Law & Policy

from paul krugman's substack:

"...stablecoins don’t serve any clearly useful function. They can’t be used to make ordinary purchases, and there’s nothing you can do with them that can’t be done more cheaply and more easily with debit cards, Venmo, Zelle, wire transfers etc. That is, why not just use dollars instead of tokens that are supposedly backed by dollars?"

honestly shameful behaviour, lying to your gullible shitlib audience that doesn't know any better. not even worth the time to write a rebuttal but: 

1) stablecoin remittances are between 100-1000x cheaper (and faster) than wire transfers, this is a very stupid talking point

2) USDC is backed 1:1 and publishes monthly independent transparency reports, why pretend otherwise? fractional reserve banking is held to a far lower standard and I'd expect an "economist" to know better.

https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/digital-corruption-takes-over-dc

This piece and others is being taken as gospel by a lot of Dems that are already skeptical of crypto. Go into the comments and you can literally find former Clinton and Obama Admin senior advisor Reed Hundt praising this as enlightening. 

Crypto has a very hard problem for the remaining skeptical Democrats: anyone in crypto is seen as talking their book, and those outside crypto (who almost invariably are negative on it if they are commenting on it) are seen as clear truth-tellers. 

The substance of the argument is irrelevant - the identity of the messenger is what appears to matter, with a very prominent academic who clearly doesn’t understand the basics of the tech having his jeremiad regarded as gospel.

Former SEC/CFTC/House&Senate staffer. Now Policy@Paradigm. Perennial Optimist.

Dems have a very clear addiction to viewing all problems through identity