11 sats \ 2 replies \ @south_korea_ln 29 Oct \ on: Digital euro sparks sovereignty battle between EU governments and ECB news
But as the project nears reality, a tug-of-war has erupted. Several European Union governments, including France and Germany, argue the ECB has gained too much control over one crucial aspect: how much digital currency citizens will be allowed to hold in “wallets” backed by the central bank.
While it may seem like a dry technical issue, the stakes are enormous. Politicians and technocrats worry that if the limit is set too high, citizens could pull vast sums from traditional banks during a crisis, jeopardizing the stability of the entire banking system. Some are also concerned that any cap could infringe on personal financial freedom, stoking fears of a “Big Brother” state, according to one diplomat, who like others mentioned in this piece was granted anonymity to speak freely about a sensitive issue.
[...]
Even so, that might not do much to resolve the broader worry — that a project intended to save Europe from the overarching economic dominance of U.S. tech now threatens to become a risk in its own right, should the ECB forge ahead without adequate democratic support.
Very interesting piece. It's a good reminder that within the EU, many different member states do not agree with each other. And unlike what is sometimes claimed here, not all member states are in favor of some of the recent draconian privacy or individual freedom measures pushed by other EU member states.
write
preview
this territory is moderated
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @SwearyDoctor 29 Oct
also, important to note where the banking centers are. Of course Frankfurt is a big banking center within the EU, as are Luxemburg, ireland, and France. So anything that draws money from commercial banks hurts their economies more than others. This was the point I made long ago on why CBDCs are unlikely to replace the current fiat system: they kill commercial banks, which at this point would no longer hold the citizen's money, which of course is a major source of their capital requirements and a profit center. CBDCs on a wide scale is murder of the banking system. And that system is not only a major foundation of national economies, the more cynical ones among us might point out that they own them and won't allow any such change if they can help it.
This is why there will be no CBDC in the US. In the EU, it's different, as the banking industry is a major part of the economic imbalance among countries in the EU, and many EU countries have little to no commercial banking of their own, which means that their capital flows out of their countries to underpin OTHER EU countries - namely. Luxemburg, germany, and Ireland, to a lesser extent France and Spain. Those EU countries not in this list would not be all too hurt by such a shift, on the contrary. So this is where the fight arises, and why a CBDC is still more likely in Europe than in the US.
Bonus point, the continuing expansion of the EU has been a US project for decades. Using this bloated EU to weaken Europe as a competitor is part of this plan. So making the EU gobble up country after country is a strategy that makes a CBDC more likely, which in turn will strengthen the US banking sector massively in comparison to the EU one.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @co574 OP 29 Oct
DOCUMENTARY:
reply