I see stablecoins as a bridge between fiat and Bitcoin.
USA appears to be using them to also prop up the dollar and compete with other digital trade payments protocols such as mBridge that China and BRICS have developed and CIPS.

Very few nation states or large businesses are using Bitcoin for trade payments- the contest for that is between the USA and China/BRICS.

Hard to see Bitcoin competing on trade payments although hopefully it might happen in the future.

Solomonsatoshi

Normal means subject to state regulations and the functional and geographic limits they impose. It means juicy fees going to intermediaries. It means friction for users.

Stablecoins are beating tradfi because they offer an easier way to move money. As regulators get more and more hooks into them, it seems like stablecoins will be less and less good at beating tradfi.

But bitcoin only feels like it's floating breezily above all this if it never needs to touch fiat. As soon as you try to trade bitcoin for dollars or euros, we come crashing down.

If there is not widespread merchant adoption of bitcoin, I don't see bitcoin following a very different course.

bitcoin

Stablecoins: Evolution, not a Revolution by Roy Sheinfeld

> Normal means subject to state regulations and the functional and geographic limits they impose. It means juicy fees going to intermediaries. It means friction for users.

Stablecoins are beating tradfi because they offer an easier way to move money. As regulators get more and more hooks into them, it seems like stablecoins will be less and less good at beating tradfi. 

But bitcoin only feels like it's floating breezily above all this if it never needs to touch fiat. As soon as you try to trade bitcoin for dollars or euros, we come crashing down. 

If there is not widespread merchant adoption of bitcoin, I don't see bitcoin following a very different course. 