Topic: The Central Bank of Facebook - page 6. (Read 6438 times)

These are reasons enough to steer clear of this so called "cryptocurrency".

Just because something may utilise the underlying technology of blockchains, doesn't mean that it's free from manipulation or centralisation. I think people are blindly putting way too much trust in projects like these, where a centralised entity is able to essentially manipulate both sides of the market, as well as the fundamentals of their own currency.

The fact that it's pegged to a basket of fiats also raises alarm bells, as in the long run, it's guaranteed to lose intrinsic value.

Even holding the actual cash or insured bank deposits of these currencies yourself will be better, and you're ridding yourself one more counterparty risk in the form of FB's potentially fractional reserve, or creating these coins out of thin air.

I think they will run on fractional reserves.

Yes, this is a great article to exposed what's the truth behind this Libra coin. And I think the US government knows a thing or two about it that's why they decided to go against it at the initial creation of the coin. Facebook coin might have open the pandoras box here, and now government around the world will be critical of any crypto that is going to open, and will used any excuses in the book to curb it out and cite this Libra coin as an example.

I like the headline, it`s says everything we need to know about future of facebook company and their transformation from social network to a central bank.
This is actually a great article, people should pay attention and read this. In the end of the article you can read this "Facebook claimed that its mission was to “empower billions of people”. Making money or strengthening its market power are, apparently, a sideshow." Let`s just add here their desire for control.
Well I don`t doubt they will have many supporters, just I`m not going to be one of them, and I will advise everyone else to stay away from it.

I do think this is actually a good idea you know .

To have a digital asset , a cryptocurrency that too backed up by major companies so that we can entrust it actually with some money and it won't go too low as we expect it be .

Therefore I don't know why this is not something that is a good thing .

We could avoid the bearish market and it may be beneficial for us in a long haul, I do think it might work out just fine.

We should experiment , we shouldn't just copy , if they would have just made a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin then it would still be lumped in the thousands other altcoins that we already have.

Rather, we should be concerned about which companies are part of the consortium. It might also give a good idea for the future and explain what the OP wants to mean. I can guess already these companies. The same Zionist enterprises interested to rule the world on behalf of a few people.
A type of company like Facebook isn't designed for finance activity, it's my opinion. And I doubt it will be a success, FB has lost his credibility long ago

Any time I see these companies making a new thing that would affect the whole world I remember fight club. In fight club there was a scene where the narrator (edward norton) talks about how in the future when we have space exploration it would not be colonies of nations or governments but it would be more like planet starbucks or something like that where basically he says space will be conquered by corporations.

Facebook has already tried to send a 200 million dollar something into space with spacex, now they are making their own currency as well, Libra will be the facebook currency, what stops facebook from having their own nation in the future? They could literally bribe their way into some island and buy it and basically run it, they even have their own national currency with Libra.

Do you think US government will just watch Libra coin taking down USD while inflation killing it?

Though really, there's some investors that switching their investment and getting ready to invest on it and leaving some alts dumped.


I hope they can prove it that they're really backed by it or it will be just another issue tho.

It is a stable coin with a consortium of big companies as the validator. If Libra reserves genuinely backed by a 1:1 ratio, then I don't see any serious problem. However, If they use the fractional reserve, I'm afraid inflation will speed up rapidly and take down the global economy (assumed Libra would become mainstream). Perhaps this situation is good for Bitcoin. People will realize that Bitcoin is the only non-debased currency.

Sorry but reading all the above text, the only think that I understood is that Facebook will be a digital Bank.
If their crypto is going to be reserved by dollars, euros etc. then this is the definition of Libra notion.

Please see this for background.

No, Facebook's new cryptocurrency, Libra, is not a new 'world currency,' as The Economist proclaims, nor a way to supplant (or protect Facebook and users against) the world's fiat money, as Bill Blain seems to think.

It's not even a real cryptocurrency whose value (in theory) stands on its supply and demand.  Libra's value will be pegged to a basket of dollars, euro, etc. by the Central Bank of Facebook.

What it will be is a new colony of the Western empire.  A country can, these days, be a sphere of activity, not just a geographic area.  Libra may be transacted across borders, but it is no universal money if its value comes from activities on Facebook and is issued and backed only by the Central Bank of Facebook.  (The Central Bank of Facebook stands ready to redeem each coin for a basket of national currencies, at a fixed rate.)

Why 'colony?'  Because what Facebook will do is precisely what official colonies of Britain and unofficial ones of America have done for centuries: use the value of real products and services produced in the colony to help support the paper money issued by Britain or America.  (To protect itself against the monetary policies of the 'mother country,' a colony must sell exports to buy and store reserves of the paper currency of the 'mother country.'  But, yes, you guessed it, not gold or silver.)

In any real sense, Libra will never be 100% backed by reserves of 'real money,' (as The Economist calls national currencies.)  Where would the fun be for Mark or colonial or banana-republic elites?  Why would you bother issuing a money if not to create wealth out of thin air?

If Libra becomes a magnet drawing new paid activity and associated software systems to Facebook, its reserves of dollars and euro will have to grow as this new economy grows.  I.E., more demand for dollars while Mark and software developers are doing all the work.  If, surprise surprise, the Central Bank of Facebook issues too much Libra and confidence collapses, Mark will take all the blame.  If anything, the demand for dollars will only go up, as users scramble to sell Libra for dollars and/or Libra is officially devalued, so the same dollar buys more real work.  (We've seen this movie before -- it's called the 'developing world.')

Libra won't be a brave new world; it goes way back to the old and enduring world that the top elites, if not everyone else, know well.  It's as if either a new Japan or a new banana republic has arisen from the sea, ready to serve the West with its teeming millions.  My quick guess is that it's more banana republic than Japan, judging by the scandals that have already plagued the company.  But who knows.  Holders (HODLers?) of state-free assets need not worry.  Things like this happened time and again over the last century.  State-free assets have endured.

P.S. Sorry if you think the Central Bank of Facebook exists, reading the above.  No, officially it will be a 'consortium,' where the Facebook delegation will be 'totally separate' from Facebook itself.  Right.