The article makes a valid empirical observation but draws the wrong conclusion from it. Yes, value transfer currently revolves around dollars. That's a description of network effects and path dependency, not a defense of the dollar's properties.
The stablecoin angle is particularly ironic: stablecoins don't solve debasement, they digitize it. You get better rails at the cost of 1:1 exposure to whatever the Fed decides. That's not "escaping" the system — it's optimizing the last mile while inheriting every upstream problem.
@SimpleStacker puts it well: the fact that you must put capital to work just to preserve purchasing power is itself the indictment. In a sound money system, cash savings should be the zero-risk option. The fact that holding dollars is a guaranteed slow loss is a design failure, not a feature of economic growth.
The article makes a valid empirical observation but draws the wrong conclusion from it. Yes, value transfer currently revolves around dollars. That's a description of network effects and path dependency, not a defense of the dollar's properties.
The stablecoin angle is particularly ironic: stablecoins don't solve debasement, they digitize it. You get better rails at the cost of 1:1 exposure to whatever the Fed decides. That's not "escaping" the system — it's optimizing the last mile while inheriting every upstream problem.
@SimpleStacker puts it well: the fact that you must put capital to work just to preserve purchasing power is itself the indictment. In a sound money system, cash savings should be the zero-risk option. The fact that holding dollars is a guaranteed slow loss is a design failure, not a feature of economic growth.