news Conservative U.S. Think Tank Denies Need for Federal Digital Currency

[kyoukage01 3181]

According to a think tank, the U.S. should refrain itself from creating its own cryptocurrency and support those that already exists instead, as opposed to other countries like China that attempts to create their own. At least that is what I infer from this article.

 

This will definitely boost the popularity and acceptance of cryptocurrencies already in use, especially the top ones. But there is the certainty that the U.S. will try to meddle in the affairs of the people using it, by imposing taxes, tracking personalities by the FBI, etc., in the name of national security or whatever.

 

Then again, countries that have their own national cryptocurrency can also do that, and so much more, simply because their governments "own" it, and technically, they can do whatever they want with it.

 

So maybe this think tank's approach isn't so bad after all.

 

What do you think?

 

Here is the link to the article:

https://cointelegraph.com/news/conservative-us-think-tank-denies-need-for-federal-digital-currency

Spoiler

Conservative U.S. Think Tank Denies Need for Federal Digital Currency

Conservative United States think tank the Heritage Foundation argues that instead of launching a central bank digital currency (CBDC), the government should ensure that the public can use the currencies they prefer, including private ones.

 

In a commentary piece published on Feb. 12, the Heritage Foundation notes that Facebook’s Libra global stablecoin project “is just the latest reminder that providing money does not have to be a centralized function of government.” The report answers to the idea that the public sector must ensure that sovereign currencies stay at the center of each nation’s financial system:

“Government officials should not suppress alternative forms of money to protect sovereign currencies; they should protect people’s ability to decide what forms of money are the best means of payment.”

Consumer sovereignty, not monetary sovereignty

The report argues that the principle of monetary sovereignty that member of the U.S. Federal Reserve's Board of Governors Lael Brainard spoke about in Febuary should be replaced with the concept of consumer sovereignty.

 

The Heritage Foundation cites the popular concerns that stablecoins and cryptocurrencies heighten the risk of crime and fraud, and notes that “the government does not need to create its own digital currency to protect people from these problems.” The paper claims:

“As with the existing payments system, any system based on cryptocurrencies can be policed by governments for fraud, consumer losses, and illicit activity.”

Competition between the Federal Reserve and private banks

The report also cites concerns that the Federal Reserve should not compete with the private sector. The central bank allegedly competes with private banks with its real-time payment tool, which Cointelegraph reported is expected to be a threat to private banks. The paper argues that a CBDC would also be a type of competition detrimental to the private sector:

“If everyone — not just banks or certain types of financial firms — has direct access to accounts at the Fed, then private banks will be in direct competition with the central bank for retail customers. If the Fed moves in this direction, private banks will lose, and so will their customers. Ultimately, the federal government would have full control over the money going into — and out of — every person’s account.”

Per the report, direct government control over every person’s account is part of the goal of such efforts. According to the Heritage Foundation, “this level of government control simply is not compatible with economic and political freedom.”

Talk of CBDCs in Washington

As Cointelegraph reported earlier this month, Brainard also said during the aforementioned talk that the institution is more open to the idea of central bank digital currency than previously. Yesterday, Congressman Bill Foster questioned a Federal Reserve official on U.S CBDC progress and was told that the institution is not yet sure whether deploying such a digital currency is a good idea.

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by kyoukage01

[PiroSense 2681]

13 hours ago, kyoukage01 said:

What do you think?

On a shallow perspective, it's all good for adoption of cryptocurrencies. But the argument telling they could police existing cryptocurrencies (like Bitcoin) is pure non-sense. Even if US try to identify every citizen having a wallet, creating one anonymously is too easy. Exchanging it to another person directly, away from exchanges, could be alsk easy. They would not be able to police everything on these existing decentralized platforms.

 

Also, this is only a think tank, a separate organization totally unaffiliated with the government.

 

The article also emerged because of Facebook's Libra, which is a centralized company full of privacy issues. They could manage that for sure, but not decentralized cryptocurrencies like BTC, ETH, and etc.

 

CBDC is still the way to go, or not adopt it at all (in government's perspective).

[gigabyteRTX 1583]

Well truly that adopting and accepting crypto currency by one country can increase their economic status if only they have proper preparation and proper knowledge of the people to succeed in this industry.

[Shahud 1319]

Most of countries trying to rule on the crypto and bitcoin but it can't be possible to control thr crypto and bitcoin.and when it comes tk trusting over government for crypto then they are not deserve to  trusted.and if they accept the bitcoin and legalise it then many ofthe financial issue can be resolved

[Jeet Narayan 1940]

Us governments Denise to make new Crypto because they can't control it because it is decentralized. Peoples wants to use Crypto but governments not accepting. China also thought to make new digital currency but now they denied this project.

[Oxygen 1004]

On 2/13/2020 at 12:40 PM, kyoukage01 said:

According to a think tank, the U.S. should refrain itself from creating its own cryptocurrency and support those that already exists instead, as opposed to other countries like China that attempts to create their own. At least that is what I infer from this article.

 

This will definitely boost the popularity and acceptance of cryptocurrencies already in use, especially the top ones. But there is the certainty that the U.S. will try to meddle in the affairs of the people using it, by imposing taxes, tracking personalities by the FBI, etc., in the name of national security or whatever.

 

Then again, countries that have their own national cryptocurrency can also do that, and so much more, simply because their governments "own" it, and technically, they can do whatever they want with it.

 

So maybe this think tank's approach isn't so bad after all.

 

What do you think?

 

Here is the link to the article:

https://cointelegraph.com/news/conservative-us-think-tank-denies-need-for-federal-digital-currency

  Reveal hidden contents

Conservative U.S. Think Tank Denies Need for Federal Digital Currency

Conservative United States think tank the Heritage Foundation argues that instead of launching a central bank digital currency (CBDC), the government should ensure that the public can use the currencies they prefer, including private ones.

 

In a commentary piece published on Feb. 12, the Heritage Foundation notes that Facebook’s Libra global stablecoin project “is just the latest reminder that providing money does not have to be a centralized function of government.” The report answers to the idea that the public sector must ensure that sovereign currencies stay at the center of each nation’s financial system:

“Government officials should not suppress alternative forms of money to protect sovereign currencies; they should protect people’s ability to decide what forms of money are the best means of payment.”

Consumer sovereignty, not monetary sovereignty

The report argues that the principle of monetary sovereignty that member of the U.S. Federal Reserve's Board of Governors Lael Brainard spoke about in Febuary should be replaced with the concept of consumer sovereignty.

 

The Heritage Foundation cites the popular concerns that stablecoins and cryptocurrencies heighten the risk of crime and fraud, and notes that “the government does not need to create its own digital currency to protect people from these problems.” The paper claims:

“As with the existing payments system, any system based on cryptocurrencies can be policed by governments for fraud, consumer losses, and illicit activity.”

Competition between the Federal Reserve and private banks

The report also cites concerns that the Federal Reserve should not compete with the private sector. The central bank allegedly competes with private banks with its real-time payment tool, which Cointelegraph reported is expected to be a threat to private banks. The paper argues that a CBDC would also be a type of competition detrimental to the private sector:

“If everyone — not just banks or certain types of financial firms — has direct access to accounts at the Fed, then private banks will be in direct competition with the central bank for retail customers. If the Fed moves in this direction, private banks will lose, and so will their customers. Ultimately, the federal government would have full control over the money going into — and out of — every person’s account.”

Per the report, direct government control over every person’s account is part of the goal of such efforts. According to the Heritage Foundation, “this level of government control simply is not compatible with economic and political freedom.”

Talk of CBDCs in Washington

As Cointelegraph reported earlier this month, Brainard also said during the aforementioned talk that the institution is more open to the idea of central bank digital currency than previously. Yesterday, Congressman Bill Foster questioned a Federal Reserve official on U.S CBDC progress and was told that the institution is not yet sure whether deploying such a digital currency is a good idea.

 

I think it is better to support first the existing crypto currencies by US. And also they should take some steps to encourage other countries too for the adoption of crypto currencies. When the most of countries started using crypto currencies than it is better to create own to boost up more. 

[Irungu 4299]

The US usually has an interesting country policies and usually when you look at it and see how it is heavily in control of what they are doing then there is one sure thing that one should know about it, its one thing to understand the market and its also another to really identify it, they like being careful because US has a lot of enemies and the enemies can come from so many sides as we can tell

[Sapdrx 469]

I think the thinktank is biased and unaware of the current luring financial crisis. There's not enough cash in the market and governments just print extra money when they need it. I think in some years they will be passed by the reality.

[kyoukage01 3181]

1 hour ago, SCB1234 said:

The discussion this week was actually in relation to the CVirus, and the discussion was the need to escalate the ove for a digital dollar. There was correct concern that either citizens or government might not like the scrutiny of funds, but need for competitive future.

Funny how the fuss over a teeny weeny virus made them raise the suggestion to create a 'digital dollar' much sooner.

 

There may be some who agrees, if only for the sake of the U.S. not being left behind by other countries already racing to create their own. And then we have people like the ones on the article, as you can see.

 

Can you share to us the link to that discussion?

 

[BTC Future 3946]

I think that any central bank digital currency (CBDC) will be centralized and under the complete control of the government and the banks. It will just be an adaptation of the fiat currency into a digital one, that will have cryptographic algorithms for security reasons, but it won't have a decentralized network such as Bitcoin's. They might be able to force it on the population, but still it will be even worse than fiat, since government organizations would be able to spy on the consuming habits of their citizens and perhaps find ways through other sciences to enforce certain habits and behaviors. It doesn't look good to me at all to be honest, although I don't care if they create a CBDC or not since they can't stop cryptocurrencies.

Edited February 16, 2020 by BTC Future

[Popedee 377]

On 2/13/2020 at 8:40 AM, kyoukage01 said:

According to a think tank, the U.S. should refrain itself from creating its own cryptocurrency and support those that already exists instead, as opposed to other countries like China that attempts to create their own. At least that is what I infer from this article.

The high point of that article for me it's the group claiming people should have freedom to determine what the choose as currency. I love their submission and I want to quote it

Quote

“Government officials should not suppress alternative forms of money to protect sovereign currencies; they should protect people’s ability to decide what forms of money are the best means of payment.”

 

[bentayebsalah 2280]

It does not look like a good idea, and they want that to control again, currencies, and eliminate decentralized cryptocurrencies, so I do not think that there is anyone who accepts this.

[Opinder 1310]

I do not think America would depend on others technology. It would introduce its own coin to satisfy its ego. USA a country which wants to stay at top in all aspects. It would definately take an action to compete China in crypto world.

[guatazoo 7150]

On 2/13/2020 at 10:40 AM, kyoukage01 said:

According to a think tank, the U.S. should refrain itself from creating its own cryptocurrency and support those that already exists instead, as opposed to other countries like China that attempts to create their own. At least that is what I infer from this article.

 

This will definitely boost the popularity and acceptance of cryptocurrencies already in use, especially the top ones. But there is the certainty that the U.S. will try to meddle in the affairs of the people using it, by imposing taxes, tracking personalities by the FBI, etc., in the name of national security or whatever.

 

Then again, countries that have their own national cryptocurrency can also do that, and so much more, simply because their governments "own" it, and technically, they can do whatever they want with it.

 

So maybe this think tank's approach isn't so bad after all.

 

What do you think?

 

Here is the link to the article:

https://cointelegraph.com/news/conservative-us-think-tank-denies-need-for-federal-digital-currency

  Reveal hidden contents

Conservative U.S. Think Tank Denies Need for Federal Digital Currency

Conservative United States think tank the Heritage Foundation argues that instead of launching a central bank digital currency (CBDC), the government should ensure that the public can use the currencies they prefer, including private ones.

 

In a commentary piece published on Feb. 12, the Heritage Foundation notes that Facebook’s Libra global stablecoin project “is just the latest reminder that providing money does not have to be a centralized function of government.” The report answers to the idea that the public sector must ensure that sovereign currencies stay at the center of each nation’s financial system:

“Government officials should not suppress alternative forms of money to protect sovereign currencies; they should protect people’s ability to decide what forms of money are the best means of payment.”

Consumer sovereignty, not monetary sovereignty

The report argues that the principle of monetary sovereignty that member of the U.S. Federal Reserve's Board of Governors Lael Brainard spoke about in Febuary should be replaced with the concept of consumer sovereignty.

 

The Heritage Foundation cites the popular concerns that stablecoins and cryptocurrencies heighten the risk of crime and fraud, and notes that “the government does not need to create its own digital currency to protect people from these problems.” The paper claims:

“As with the existing payments system, any system based on cryptocurrencies can be policed by governments for fraud, consumer losses, and illicit activity.”

Competition between the Federal Reserve and private banks

The report also cites concerns that the Federal Reserve should not compete with the private sector. The central bank allegedly competes with private banks with its real-time payment tool, which Cointelegraph reported is expected to be a threat to private banks. The paper argues that a CBDC would also be a type of competition detrimental to the private sector:

“If everyone — not just banks or certain types of financial firms — has direct access to accounts at the Fed, then private banks will be in direct competition with the central bank for retail customers. If the Fed moves in this direction, private banks will lose, and so will their customers. Ultimately, the federal government would have full control over the money going into — and out of — every person’s account.”

Per the report, direct government control over every person’s account is part of the goal of such efforts. According to the Heritage Foundation, “this level of government control simply is not compatible with economic and political freedom.”

Talk of CBDCs in Washington

As Cointelegraph reported earlier this month, Brainard also said during the aforementioned talk that the institution is more open to the idea of central bank digital currency than previously. Yesterday, Congressman Bill Foster questioned a Federal Reserve official on U.S CBDC progress and was told that the institution is not yet sure whether deploying such a digital currency is a good idea.

 

I think it would be good idea if Americans will produce their own cryptocurrency, because America now is the most leading to have corona's cases, so that cryptocurrency will help them to use in order to avoid the supply of covid 19 by using fiat currencies.

[magd 5231]

I think they need them. The federal forces should have their own currency that provides them with special features for them. Even if the center denies its need for the cryptocurrency, but I think it may be beneficial to them. Thank you.

[bliznec 22267]

The United States is concerned with cryptocurrencies and is concerned with the resolution of cryptocurrencies as soon as possible. But these actions, unfortunately, turn into failures. 

[tienda 8776]

The United States of America government are face to the phenomenon that they cant control, so the unique thing they can do is to invest is such project to convert cryptocurrency in stable currency and traceable..

[BrolySSJ 7899]

I think countries having their own crypto is a good idea, in the sense that it will help out to build the country and may also help in economic development, however i also think that the world needs to have one crypto such as bitcoin whereby people from around the world can then still do transactions with other users in crypto, which i think is important in promoting global financial relationships.

[Rezort 846]

Well, there could be some good consequences as well as bad ones, and in my opinion, bad sides of this approach are prevail over good ones, so I am against it.

[kyoukage01 3181]

11 hours ago, Bob option said:

I do not understand why the major countries do not support the currencies in the market and are always trying to create their own currency. Do these countries want to control their own currency at a certain price or do you want something else that is confusing and frankly speaking.

Maybe they want it like "State-owned is state-controlled". Or maybe in the case of Petro (Venezuela), with their fiat at that time in hyperinflation mode, they wanted to make a digital currency in the attempt to alleviate the difficulties in their economy. Whatever the reason, no state-owned crypto has yet proven themselves successful AFAIK.

 

Edited April 16, 2020 by kyoukage01

[Zues 1069]

On 2/13/2020 at 3:40 PM, kyoukage01 said:

According to a think tank, the U.S. should refrain itself from creating its own cryptocurrency and support those that already exists instead, as opposed to other countries like China that attempts to create their own. At least that is what I infer from this article.

 

This will definitely boost the popularity and acceptance of cryptocurrencies already in use, especially the top ones. But there is the certainty that the U.S. will try to meddle in the affairs of the people using it, by imposing taxes, tracking personalities by the FBI, etc., in the name of national security or whatever.

 

Then again, countries that have their own national cryptocurrency can also do that, and so much more, simply because their governments "own" it, and technically, they can do whatever they want with it.

 

So maybe this think tank's approach isn't so bad after all.

 

What do you think?

 

Here is the link to the article:

https://cointelegraph.com/news/conservative-us-think-tank-denies-need-for-federal-digital-currency

  Reveal hidden contents

Conservative U.S. Think Tank Denies Need for Federal Digital Currency

Conservative United States think tank the Heritage Foundation argues that instead of launching a central bank digital currency (CBDC), the government should ensure that the public can use the currencies they prefer, including private ones.

 

In a commentary piece published on Feb. 12, the Heritage Foundation notes that Facebook’s Libra global stablecoin project “is just the latest reminder that providing money does not have to be a centralized function of government.” The report answers to the idea that the public sector must ensure that sovereign currencies stay at the center of each nation’s financial system:

“Government officials should not suppress alternative forms of money to protect sovereign currencies; they should protect people’s ability to decide what forms of money are the best means of payment.”

Consumer sovereignty, not monetary sovereignty

The report argues that the principle of monetary sovereignty that member of the U.S. Federal Reserve's Board of Governors Lael Brainard spoke about in Febuary should be replaced with the concept of consumer sovereignty.

 

The Heritage Foundation cites the popular concerns that stablecoins and cryptocurrencies heighten the risk of crime and fraud, and notes that “the government does not need to create its own digital currency to protect people from these problems.” The paper claims:

“As with the existing payments system, any system based on cryptocurrencies can be policed by governments for fraud, consumer losses, and illicit activity.”

Competition between the Federal Reserve and private banks

The report also cites concerns that the Federal Reserve should not compete with the private sector. The central bank allegedly competes with private banks with its real-time payment tool, which Cointelegraph reported is expected to be a threat to private banks. The paper argues that a CBDC would also be a type of competition detrimental to the private sector:

“If everyone — not just banks or certain types of financial firms — has direct access to accounts at the Fed, then private banks will be in direct competition with the central bank for retail customers. If the Fed moves in this direction, private banks will lose, and so will their customers. Ultimately, the federal government would have full control over the money going into — and out of — every person’s account.”

Per the report, direct government control over every person’s account is part of the goal of such efforts. According to the Heritage Foundation, “this level of government control simply is not compatible with economic and political freedom.”

Talk of CBDCs in Washington

As Cointelegraph reported earlier this month, Brainard also said during the aforementioned talk that the institution is more open to the idea of central bank digital currency than previously. Yesterday, Congressman Bill Foster questioned a Federal Reserve official on U.S CBDC progress and was told that the institution is not yet sure whether deploying such a digital currency is a good idea.

 

I think that they should not create their own and just try to support the existing currencies now. It can rise the prices by recognizing them and giving them a chance to help the economy. It will be a huge help for the currency. 

[kyoukage01 3181]

22 hours ago, xpertt said:

For me, I think countries should stop creating their own currency and we should use those currencies that is already existing in the market because I think creation of many currency is just a waste of time and also a lot of them will die because there are no investors and supporters of those coins.

This doesn't stop them from trying anyway.

 

I think maybe if a country adopts, advocates, and encourages the use of crypto to the point where at least half or its population are actively using it, then declares making a new coin, then maybe it wouldn't turn out to be much of a shitcoin. So far as I see it, China is doing a half-baked approach with this one, and other countries have rather placed interest in the blockchain than in cryptocurrency itself.

 

[Nezar 7169]

I do not agree with this proposal. Each country should establish its own currency in addition to supporting the existing currencies, especially Bitcoin. In addition, cryptocurrencies must be allowed to purchase many important things in our daily life.

[CryptoMaxim 3829]

Such opinions may be divided as not everyone believes in cryptocurrencies. And the usual financial system has been established and works for a long time. Probably his opinion is caused by this.

[Thekingcallme 1975]

On 4/15/2020 at 1:01 PM, BrolySSJ said:

I think countries having their own crypto is a good idea, in the sense that it will help out to build the country and may also help in economic development, however i also think that the world needs to have one crypto such as bitcoin whereby people from around the world can then still do transactions with other users in crypto, which i think is important in promoting global financial relationships.

A lot of the country is already creating its own cryptocurrency to protect itself and control its currency in order to enter the field of crypto without fear.