Live data from Hacker News

What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

economist.com

51–60 of 148 posts

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#51

One benefit I didn't see mentioned was that central banks, being an arm of the government, presumably won't cut off payment processing for completely-legal-but-socially-unacceptable sites like private payment services do. I know this happens to porn artists/websites all the time, and recently it's been happening to political extremist sites like Parler etc. too.

I would expect the use of the system for policy enforcement to be much more intrusive.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#52
post #29
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I buy pretty much everything with VISA or Paypal. If I want something to be private, I could do it with cash or a cryptocoin. I think it would be nice if govt (via crown-corp or some such) provided an alternative that I can choose to use sometimes. They might have a better privacy-policy than I'm getting from the big companies lol. This might also open up new markets, e.g. micropayments, because govt could choose to…

Cash is private. Most cryptocoin are not particularly private. The few that set out to be private may or may not succeed at being private or being a widely exchanged digital currency.

I'd like to introduce you to a man named David Chaum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_signature

https://docs.wasabiwallet.io/building-wasabi/TechnicalOvervi...

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#54
post #21

Digital currencies allow for full tracking of every transactions and are a privacy nightmare. They allow applying negative interest rate on everybody and they would facilitate neverending hyperinflation (no need to print new bills at great expense). Hence they can't coexist with cash so say goodbye to cash. I don't like where we're going.

> I don't like where we're going. Me neither, not at all. The idea of a digital Euro is already worked on: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/html/digitaleuro.en.html Obviously, it's an "inclusive" system, a term that evokes in me strong feelings of mistrust, as it has no provisions of alternatives like not moving to a digital currency. "Inclusive" by mandate and without consent, or the possibility to opt out. (Somewhat…

Right on point distinction. There are various models:

- almost all CBDC designs are transparent (monitored and stored), since they sit on the ledger and has to be auditable by a third party. So, the only way to allow privacy is to give some „vouchers“ that those transactions are either not stored or stored with a different key. ECB has proposed one such designs, e.g. 300 euro vouchers a day.

- there are other models that do not use DLTs so they can provide means not to store specific txns, hence private.

If stored, it can be audited.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#55
post #14

Important note: central bank digital currencies are not crypto currrencies. They are not block chains. They are not decentralized. They are not permissionless. I cannot find a record of any CBDC which clearly states that it want's to use any of these technologies. I'd be interested to be proven wrong. Central bank digital currencies are essentially a new hybrid monetary/fiscal policy tool. Historically the Federal re…

Important note: bitcoin is a ponzi [1] and not digital gold. Learn how the investment fraud works. [1] https://github.com/openblockchains/bitcoin-ponzi

I thought the real value of Bitcoin is hiding shady deals: drugs, money laundering, etc. Needless to say, there is plenty of that to drive Bitcoin value up.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#56
post #48
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. I guess it feels almost unbelievable that all this fuss is over something so mundane. I guess i dont really understand why though. It sounds like the central bank is thinking about becoming, well, a normal bank. We already have normal banks. Governments can already transfer cash to accounts in normal banks. Governments can already sell bonds to people who want some sort of very stable investment backed b…

Benefit is that currently government insures bank deposit, which is subsidy to banking. For example, FDIC does deposit insurance in US. There is cap in FDIC insurance, which complicates large deposit. We can get rid of all these complexity with CBDC.

FDIC is funded via premiums paid for by member banks, not the gov. That's not a subsidary.

As far as the insurance cap goes, if the new plan is that the central bank doesn't need insurance because it can always print new money, i suppose that's true, but that is one hell of a subsidary and one that sounds scary from a fiscal responsibility standpoint.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#57
post #43
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you saying that digital currency is a fancy term for a direct deposit? Basically yes, but specifically only for the case of a direct deposit between the Federal reserve and an individual. That doesn't currently exist. But that's also basically my point. CBDCs are nothing new from an operational or technological perspective which I think is something many people are getting confused about. They are a new thing i…

Fair enough. I guess it feels almost unbelievable that all this fuss is over something so mundane. I guess i dont really understand why though. It sounds like the central bank is thinking about becoming, well, a normal bank. We already have normal banks. Governments can already transfer cash to accounts in normal banks. Governments can already sell bonds to people who want some sort of very stable investment backed b…

I think this is actually a monumental shift in the whole US political system were it to be enacted.

Because it drastically broadens the scope of actions the Fed or another CB is capable of therefor increasing its influence and importance. And keep in mind the people running it are not democratically elected and are partially private banks.

Right now the fed basically has no direct tie to the real economy. They always have to act indirectly via asset purchases from large institutions. They basically have one hand tied behind their back all the time. This unties that hand and allows them to interact with the real economy directly and not just the financial intermediaries.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#58
I welcome the convenience CBDC provides, but I am absolutely against the abolition of cash. You don't need to be an economist to see that having no cash is a nightmare - every transaction you make across your lifetime is tracked and can be shot down by somebody that is not you. I believe that cash should always exist as an alternative backup to any convenient electronic system. With responsibility comes authority, and taking too much authority from individuals is not healthy for a free society.

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't like where we're going. You'll own nothing and you'll be happy.

I'm pretty sure for the first part of your sentence but not the second one ;)

just to footnote the quote since I didn't know what it meant the first couple times I saw it: It's likely in reference to an article and line in a video as part of the World Economic Forum's "Great Reset" concept. The article generated some backlash so they changed the article title and added some notes to bookend it. (edit: WEFwoof posted this below as well)

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/how-life-could-change...

Video: 8 predictions for the world in 2030

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx3DhoLFO4s

Re: What is the fuss over central-bank digital currencies?

#60
post #48
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. I guess it feels almost unbelievable that all this fuss is over something so mundane. I guess i dont really understand why though. It sounds like the central bank is thinking about becoming, well, a normal bank. We already have normal banks. Governments can already transfer cash to accounts in normal banks. Governments can already sell bonds to people who want some sort of very stable investment backed b…

Benefit is that currently government insures bank deposit, which is subsidy to banking. For example, FDIC does deposit insurance in US. There is cap in FDIC insurance, which complicates large deposit. We can get rid of all these complexity with CBDC.

I personally don't belive this has anything to do with deposit insurance.
Post reply on HN