Discussion about holding stablecoin


#22

If we had not had fiat, where would all of the monies have come from to allow people to push up the price of cryptos to make us fat profits.

I used to hate bankers / fiat.
But where would the world be now if we hadnt had them.
Its a broken system i hope we can move away from, but imo was a necessary evil.
Stablecoins have their place, but are only as good as the fiat / gold they represent.


#23

It is one thing to point out the problems with an existing system.
But it wouldn’t be wise to completely switch immediately to a (radical) different system that hasn’t proven itself enough in reality.


#24

When I think about gold backed stablecoin it does not do much for me, gold is a quite volatile asset from what I know and that would mean that you need to move trucks of gold in and out the facility to keep it backed 1:1? Do I make the wrong conclusion here, as it don’t excit me much I’dont have the energy for any deeper thought about it, I rather see stablecoins backed by relative stable assets as USD or Euro.


#26

Because imo.
Without the banks using fractional reserve to create money from nothing, a hell of a lot of the industry that is present today simply wouldnt be here, alot of the technological advancements that have been made wouldnt have been made, it would be a less advanced world.

I never said my goal was to make profits, but they make my life less work and more play, and i like that.

Utopia, dystopia, its all a matter of perspective.


#27

The USD is not pegged to gold so that can’t be a stablecoin. Either way, “no bank failure risk” is simply untrue unless you argue it isn’t really a bank but that’s just splitting hair because the type of risk stablecoin holders face is quite the same.


#29

if i’m understanding your reply correctly:
right, so why would you want a stablecoin pegged to the USD, when you can have one pegged to gold. it may be a bit more volatile short term, but it holds its value over long term and, redeemable anywhere.
edit:
I don’t remember who said this but, it was a notable, high ranking financial individual:

“all fiat currencies eventually will return to a value of zero.”

Granted, we probably wont see that zeroing out of the dollar in our lifetimes, but it’s a testament to the value of gold.


#30

they would probably just keep a reserve of gold on hand as opposed to trucking it in and out constantly… that would be a logistical nightmare.


#31

The world has tried to peg money to gold and that did not work out due to for example too little gold to support the market growth and problem to maintain the peg to gold because of the volatility. As the meaning of the word stable in “stablecoin” I believe that it is important to have it linked to a resource which is “stable” in price.

Can recomend reading the part “U.S. balance of payments crisis”

"“After the end of World War II, the U.S. held $26 billion in gold reserves, of an estimated total of $40 billion (approx 65%). As world trade increased rapidly through the 1950s, the size of the gold base increased by only a few percentage points. In 1950, the U.S. balance of payments swung negative.”

"For the Bretton Woods system to remain workable, it would either have to alter the peg of the dollar to gold, or it would have to maintain the free market price for gold near the $35 per ounce official price. The greater the gap between free market gold prices and central bank gold prices, the greater the temptation to deal with internal economic issues by buying gold at the Bretton Woods price and selling it on the open market. "

It don’t make sense to me, why peg something you want to be stable to something that is volatile? Money is commonly accepted as payment and is usually free-floating which makes it find equilibrium on the market which gives it a relative fair price and value.


#33

it appears as tho its a bit of a double edged sword. on the one hand, the gold standard wold wreak havoc on the current economy as per this article. on the other, pegging to the dollar, knowing that all fiat currencies are essentially not worth the ink and paper used to make them and, only valuable because we’re told they are.


Note: for clarification. I think i may have gotten of base here with that last post. i’m not talking US economy with regards to the USDVault post i made initially. i’m referring to a much smaller base of people to which the amount of gold currently currently in circulation would have no problem providing security for. Or, for at least those who choose to invest in that stablecoin.


#34

Gold does indeed hold “a” value over the long. I’m unsure whether it translates to a coin pegged to gold because this:

… is not actually true. For one, gold is not actually easily converted to something that you can buy and sell with. Even more importantly, a cryptocurrency pegged to the gold would not be redeemable as gold exactly in the type of situation when fiats are no longer an option.

Also, gold isn’t just a “bit more” volatile than fiat but a lot more.


#35

At least it doesn’t seem to drop in value by half every 10 years like Fiat :stuck_out_tongue:


#37

That’s great but you still won’t be able to withdraw your gold-pegged stuff as gold exactly when you most need to. In the meantime, it’s too volatile to be a buy-and-forget type of stable investment and it’s also not a legal tender to be useful for everyday purposes.

In other words, do keep some under your pillow if you’re paranoid, but don’t buy into crazy gold-pegged stablecoin ideas.


#38

Very scary to log in and see a balance of zero on TUSD on Ethereum blockchain trackers. It looks like a standard update that caught me and maybe others off-guard, but sounds like nobody lost their TUSD value.

I’m just hearing about this after the fact but was still scary this morning.

Anyone else affected?

Blockchain info sites should update values soon I imagine, but did anyone actually lose TUSD coins in this?