What leverage are you using to short bobros?
FED: STABLECOINS AREN'T THE FUTURE
Nicholas White
Jonathan Robinson
Bullish
Dylan Baker
crypto niggers are getting played and selling out the future to literal digital enslavement and people in pods living delusions in the “meta verse” just like the troons of the matrix envisioned
Jaxon Gomez
>IT DOES SOMETHING UNNECESSARILY
>THE ONES THAT DON'T ARE WORSE
doesn't that mean it's necessary then
what the fuck are they talking about
Cooper Howard
>tying up liquidity is unnecessary
>not tying up liquidity makes the asset risky
?????????????
Aaron Edwards
>kvetching intensifies
Camden White
>You see all those other shitcoins are scams with mint functions, but our shitcoin that has a mint function (that we repeatedly abuse) is not like those coins
Wyatt Sanders
ust bros i just got going on anchor, is this the end?
Ayden Rogers
> hey goi we need our entitlement programs
> you stop tying up liquidity in internet money
No.
Chase Lopez
>shorting stablecoins
Brilliant
Kayden Sanchez
>we are making stable coins but we won't call them that because then you'll just buy more crypto
Matthew Williams
Dont use crypto, because, just dont.
Parker Thomas
>stablecoins that do not tie up liquidity are risky
Let's break this down and see why it is so absurd. What they are describing are 2 models of stablecoins--- one is where the coins are backed 100% by fiat that is held by the issuing company (liquidity tied up), and the other is like tether, where only a fraction of the existing stablecoins are backed by fiat held in reserve. The latter--- which the Fed is describing here as "risky"--- is a literal mirror of what the fractional reserve banking system is, where banks are constantly lending and investing money that fundamentally doesn't exist and is backed by probably less than 10% of money held in reserve. In the former case of the 100% backed stablecoin, which the Fed describes as unnecessarily tying up liquidity, it's not ideal because it means you are leaving money idle that could be invested or put to work generating more value, alongside the stablecoins issued on top of them.
The fractional reserve approach is ideal in that sense because it prevents idle money sitting around and accelerates economic expansion. However, it's risky because if there is a disaster in the ecosystem where enough people default on their debt or there is a bank run, there is not enough money actually in reserve and you would experience a deflationary crisis.
Leave it to the Fed to describe in veiled terms why the current banking system is risky and retarded
Kayden Baker
Fuck this is a horrible admission of how this system works.
>You can't tie up liquidity by actually having 100% backing in reserves
>And if you don't it's risky....but not when we do it because of reasons....
Christopher Foster
>We already have an efficient form of digital money; we just need to
So we don't have an efficient form of digital money.
Mason Young
unironically yes. it needs tremendous amounts of new capital injected so the yield can stay elevated. literal ponzi
Carter Perry
Nope it just needs to get wider crosschain adoption, once the strings tighten on usdt/c people will realise the need.
John Adams
its true, if you put all your money into digital, and the power goes out, its all tied up and unusable
Levi Morgan
They need more time to counter and do not want you to put them in a corner.
Justin Turner
Honk honk honk
Nathaniel James
Warning to all newfags. Do not do whatever is suggested in thread. Ever. You will lose all your pocket money. Longing and shorting did not exist for crypto at all. It was made a new market. A market that (you) can only lose, as it is played by absolute professionals.
Jace Clark
Crypto is inherently racist and has it's roots in white supremacy.
Nolan Harris
Well, that's the nice thing about it. Don't tell them the negative stuff.