4 ms·

A U.S. Digital Dollar Should Serve the Public, Not Banks

25 points by pdog 5y ago

walterbell 5y ago
2021 paper from the same author, proposing 1-tier CBDC (direct accounts at the Fed), which could threaten thousands of US community banks. Meanwhile, China's CBDC is 2-tier, retaining their existing banking system. https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2215&context=faculty-publications https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a... > Congress should authorize the Federal Reserve to give everyone-individuals, businesses, and institutions-the option to maintain accounts at the central bank. We call these accounts FedAccounts. Unlike the CBDC approaches currently under discussion, which would use complicated and inefficient distributed ledger technology and be walled off from the existing system of money and payments, FedAccounts would be seamlessly interoperable with the mainstream payment system, relying on technologies that the Federal Reserve has used for decades
- cuteboy19 5y ago
  Why does the federal reserve require a distributed ledger at all?
  - anm89 5y ago
    They are specifically saying they don't plan to use a distributed ledger. Of course the US government is not going to allow miners to control their own currency or something like that. CBDCs have nothing to do with crypto. They are totally unrelated concepts.
Barrin92 5y ago
A zero-fee digital currency that every business in the currency zone accepts and that enables instant payments and transfers is pretty much all I want. I honestly don't understand why we don't have this yet. (euro area in my case). The entire private payments sector just seems like a rent-seeking industry to be honest. If a digital dollar/euro is disruptive to the private banking sector than honestly that just shows that they're not offering much in actual value.
smallmouth 5y ago
The large banks are always the primary beneficiaries of US monetary policy. It's always been that way, officially at least, since 1913.

25 points by pdog 5y ago

2021 paper from the same author, proposing 1-tier CBDC (direct accounts at the Fed), which could threaten thousands of US community banks. Meanwhile, China's CBDC is 2-tier, retaining their existing banking system. https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2215&context=faculty-publications https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a... > Congress should authorize the Federal Reserve to give everyone-individuals, businesses, and institutions-the option to maintain accounts at the central bank. We call these accounts FedAccounts. Unlike the CBDC approaches currently under discussion, which would use complicated and inefficient distributed ledger technology and be walled off from the existing system of money and payments, FedAccounts would be seamlessly interoperable with the mainstream payment system, relying on technologies that the Federal Reserve has used for decades

cuteboy19 5y ago
Why does the federal reserve require a distributed ledger at all?
- anm89 5y ago
  They are specifically saying they don't plan to use a distributed ledger. Of course the US government is not going to allow miners to control their own currency or something like that. CBDCs have nothing to do with crypto. They are totally unrelated concepts.

Barrin92 5y ago

A zero-fee digital currency that every business in the currency zone accepts and that enables instant payments and transfers is pretty much all I want. I honestly don't understand why we don't have this yet. (euro area in my case). The entire private payments sector just seems like a rent-seeking industry to be honest. If a digital dollar/euro is disruptive to the private banking sector than honestly that just shows that they're not offering much in actual value.

smallmouth 5y ago

The large banks are always the primary beneficiaries of US monetary policy. It's always been that way, officially at least, since 1913.