3 ms·
If every person has an "digital currency wallet" held at their normal bank as a pass through to the fed already, and let's say congress passes a bill pre-approv
by anm89 6y ago
If every person has an "digital currency wallet" held at their normal bank as a pass through to the fed already, and let's say congress passes a bill pre-approving them to do a certain amount of stimulative distributions, they basically have a blank check. There would be no further approval needed for those distributions. It's even possible they would ask for this to be uncapped, essentially opening a new facility.
I think this structurally has less resistance than writing physical checks. What's the point of designing and implementing that system if they aren't going to be allowed to use it.
- yokaze 6y ago> If every person has an "digital currency wallet"... Nothing that follows in this paragraph depends on the pre-condition of having a digital currency wallet. > I think this structurally has less resistance than writing physical checks. That may be, but I find it hard to judge. I am skeptical if the decision to shell out a couple of billions depends on physical checks or not. You could also argue the reverse, a check works better for advertisement for the governing party. People get something physical that is worth something. > What's the point of designing and implementing that system if they aren't going to be allowed to use it. There are other use-cases. Direct depositing stimulative is one possibility, but from my point-of-view hardly a game-changer. Direct withdrawal/devaluation on the other hand... The main motivation I see though is more to compete with PayPal/Visa/MasterCard/Apple Pay/Google Pay..., and all the classic banks. The motivation is not to lose relevance, and if designed correctly, I can opt out of monetising my buyers history & private information.