3 sats \ 6 replies \ @SoulOnChain 14 Jun 2022
It's trying to peg itself to the value of the dollar, right? So, I would say that it will eventually go to zero against bitcoin and other hard assets like all other fiat currency.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @AJ1992 14 Jun 2022
Disagree, stablecoins are the future of currency as a whole. You get that middle ground that people yearn for in currency.
reply
1 sat \ 4 replies \ @SoulOnChain 14 Jun 2022
Yes, I understand that it the short term, but it's pegged to the dollar. The dollar will go to zero over time, why wouldn't something pegged to it also go to zero? How could the dollar be worth zero but the stable coin pegged to it is worth more than zero?
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @ideasourcing OP 14 Jun 2022
It's a banker scheme, it's a much bigger conspiracy, IMO these stablecoins are technically virtual countries as their central banks, Swiss banks are in Switzerland, and so is Lugano, where USDT seems to be headquartered.
I use USDT only when I want to convert USDT to BTC if I see the price rising, or BTC to USDT if I see the price falling. But I am also forced to use it in the fiat BTC on-off ramps. In a way, central bankers (real ones) are in league with these virtual central bankers, who can just print/mine it out of thin air. It is in a way the most linked-with-BTC thing even before Luna/Terra and Celsius.
The only solution seems to be to keep self-custody, which is something most governments will try to kill, and then this theory will be proved, that government itself is creating stablecoins. All CBDCs will also fall in this category.
Ideally, each exchange given a license to operate in a country must register itself as a traditional bank first, and have people open accounts as banks normally do. Then we should be able to directly buy BTC with local currency, and convert BTC to local currency temporarily whenever we see a dump coming. Then convert back to BTC when we see a pump coming. Why is USDT there in the first place?
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @SoulOnChain 14 Jun 2022
Interesting take, thanks for that. I honestly hadn't thought about the virtual central bank angle.
Do you think there is a significant separation or difference between algorithmic stable coins and ones like Tether? I saw their CEO making the finance television rounds after the Luna/Terra disaster saying that their stablecoin is different and is fully backed by dollar assets. I don't believe their CEO, just off the fact that I can't verify anything he is saying. I think he did state that it was backed by commercial paper but they recently changed their treasury into mostly US treasuries.
I currently don't use Tether, if I do trade then I stick to one of the exchanges on lightning where they as of yet don't use stabelcoins, it's all btc margin. Although, I do see why a lot of people use it like you said and for other reasons. Self-custody seems like a solution, but the only self-custody solution for Tether that isn't a different blockchain seems to be the Liquid network, unless I am unaware of any others.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ideasourcing OP 15 Jun 2022
I don't know the details about stablecoins - algorithmic or not, but I have a hunch that they are all a big scam by the central bankers, because they are centralized right, just like central bank money printing. And if national governments want to do what I wrote above, I think the central banker organization must be forcing them all to use stablecoins instead of direct LocalCurrency-Bitcoin conversions.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @KingZing 14 Jun 2022
It's going to take several decades doing that, and that's assuming they don't do some sort of rebasement/new model sometime in the future.
USD is still far superior for day to day transaction in short to mid long term.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @cryptocoin 14 Jun 2022
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @AJ1992 14 Jun 2022
no way.
reply