pull down to refresh

I was listening to Peter McCormack’s podcast “What Bitcoin Did” yesterday and heard his interview with Mark Goodwin. While talking about the recent Tornado Cash incident, Peter asked him how worried he was about Central Bank Digital Currencies. Mark responded that he saw CBDCs as a red herring as far as the United States goes. He made the argument that the US government likes Tether and USDC, and that’s why these coins have been more or less left alone and allowed to grow. He reasoned that the US would much rather have a private company running a digital dollar than the government. This notion shocked my libertarian sensibilities, but I kept listening. He made the point that a private company has much more freedom to censor and control than the government would. No more annoying free speech constitutional claims. As it is, the whole Tornado Cash incident appears to be on shaky legal ground. Coin Center wrote that “Treasury's financial crimes enforcement arm overstepped its legal authority through its sanctions, which potentially violates constitutional rights to due process and free speech." The other day I listened to snippets of Joe Rogan’s podcast with Mark Zuckerberg. He revealed how the FBI basically shut down the Hunter Biden laptop story right before the election. Overt government action would have been controversial and, more importantly, illegal. I’m tired of hearing my liberal democratic friends tell me how banning and blocking by social media sites is fine, since the First Amendment doesn’t apply. Now, Circle couldn’t wait to block USDC from “tainted” Tornado Cash addresses. Circle is a puppet dancing on a string held by Blackrock and the U.S. government. Ethereum is controlled by the big players and Vitalik stands to make even more money once Proof of Stake makes Ethereum just like any other fiat financial company. I would love to sit here and say I don’t have to worry because I’m a bitcoiner. That’s not the case, though, since I still can’t get past the Wasabi Wallet Coinjoin debacle.
Neel Kashkari explains why governments want CBDCs (but the constituents should not).
All eyes are on Jackson Hole, but the real statement of the summer came from @neelkashkari: “I keep asking anybody to explain to me what problem [a CBDC] is solving.” 🧵
[Video]
reply
Kind of reminds me of this article:
"Bank Indonesia has been considering a central bank digital currency, or CBDC, since the start of this year.
“A CBDC would be one of the tools to fight crypto,” Agung said on Tuesday. “We assume that people would find CBDC more credible than crypto. CBDC would be part of an effort to address the use of crypto in financial transactions.” The central bank’s wariness of crypto assets could add to the dilemma of millions of Indonesians who invest in them. The National Ulema Council deemed cryptocurrency as haram, or banned, as it has elements of uncertainty, wagering and harm. The council holds the authority on Shariah compliance in the country that’s home to the world’s largest Muslim population.
Meanwhile, the government is pushing forward with plans to set up a dedicated crypto exchange as soon as this year. As many as 7.4 million Indonesians were invested in crypto assets as of July, doubling from last year, while transaction value surged to 478.5 trillion rupiah ($33 billion), according to the trade ministry."
^ Indonesian central bankers find CBDCs appealing as a form of behavioral control.
reply