Author

Topic: Fear of Facebook spurs Federal Reserve to build its own digital currency (Read 394 times)

hero member
Activity: 1008
Merit: 531
Maybe they are afraid of competing with Facebook, where Facebook innovations have emerged first and the lives of their projects will be empflated.
The government feared if the Fiat would be shaken and people would be more interested in that Facebook currency. The value of the cryptocurrency is no tax and it is better to invest.
Perhaps the government is making their currency only for their political interests so that the payment of transactions is able to compete with other private parties.

no , of course that not, they don't affraid fight agaisnt libra/facebook they just affraid about losing control about their own money.
If the Fed does not stay ahead of this rapidly maturing technology, I fear private sector efforts to eclipse fiat monetary systems will get ahead of them, with potential disruptions to our banking system and in a worst case scenario, loss of control of our own currency.
and they will collapse from what they create before.
and also what u mean no tax ?
many many developed countries already make taxes for cryptocurrency.
I don't think they were afraid of it taking over the regular currency they use, BTC is way bigger and that isn't getting restricted that much (mostly the banks banning people from buying btc).

I reckon it's more about their image, and they don't want a company like Facebook to take over the finance systems since it doesn't have the best track record.
Facebook can be dominance coin after legal by US government, still many economic community disagree with Facebook coin make little late to publish for investor, after announcing more than last three months Facebook coin become most interested discussing public on investor prediction Facebook coin become competitor with bitcoin and other altcoin.
I disagree, how can libra dominate the market when the US has already shattered it. I'm going to take a educated guess here and day that due to the US's involvement it's likely why a lot of their partners pulled out.

Facebook's coin also wouldn't really be a direct competitor to bitcoin, that'll be saying that USDT is a direct competitor to BTC. They both have completely different goals and they understand this, which was why not a lot of people in our community actually hated Libra, but felt bad for them in a way.
sr. member
Activity: 938
Merit: 251
Maybe they are afraid of competing with Facebook, where Facebook innovations have emerged first and the lives of their projects will be empflated.
The government feared if the Fiat would be shaken and people would be more interested in that Facebook currency. The value of the cryptocurrency is no tax and it is better to invest.
Perhaps the government is making their currency only for their political interests so that the payment of transactions is able to compete with other private parties.

no , of course that not, they don't affraid fight agaisnt libra/facebook they just affraid about losing control about their own money.
If the Fed does not stay ahead of this rapidly maturing technology, I fear private sector efforts to eclipse fiat monetary systems will get ahead of them, with potential disruptions to our banking system and in a worst case scenario, loss of control of our own currency.
and they will collapse from what they create before.
and also what u mean no tax ?
many many developed countries already make taxes for cryptocurrency.
I don't think they were afraid of it taking over the regular currency they use, BTC is way bigger and that isn't getting restricted that much (mostly the banks banning people from buying btc).

I reckon it's more about their image, and they don't want a company like Facebook to take over the finance systems since it doesn't have the best track record.
Facebook can be dominance coin after legal by US government, still many economic community disagree with Facebook coin make little late to publish for investor, after announcing more than last three months Facebook coin become most interested discussing public on investor prediction Facebook coin become competitor with bitcoin and other altcoin.
sr. member
Activity: 1274
Merit: 278
Facebook might be not suitable for the entire state that's how the Federal Reserve see it, in this case, building their own digital currency will be a big step to induce market adoption to the entire state. Regarding this, a state having their own digital currency will impact greatly to their people's view on how fiats will be in the future. I can see, they are now taking slow movements to the betterment of cryptocurrency but still not disregarding their banks but to incorporate it for better transactions, faster and much more efficient.
member
Activity: 526
Merit: 10
Lifestyle & Wellness Platform
I think a lot of people are really not really sure how big a bank is going to do to a country's financial and economic markets. The bank is the place where providing money to the economy helps many businesses to grow and produce.
If banks are no longer an intermediary step, it seems that they will lose a great source of income. Besides, whether the Fed or any central bank develops a coin with its own blockchain will similarly weaken banks.
In general, I think blockchains should still be used by banks early to make transactions faster.
hero member
Activity: 1008
Merit: 531
Maybe they are afraid of competing with Facebook, where Facebook innovations have emerged first and the lives of their projects will be empflated.
The government feared if the Fiat would be shaken and people would be more interested in that Facebook currency. The value of the cryptocurrency is no tax and it is better to invest.
Perhaps the government is making their currency only for their political interests so that the payment of transactions is able to compete with other private parties.

no , of course that not, they don't affraid fight agaisnt libra/facebook they just affraid about losing control about their own money.
If the Fed does not stay ahead of this rapidly maturing technology, I fear private sector efforts to eclipse fiat monetary systems will get ahead of them, with potential disruptions to our banking system and in a worst case scenario, loss of control of our own currency.
and they will collapse from what they create before.
and also what u mean no tax ?
many many developed countries already make taxes for cryptocurrency.
I don't think they were afraid of it taking over the regular currency they use, BTC is way bigger and that isn't getting restricted that much (mostly the banks banning people from buying btc).

I reckon it's more about their image, and they don't want a company like Facebook to take over the finance systems since it doesn't have the best track record.
hero member
Activity: 1638
Merit: 518
Maybe they are afraid of competing with Facebook, where Facebook innovations have emerged first and the lives of their projects will be empflated.
The government feared if the Fiat would be shaken and people would be more interested in that Facebook currency. The value of the cryptocurrency is no tax and it is better to invest.
Perhaps the government is making their currency only for their political interests so that the payment of transactions is able to compete with other private parties.

no , of course that not, they don't affraid fight agaisnt libra/facebook they just affraid about losing control about their own money.
If the Fed does not stay ahead of this rapidly maturing technology, I fear private sector efforts to eclipse fiat monetary systems will get ahead of them, with potential disruptions to our banking system and in a worst case scenario, loss of control of our own currency.
and they will collapse from what they create before.
and also what u mean no tax ?
many many developed countries already make taxes for cryptocurrency.
sr. member
Activity: 1204
Merit: 253
Undeads.com - P2E Runner Game
Maybe they are afraid of competing with Facebook, where Facebook innovations have emerged first and the lives of their projects will be empflated.
The government feared if the Fiat would be shaken and people would be more interested in that Facebook currency. The value of the cryptocurrency is no tax and it is better to invest.
Perhaps the government is making their currency only for their political interests so that the payment of transactions is able to compete with other private parties.
legendary
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1124

I think the Fed will really find it necessary to create their own coin to adopt into the new technology, its going to be centralized we all know that but need it that way. There is no sense in criticizing anymore, its all opensource and can be forked people had already created different alt coins that they shall also be competing. China is about to launch which is a big jump for them and it feels like most countries who are against it are being tricked by China.
I understand what you are saying, there is no way we can stop them from creating their own coin seem everyone that want to enter into Blockchain technology likes to create their own coin, but don’t you think that these coins will be becoming too much if everyone is creating their own coin, and when every country begging to create there, it will limit the use of cryptocurrency to a particular people and not make it expand for it to be uniformly used.

As china as created its own crypto, you know that it will be limited to the china people alone, as you will never find a us person using it, and this is not the view of cryptocurrency which is why I feel they ought to have just embrace bitcoin in other to create the oneness that we need for the world.
legendary
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1041

I think the Fed will really find it necessary to create their own coin to adopt into the new technology, its going to be centralized we all know that but need it that way. There is no sense in criticizing anymore, its all opensource and can be forked people had already created different alt coins that they shall also be competing. China is about to launch which is a big jump for them and it feels like most countries who are against it are being tricked by China.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1034
It is unlikely that a central bank will launch a decentralized or cryptocurrency. Note that a "cryptocurrency" word means there is some decentralization in addition to encryption in its layers.
Facebook call for the launch of a hybrid currency trying to gain new competitive advantages against paper currencies & subject to legislation is a whistle the beginning of the emergence of this type of industry and will not stop unless the launch of a hybrid currency of major alliances that serve as the central bank and subject to its legislation.
So whether Libra succeeds or not, we will see the birth of a hybrid currency nearby. It determines the time, the extent of its decentralization and its effectiveness.
it is inevitable in the digital era where everything is digitized , start from newspaper , books, shopping etc have a digital version now. payment processor / currency is being digitized now so i won't surpised at all with this.

just the matter of time, as the reason behind why it is urgent to have digital currency is because the traditional money works in ineficient way like :
the fees is high
the transaction proccess takes too long
it was not easy access to your money

to summarize it all , they knew the advantages of digital currency but disagree with the cryptocurrency concept as they want a control over it. that's why they prefer/ planning for a hybrid currency.
legendary
Activity: 2464
Merit: 1102
I have no doubt that if a central bank develops a cryptocurrency, it will be centralized (or at least federated) and they will track every cent that you spend.

It will simply be a fiat currency that you can move via a blockchain. And it's value will be exactly the same as the fiat. So $1 on a blockchain will be the same as $1 in paper currency.

It just makes it easy to move without using western union and so on. And kills off Facebook's coin (which is trying to be a stable coin pegged to the dollar). Why bother with a stable coin issued by a company when you can have a blockchain dollar that is the real thing?
If you ask for my own opinion, I think i would even prefer to use that government owned cryptocurrency than to go for Facebook option because I think Facebook has a very funny way of trying to hijack everything which is for profit purpose, so Facebook coming to cryptocurrency to promise all those features of their Libra coin was never because they had true passion or emotion for cryptocurrency and the liberation of people, but i think first, it would be for more money making, and secondly, it could also be away to get back at the government too for the charges that is being slammed on them for their privacy control fault issue they had with the government.

I am ready to support whatever that would make all those PayPal, western union less powerful and less involved in our transaction.
hero member
Activity: 1330
Merit: 569
In my own opinion, I wont say its the fear of Facebook but rather the fear that their teeming population are moving towards digital currency. Not everybody would use Facebook and even without the Libra currency, a lot of people have beef against Facebook simply because of the fact that it has access to a lot of people information across the globe which in recent times have been found deficient in keeping those information safe. If it were to be Facebook, they would have ensured that fight is killing Libra and the moment large conglomerates are pulling out of the initiatives, they should just go back and rest but because they know that even if Facebook did not develop Libra, nothing is stopping their people from going digital and they need to be ready for it.
sr. member
Activity: 756
Merit: 251
Yes this is what I was talking about , the reason the government was so controlling over the Facebook's decision of building their own cryptocurrency is not because it is bad for the society but it's because  they fear that it might cause a uproar , a now government , a new nationality might arrise , everyone already knows how many people are on Facebook and how many companies trust them and are sponsoring them , therefore I think it might really be successful.

while I agree with the first part of your thoughts, but as for the second one I think it is even too complex then that. all they want is to control financial flows and money emissions
in fact it does not matter for them if it is paper or digital money until they control it and gains profits.

Their attitude can be summarized from your post. It does not matter for as long as they gain profit. That is what they are and what they do. This attitude covers not only about financial flow and money emissions. This also includes the observance of the law. They do not care about whether something is illegal or not for as long as the price is paid. Double standard is always the standard of the government.
hero member
Activity: 2716
Merit: 698
Dimon69
while I agree with the first part of your thoughts, but as for the second one I think it is even too complex then that. all they want is to control financial flows and money emissions
in fact it does not matter for them if it is paper or digital money until they control it and gains profits.

This is their hidden agenda, just like how China keeps banning cryptocurrencies since thy can't put tax on those money or investments that are in cryptocurrencies since exchanges location are all different. What more that facebook is used in all over the world and many big companies are interested that somehow drops their partnership now due to pressure that Facebook or Liba needed to comply to start operating, but we understand complying is really needed to secure users privacy.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 507
Yes this is what I was talking about , the reason the government was so controlling over the Facebook's decision of building their own cryptocurrency is not because it is bad for the society but it's because  they fear that it might cause a uproar , a now government , a new nationality might arrise , everyone already knows how many people are on Facebook and how many companies trust them and are sponsoring them , therefore I think it might really be successful.

while I agree with the first part of your thoughts, but as for the second one I think it is even too complex then that. all they want is to control financial flows and money emissions
in fact it does not matter for them if it is paper or digital money until they control it and gains profits.
hero member
Activity: 1890
Merit: 831
Yes this is what I was talking about , the reason the government was so controlling over the Facebook's decision of building their own cryptocurrency is not because it is bad for the society but it's because  they fear that it might cause a uproar , a now government , a new nationality might arrise , everyone already knows how many people are on Facebook and how many companies trust them and are sponsoring them , therefore I think it might really be successful.
legendary
Activity: 3080
Merit: 1500
One point of concern is that, who would act as a node if Federal Reserve launches a cryptocurrency? It is evident that Fed won't employ common people like us to run a node from our homes, so who would that be?? If Fed itself choose to act as a node and retain the power to control the network, it's not decentralization! So Fed issued cryptos will just become a digital representation of the fiat money with a tweak! In this process, they will cut out their close allies, Banks!
member
Activity: 574
Merit: 12
The United States had long had to work on the issue of its national stable coin, and not wait until private individuals began to deal with global financial issues and therefore the US financial system will in the future depend on the actions of these private individuals. Probably, the US government realized that it is better to lead the process of transition of society to cryptocurrency than to fight it. Therefore, this step is quite predictable, especially after the Chinese government began to force the appearance of its national stable coin CBDC. This is a fairly positive process for the development of cryptocurrency if world states begin to issue their national stable coins, which will be supported by governments.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1088
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
I have no doubt that if a central bank develops a cryptocurrency, it will be centralized (or at least federated) and they will track every cent that you spend.

It will simply be a fiat currency that you can move via a blockchain. And it's value will be exactly the same as the fiat. So $1 on a blockchain will be the same as $1 in paper currency.

It just makes it easy to move without using western union and so on. And kills off Facebook's coin (which is trying to be a stable coin pegged to the dollar). Why bother with a stable coin issued by a company when you can have a blockchain dollar that is the real thing?
legendary
Activity: 3528
Merit: 7005
Top Crypto Casino
The real reason for negative press against crypto has been its innovation and value factors.
I disagree--negative press is because of the threat bitcoin poses to the current banking and fiat systems, just like the article said the Fed was concerned about.  Bitcoin is also a new thing, which most people don't understand and the media plays on the fear that is inherent with the unknown.  It drives me crazy.

And yeah, any fedcoin will be centralized and will probably be unpopular with the plebians unless we're forced to use it, of course.  But you know what?  As long as the US doesn't outlaw bitcoin, I'm fine if they create their own coin.  Let the market decide what it wants.  I don't think the threat to the system from bitcoin is anywhere near as bad as they might think.  It's been around for ten years now and hasn't exactly disrupted anything to the point where banks are sweating bullets. 

The government is probably more worried about tax evading and people using crypto for illegal goods & services, and their argument in the article is likely a smokescreen.
hero member
Activity: 2702
Merit: 672
I don't request loans~
Learning about the country means learning about the law and also the complexity of the interests of its citizens, in addition to requiring speed and savings, citizens also need security guarantees for transactions using digital currency & cryptocurrency. In contrast to banks that provide guarantees of money security by providing a 100% return if losses are caused by bank mechanisms and SOP errors. There is no guarantee in blockchain technology or financial institutions involved in it. For example, some exchangers who experience digital hacking so that their assets are lost.

And this is why bitcoin is both good and bad in the eyes of others. Decentralization of the financial system is great in the eyes of most people since this removes the manipulation possibly made by the government themselves who hold our fiats. On the other hand, Hackers and Scammers filled the crypto world because of the fact that it IS decentralized. This makes the current system of crypto seem like alien to most of the masses since they would have to handle their funds themselves, storing it themselves in their own digital storage or something of the sort.

I'd bet that the Federal Reserve is trying to find a loophole or a way at the very least to stop the people from adopting bitcoin or at least those that haven't and would push them to instead adopt their coins.
legendary
Activity: 2254
Merit: 2253
From Zero to 2 times Self-Made Legendary


Not afraid but feel challenged to maintain his hegemony. On the one hand, they understand that technology means efficiency but on the other hand, technology is expensive and the dynamism is moving fast and cannot be controlled. So always the policy taken by the government is to prohibit and threaten penalties for violations. But the government realizes that technological progress cannot be denied, therefore the Central Bank seeks to combine banking security and securities with blockchain technology.

Learning about the country means learning about the law and also the complexity of the interests of its citizens, in addition to requiring speed and savings, citizens also need security guarantees for transactions using digital currency & cryptocurrency. In contrast to banks that provide guarantees of money security by providing a 100% return if losses are caused by bank mechanisms and SOP errors. There is no guarantee in blockchain technology or financial institutions involved in it. For example, some exchangers who experience digital hacking so that their assets are lost.
legendary
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1427
Interesting how fear can also drive this powerful institution now to act in a different way.

Not really that surprising. Facebook isn't a private entity that just drops a new payment protocol and suddenly the whole world is using it.

Facebook is a company that has to abide by every single regulation of each jurisdication they plan to operate in. This is where Bitcoin obviously shines, because there are no rules to abide by. It's truly borderless, near impossible to curb down on, and there is no entity behind it that profits from its existence such as how Facebook profits from Libra's existence.

I like the fact how Libra has made some high level politicians almost hype up Bitcoin to trash talk Libra.  Cheesy
sr. member
Activity: 1554
Merit: 334
We'll see if they would implement identification of addresses to their planned cryptocurrency. If they do so, then it's no different to current banking system. I also don't agree on Facebook doing Libra because first,  I think it would just fool people into thinking it is private when in reality, when used with Facebook platform, they are still identified and nothing is private. However, even if the feds make their own, I don't think people will trust it because the government surely does not want lose of control and surveillance to what people do.
sr. member
Activity: 756
Merit: 251
Interesting how fear can also drive this powerful institution now to act in a different way. The thing that they are criticizing is the very thing that drives them into the area they equally criticized in the past. And now they are also entering into the arena. This must be the chilling fear inside them that let them finally deciding to join the club. Welcome to the digital world, where the rules are different and where you are probably going to be defeated.
hero member
Activity: 1666
Merit: 753
I think that this was an imminent move by the Fed regardless of whether or not Facebook decided to move ahead in their Libra project. That's just because of the general direction that we're heading in in terms of cashlessness. It was only a matter of time.

But the fear is definitely real that FB will somehow take the powers of the Fed into their own hands.

They probably saw how there is now a duopoly in China in terms of the two dominant financial services providers in alipay and Wechat pay essentially cornering the banking industry, and they know that they cannot exert as direct or as much control over FB as the Chinese government can over their payment processors.
legendary
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1196
STOP SNITCHIN'
I have no doubt that if a central bank develops a cryptocurrency, it will be centralized (or at least federated) and they will track every cent that you spend.

That's the primary trade off for end users. Banks offer a layer of privacy that requires a court order to break. They certainly aren't anonymous, but they are still world's away from a Fedcoin where transactions will be openly surveilled.

A new monetary construct like this is pretty terrifying. Rather than thousands of banks distributed across the world, we're talking about the Fed or a company like the Libra Group having access to a huge swathe of the world's transaction data.
sr. member
Activity: 1190
Merit: 306
I have no doubt that if a central bank develops a cryptocurrency, it will be centralized (or at least federated) and they will track every cent that you spend.
Ya think? 

If people as a whole are barely adopting bitcoin as a currency, what makes the federal reserve think that whatever coin they bring to market is going to make an impact?  Don't they know most intelligent people would scoff at what basically would amount to a debit card issued by the federal gov't?  They really must think people are stupid (not surprisingly).

And yes, of course it would be completely centralized, just like the fed itself is.  Un-frigging-believable.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18748
Bair said it could be more secure, efficient and less costly.

With a cryptocurrency sitting on a distributed ledger, you could just go directly from point A to point B. You don’t need an intermediary.
Sooooo.... exactly how bitcoin works then? Seems like all the features they are touting as advantages of a Fed owned digital currency are exactly the same features that make bitcoin, well, bitcoin.

Can't say I'm surprised about this. First the banks jumped on board, then we saw some governments try to launch their own coin, and then multinationals like Facebook. It was only a matter of time before the Fed caught up too. As others have said, any such coin will be a sham. It will either not be decentralized at all, or will be run by a network of users/nodes which are owned/operated/funded by the Fed themselves. No way they are going to give up the ability to print more money as and when it suits them.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 4002
It is unlikely that a central bank will launch a decentralized or cryptocurrency. Note that a "cryptocurrency" word means there is some decentralization in addition to encryption in its layers.
Facebook call for the launch of a hybrid currency trying to gain new competitive advantages against paper currencies & subject to legislation is a whistle the beginning of the emergence of this type of industry and will not stop unless the launch of a hybrid currency of major alliances that serve as the central bank and subject to its legislation.
So whether Libra succeeds or not, we will see the birth of a hybrid currency nearby. It determines the time, the extent of its decentralization and its effectiveness.
sr. member
Activity: 1078
Merit: 310
This is an interesting story that would merit the U.S. Government's attention and stance towards cryptocurrency! I understand this is a brilliant idea but I think the U.S. will conduct necessary studies first before pursuing it because I think it could trigger a massive disruption across world economies along with their financial institutions and they also have to consider  the repercussions that might occur resulting from it - not to mention the fact that it could also hurt its own economy by affecting financial sectors and banking industry.

Also, I am thinking that implementing such plan could also trigger a cold war era crypto race as superpower countries in the likes of China and Russia would not want top be left behind in this niche and would ultimately build their own crypto to match that of the U.S. to maintain status quo  and their influences over global affairs and economics.
hero member
Activity: 2702
Merit: 672
I don't request loans~
Aren't they a bit too late on the party now? With how much resistance they put up against the development of bitcoin, and now that facebook is trying to make their own digital currency, they also want to build one now? Sadly for them, Facebook isn't the one they are supposed to fear, it should be bitcoin. And here they are, the government trying to make their own digital currency as to not let their influence in the financial market dwindle. As all of us should expect, such currencies would be totally controlled or at least tracked by the government themselves, which defeats the purpose of what the current trend of decentralization is. Well at least, the world is starting to see that fiat is dying and the time for digital currency is right here right now.
legendary
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1179
I have no doubt that if a central bank develops a cryptocurrency, it will be centralized (or at least federated) and they will track every cent that you spend.
Not only that, but I'm pretty sure that it will be offering interoperability between their network and the seperate banking networks for even more control. It's going to be a cage the regular folks won't be able to escape from.

All so that the governments don't need any permission from a bank to reverse transactions and freeze balances, but do it themselves at any time of the day.... this is something that won't only happen in China, but also globally.

It's a scary scenario that will be playing out in the coming years, but one we can somewhat prepare ourselves for by parking a chunk of our wealth in Bitcoin.... anything we can save now will bring you closer to financial freedom later on.
sr. member
Activity: 1008
Merit: 355
Despite criticism about delays or fees in bitcoin, alternative options presented by banks and financial institutions are always worse. The real reason for negative press against crypto has been its innovation and value factors. Crypto raises the bar for payment processing and merchant industries, making it difficult for more established financial institutions to compete.

So is USA then joining the China on this aspect? Well, I think this has been suggested to them before but the reaction is just lukewarm but with the coming of Libra the idea is getting its new life. I am sure that the Fed will not be considering this idea seriously as they see no need to make a digital version of the dollar for now, maybe not until they can see China successful on this regard. I am not in favor of centralized cryptocurrency as there is no advantage of it except being, well, digital.


I have no doubt that if a central bank develops a cryptocurrency, it will be centralized (or at least federated) and they will track every cent that you spend.

This is quite expected. And that is why we in the cryptocurrency community should be expressing our disgust and opposition to the idea of the Fed making its own cryptocurrency. However, China will soon be launching the digital yuan (or whatever name they might call it) to the big Chinese market and let's see how viable it can be especially in international eCommerce transactions. I am sure that once China can be good with this, there will be an avalanche of many other countries doing the same. Finally, we are entering the death of the physical fiat money replaced by the digital fiat ones. Ouch!



sr. member
Activity: 1540
Merit: 420
www.Artemis.co
So the Federal Reserve is in for the competition now, well this is scary because they don't allow any entity to take over control of the financial system which could never happen anyway. I understand their goal its not for the masses but for the few only.
legendary
Activity: 4466
Merit: 3391
I have no doubt that if a central bank develops a cryptocurrency, it will be centralized (or at least federated) and they will track every cent that you spend.
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1441
Quote
Lawmakers and Federal Reserve officials are so concerned about Facebook’s plans to launch a new digital currency that they’re contemplating a novel response — having the central bank create a competitor.

Momentum is building for an idea that was once considered outlandish — a U.S. government-run virtual currency that would replace physical cash, a dramatic move that could discourage major companies like Facebook from creating their own digital coins.

Facebook’s proposed currency, Libra, has forced the Fed to consider the issue because of a fear that private companies could establish their own currencies and take control over the global payments system. Some Fed officials share the concern about a new balkanized currency system outside government control that Facebook has threatened to unleash.

“Libra bust this way out into the open,” said Karen Petrou, a managing partner at Federal Financial Analytics who advises executives on coming policy shifts.

But it’s not just Facebook. The matter is also taking on urgency as other countries consider creating their own digital currencies — another potential challenge to the primacy of the U.S. dollar. The head of the Bank of England has floated the idea that central banks could create a network of digital currencies to replace the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

The discussions are informal at this point. Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have written to the central bank asking officials to consider how they might approach a digital currency, and some Fed officials have begun to acknowledge the government might someday play a role.

“It is inevitable,” Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia President Patrick Harker said at a recent conference, according to Reuters. “I think it is better for us to start getting our hands around it.”

Those discussions will land on the Fed’s doorstep this week as the world’s top financial policymakers gather in Washington for meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

Even if Libra fails because of Facebook’s political baggage — the blowback from lawmakers and regulators has been so fierce that the association tasked with running the cryptocurrency has lost a quarter of its initial members — central bankers worry that another major company could enter the space. If the Fed doesn’t establish a digital currency, who will?

The flurry of recent moves by Facebook and the Fed’s international counterparts has also caught the attention of Congress.

“None of us know precisely how the digital world will evolve,” said Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.), who has asked Fed Chair Jerome Powell to report back on what the Fed can do. “But it’s important they undertake this kind of preparation work and analysis.”

The growing pressure on the Fed is evidence of how rapid developments in technology are beginning to shake the foundations of the financial system, raising questions about whether policymakers are prepared. Some lawmakers want the Fed to take a more active role in fintech developments.

“A consumer payments system is a natural monopoly, the same way Microsoft Word is a natural monopoly,” said Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.), who joined with Hill to ask the Fed to outline its options for creating a digital currency. “No one wants to use some incompatible word processor. … The question arises — shouldn’t it be the U.S. taxpayer and the U.S. government that does it rather than any private firm?”

The details of a possible Fed-developed digital currency are still vague. But advocates and experts say such an instrument could give consumers a new way to make payments without having to rely on banks and without incurring fees when they transfer money. The digital currency would likely take some inspiration from the technology that underpins other cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin.

But over the last couple of years, the Fed’s leaders have been anything but enthusiastic. Members of its Washington-based board of governors have dismissed the idea that the central bank should create its own digital currency.

But that was before Facebook revealed its plans to become a huge player in the financial system. The social media giant’s June announcement that it planned to spearhead a new digital currency jolted the Fed and other regulators around the world.

An array of powerful figures — Powell, President Donald Trump and House Financial Services Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) — quickly voiced concern about Facebook’s vision for disrupting payments networks.

Officials took the threat so seriously because of Facebook’s massive built-in user base. Trump immediately highlighted and dismissed concerns about it posing an existential threat to the dollar. “It is by far the most dominant currency anywhere in the World,” he said of the greenback, “and it will always stay that way.”

Another radical proposal dropped in August, when Bank of England Governor Mark Carney, who leads monetary policy for the U.K., suggested that central banks join forces to create a network of digital currencies that would make up a “synthetic hegemonic currency” — similar in some ways to Libra, which is expected to be backed with a variety of existing currencies.

Carney framed it as a potential replacement for the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency — not to mention a way to address risks from a possible transition to China’s renminbi as the next dominant currency.

Carney is one of many officials around the world who have been suggesting that governments create their own competitors to Libra.

Christine Lagarde, before leaving her post as managing director of the IMF to lead the European Central Bank, made a case for governments issuing their own digital currency, which she said was “not science fiction.”

The Bank for International Settlements, which represents the world’s central banks, said early this year that most were conducting research into central bank digital currencies and many were progressing from conceptual work into experimentation and proofs-of-concept.

The IMF/World Bank meetings this week are likely to highlight the debate.

It was a topic of discussion when Facebook’s lead executive on Libra, David Marcus, appeared with Carney on a panel Wednesday that focused on “Big Tech and the Future of Finance." Marcus said access to a government-run system that addressed Facebook's goals would have made his life simpler.

"The real reason we're trying to build this is it doesn't exist," he said.

Fed Governor Lael Brainard, who dismissed central bank digital currencies earlier this year, dedicated a portion of a speech to the prospect that central banks will develop their own currencies.

Brainard said there were "compelling advantages to the current system" in the U.S., and she urged caution, warning of the challenges arising from the Fed managing hundreds of millions of potential accounts. But she acknowledged that other jurisdictions were moving ahead.

"At the Federal Reserve, we will continue to analyze the potential benefits and costs of central bank digital currencies and look forward to learning from other central banks," she said on Wednesday.

Petrou, who advises on regulatory issues through her firm, is warning banks that they need to view the discussions with a greater sense of urgency. Banks are key operators in the financial plumbing of today’s U.S. payments system.

“Many of your banks may think they’re increasingly run by regulators,” Petrou told a group of lawyers for large banks earlier this month. “Soon, though, regulators may also run banking.”

Sheila Bair, who led the FDIC during the 2008 financial crisis, is among those urging the Fed to act. She argued that a new Fed-developed digital currency could be used by the public to transfer money without the need for banks and fees. If based on distributed technology — allowing for a decentralized database of transactions across a network — Bair said it could be more secure, efficient and less costly.

“We’ve got inefficient payments,” Bair said in an interview. “It’s expensive. The retailers hate it. Bank customers hate it. … With a cryptocurrency sitting on a distributed ledger, you could just go directly from point A to point B. You don’t need an intermediary. That’s how it’s supposed to work in theory. That’s basically what Facebook is trying to launch.”


In recent Senate testimony, she said the stakes are high for the Fed.

“If the Fed does not stay ahead of this rapidly maturing technology, I fear private sector efforts to eclipse fiat monetary systems will get ahead of them, with potential disruptions to our banking system and in a worst case scenario, loss of control of our own currency,” she said.

Linda Jeng, who left the Federal Reserve earlier this year and is now a visiting scholar at Georgetown Law, said the Fed has been carefully studying distributed ledger technology and how it could improve the payments system.

“They’re not only looking at it from an intellectual, research perspective but also at its potential future applications in central banking and payments,” she said.

“They really recognize that even if Libra blows up, another money construct will follow,” Petrou said. “Any of the tech platform companies has terrific market power. They cannot stop it. They have to beat it.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/15/facebook-federal-reserve-digital-currency-047477


....


This excerpt summarizes everything relevent on this:

Quote
Sheila Bair, who led the FDIC during the 2008 financial crisis, is among those urging the Fed to act. She argued that a new Fed-developed digital currency could be used by the public to transfer money without the need for banks and fees. If based on distributed technology — allowing for a decentralized database of transactions across a network — Bair said it could be more secure, efficient and less costly.

“We’ve got inefficient payments,” Bair said in an interview. “It’s expensive. The retailers hate it. Bank customers hate it. … With a cryptocurrency sitting on a distributed ledger, you could just go directly from point A to point B. You don’t need an intermediary. That’s how it’s supposed to work in theory. That’s basically what Facebook is trying to launch.”

Despite criticism about delays or fees in bitcoin, alternative options presented by banks and financial institutions are always worse. The real reason for negative press against crypto has been its innovation and value factors. Crypto raises the bar for payment processing and merchant industries, making it difficult for more established financial institutions to compete.

One key advantage bitcoin enjoyed in its design and implementation phase is insulation from politics and conflicts of special interests. In theory the US federal reserve provides insulation from politics and conflicting perspectives by not being under the direct control of political factions. In reality however, the federal reserve has always been subject to politics from its shadowy anonymous owners, which could disadvantage it enough that it could never objectively design or implement a payment network capable of competing with bitcoin or crypto. Many of which were designed from the onset to be good and honest solutions to problems. Rather than politically expedient solutions designed to push agendas which appears to have become the norm in how programs like addressing climate change are currently being implemented.

Jump to: