being attached in any way to US markets. Like very paranoid about it. So if you are saying they are some US govt project then I'd argue that doesn't really add up. I think the US thinks Tether is undermining their power and control, even though from the standpoint of someone who understands, it actually is a significant support for the US dollar and treasuries. I simply think the political system is only just now waking up to that and trying to figure out how to take advantage of that.

"They aren't associated with any govt." isn't a suggestion one way or another? I must be misreading that somehow.

Regardless, per your response, we appear to actually be on the same page

Cheers!

I mean that they haven’t issued a govt currency and aren’t a govt program or institution. I didn’t mean that they don’t buy a particular govt’s treasuries, as that’s obviously false.

Words have specific meaning. Using a certain word to refer to something that it is not cheapens and ultimately dilutes the meaning and significance of words. Sometimes that is bad, sometimes it is a non-issue. Regardless, it is transformative

Absolutely agree.