Related Articles
The U.S. Bankers Association and Bank Policy Institute sent several letters to Congress in recent weeks attacking the GENIUS Act, bipartisan stablecoin legislation passed that became law after careful and thorough compromise was made. They don’t point to recent discoveries, or technical defects, that have been found in their arguments. They want Congress to reopen settled law because they don’t want to compete with the next wave of financial technology.
It doesn’t matter beyond the world of cryptocurrency, however, what this matters. It shows how America’s biggest financial institutions react when they compete not by providing better services, but by lobbying to impede alternatives.
As Americans prepare to celebrate 250 years of independence this July, a simple question is asked “Is it true that we believe in open markets and fair competition that makes our prosperity prosperous”? Do incumbents have power over innovation when competition takes place?
The economy of our nation was based on dynamism and innovation where new recruits could challenge incumbents and people would be able to choose how they save, spend or build their own economy. This fusion of personal freedom and open markets has been the basis for American economic success for nearly two and a half centuries.
That is a place where most Americans rarely think about tradition, today that’s under pressure the financial system. Congress passed last summer’s bipartisan GENIUS Act, which laid down the framework for theissuance, reserves and oversight of payment stablecoins. Symbols are digital assets pegged 11 to the U.C, where Stablecoins represent digital asset creations. A , S. The blockchain-based dollar that provides the dollars at a rate of internet access to the dollar is used by its ownphraser, which uses bitcoin technology. But now the big bank lobby is taking a step in to dismantle the law’s very provisions that could force them to compete with new recruits.
This debate isn’t a vacuum, this has not been dominated by . During the summer, policymakers already addressed stablecoin rewards to policy makers. But today’s efforts to revisit or reinterpret those decisions are not motivated by new discoveries of danger, but by attempts at restoring law and blunt competition after the fact that was settled.
It may sound technical, but it reflects much more important questions “Is our financial future going to be open and competitive,” or will we become increasingly closed (and controlled by only a few large institutions) as is the case with back and forth over stablecoin rewards” — in this context, according to The back-and-forward of these terms. According to the SEC, “the six largest domestic financial institutions have assets of more than 60% control over our GDP.”
That concentration does not necessarily provide better services for consumers, but it is a less important one to do so. The average American savings or checking account still is less than one percent of its value today, compared to just under one per cent (0. In fact, 39% for savings and 0. The FDIC says a small fraction of the current 3 percent is 07% for checking according to the , which has been updated. 50-3 50 3. 75% Fed Funds rates) and 75 per cent of. That gap is a sign of competition, not consumer demand. But when new technologies provide consumers with better returns, the banking industry has responded by a consistent response “The sky is falling and lobby against them.” That’s not a fair scrutiny and should be an issue to anyone who believes in free markets.”
Why is the reason clear, simple and straightforward? The reluctance of competition in the financial system when competition is discouraged often at large bank lobby pressures – does not erase demand. It is sucked artificially by . The U.S. leads when policymakers clear rules and allow fair competition, if they let the rule be true? If uncertainty or informal pressure is replaced with clear law, innovation moves elsewhere (usually to jurisdictions where the rules are weaker and fewer protections) when uncertainty/formal pressure replaces clear legal.
The only choke point in a healthy market is one chokepoint, which does not depend on the single choke Point of an individual who has been paraphrased. It has competition and alternatives to . banks are still essential to replace with new financial technologies, such as stablecoins. They can offer a further option, but they may be more likely to move value in the right way, benefit from instant settlement and earn returns that reflect market conditions better, giving people much choice about how they manage their financial life.
It’s the best thing America has done to do so, this is what it says in a . technological advances have increased individual freedom and reduced barriers to entry from online commerce to mobile banking, reducing the barrier of entry. No one should be the same for financial innovation,’ .
As America nears its 250th birthday, it is worth remembering that economic liberty and political freedom are deeply connected. The success of America has always been characterized by the freedom to transact, save and invest as well as build wealth.
The debate over stablecoin rewards is ultimately about whether we still believe in that model. Is a financial system where we need permission and settled law is reopened time and again to protect traditional incumbents who do not care about consumer interests? Or one that mixes strong rules with open competition and trust Americans in meaningful choice?
Historically, standing has never been the leading of the United States under any leadership. If we want to honor the values that paved this country, we should make sure our financial system is open, competitive and position for the next 250 years of American prosperity.”
Thanks for reading As America nears 250 financial freedom shouldn’t be up for debate
