Me sabe mal escribir tres veces seguidas... pero es que justo han sacado un video que más claro no te lo pueden decir. La ciencia nos dice que el alma no existe, pero, oh, el dinero sí tiene alma. Y también los tokens electrónicos que de dinero o currency no tienen nada.
He de reconocer que el gordito mexicano este me hace mucha gracia, porque cada dos por tres te repite que todo el dinero lo controla, y lo debe controlar, el BIS, por el bien común. Lo dice con ese posado tan serio y a la vez graciosa de ballena varada.
(recomiendo escucharlo a x1.5 ~ x2 porque si no te mueres). En cualquier caso, como sé que es un tostón, dejo los highlights. (Esto se ha publicado poco después de que eth tocara $2750).
The central question for bankers has always been: what is the soul of money?
Some say that in the future money and finance will be provided by just a few big tech corporations. Others dream of a decentralized system in which blockchains and algorithms replace people and institutions. And maybe all of these will take place in the metaverse.
My main message today is simple: the soul of money belongs belongs neither to a big tech nor to an anonymous ledger. The soul of money is trust and centrals banks have been and continue to be the institutions best place to provide trust in the digital age. [i.e.:
The soul of money belongs to BIS]
Over history independent Central Banks [
i.e: CORPORACIONES PRIVADAS] have emerged as a key institution to provide this trust. Alternatives have often ended badly. It is for good reason that most countries have established central banks.
Ver archivo adjunto 914855
In a market-based system the private sector remains the main engine of the economy. In today's two tier monetary system deposits are by far
the most prevalent form of money held by the public, since cash holdings are relatively small. Banks in turn place their own deposits with the Central Bank as bank reserves. In this case Central Banks provide an open neutral trusted and stable platform. Private companies use their ingenuity and dynamism to develop new payment methods and financial products and services. This combination has been a powerful driver of innovation and welfare.
But we must not take this successful symbiosis for granted.
Some recent developments may threaten money's essence [i.e.: being 100% controlled by BIS] as a public good if taken too far.
1) [Luego dice que si se deja a la Big Tech entrar en el tema de stable coins entonces la competencia traerá fragmentación y "risk to financial stability" - no explica las razones, pero está claro que en el libre mercado, los que tienen la impresora de dinero no quieren competidores. Lo mejor es que se queja de que las big tech podría hacer que el sistema monetario acabara "market concentration". El puñetero zampabollos del BIS qué narices que tiene]." Users may be handing the keys to our monetary system over to [other] private entities driven primarily by profits.
Ver archivo adjunto 914881
2) [Luego habla de blockchains decentralizadas] Decentralization can be a noble goal, but this principle is not what defi applications are delivering, there is a large gulf between vision and reality. Today the defi space has been user primarily for speculative activities. [Otra vez con sus pedazo huezos que su aun más grande barriga tapa: de los creados de quantitative leasing, la especulación como el monopolio es malo si no lo hago yo]. Users invest, borrow and trade crypto assets in a largely unregulated environment. But (defi) stable coins may not be sound as money [i.e.: fiat/debt issued by BIS]. Issuers (of defi stablecoins) can become creative on what counts as a safe asset. More fundamentally decentralization has a cost, so the system must generate enough fees to provide these validators with the right incentive. These fees accumulate mostly to insiders such as bitcoin miners. As in Goethe's opera (decentralized systems) could take on a life of their own.
When a crash happens and money is lost users will inevitably turn to a trusted and experienced party the public authorities to tame the only spirits and restor order. [Por eso antes he dicho que de momento no creo que vaya a petar el btc... esta posibilidad seguramente ya está planeada y petará en el mejor momento, no ahora]
Ver archivo adjunto 914892
3) A better application is possible, building on sound money new app could stand on a stronger footing.
They should not be based on anonymity but on identification [i.e.: biometrics] and trust. And they should comply with financial regulations designed to keep the system safe. [i.e.: BIS full control of all money]. Innovators should not antiestéticar regulators but work with them, to make their products sounders and more sustainable, building on Central Bank public goods. Trust in money remains the bedrock of stability. This scenario harnesses the benefits of big data and decentralized ledger technology and promote the public good nature of the monetary system. The monetary system is not fragmenetes in several gardens nor is dominated by a few large corporations [the monopoly remains exclusively on BIS hands]. CBDCs are directly issued by the Central Bank they inherit the trust that the public already palces in their currency and serve as a sound foundation for future innovation.
MultiCBDC network would be a global version of domestic monetary systems. The BIS innovation HUB is working actively to make this vision a reality. What is notable is that (msultiCBDC) are based on data loss protection where the Central Banks play the key role [i.e.: own all the centralized infrastructure].
Let's ensure that our financial system builds on the existing governance of money.
Ver archivo adjunto 914912
Luego le hace una pregunta y el rellenito responde muy claramente que este mCBDC va a empezar de 0. Es decir, sin ataduras a todas las regulacions bancarias y legacies que ellos mismos han creado. La segunda pregunta (29:36) tiene más miga:
Q>What Central Banks do in such frightering scenario where there's a shock in defi/crypto and a complete cascade of losses?
I think authorities would have very little reason to intervene, you know [let it fall]. At the end of the day the key issue here is the systemacity of the system.
What is important is that defi systems do not become systemically important. That's something that we as authorities we really need to look after. As you know, oftentimes, interventions by authorities has been triggered by too big to fail [insiders] in terms of market function. Precisely we should move fast and try to prevent that defi systems acquire systemic importantes without adequate supervision and regulation.
[En ningún momento define qué cachopo es para él en este momento
sound money, pero está claro que habla de vuestra deuda/tiempo futuro emitida por ellos y que cuenta como liability en su balance sheet. En cambio, a cualquiera que le preguntes qué es sound money, te contestará oro, plata, etc]
