Por qué las monedas digitales de bancos centrales van a destruir a las criptomonedas

Nov 19, 2018 Nouriel Roubini

NUEVA YORK – Los banqueros centrales del mundo han comenzado a discutir la idea de monedas digitales emitidas por bancos centrales (CBDC por su sigla en inglés), y ahora hasta el Fondo Monetario Internacional y su directora, Christine Lagarde, están hablando abiertamente sobre los puntos a favor y en contra de la idea.

Esta conversación viene muy atrasada. El efectivo se utiliza cada vez menos y prácticamente ha desaparecido en países como Suecia y China. Al mismo tiempo, los sistemas de pago digitales –PayPal, Venmo y otros en Occidente; Alipay y WeChat en China; M-Pesa en Kenia; Paytm en la India- ofrecen alternativas atractivas para servicios que alguna vez sólo proporcionaban los bancos comerciales tradicionales.

La mayoría de estas innovaciones tecnológicas para ofrecer servicios financieros todavía están conectadas con los bancos tradicionales, y ninguna de ellas se basa en las criptomonedas o en el blockchain (cadena de bloques). De la misma manera, si alguna vez se llegan a emitir CBDC, no tendrán nada que ver con estas tecnologías de blockchain tan promocionadas.

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, topical collections, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more. All for less than $9 a month.

Subscribe Now

Nouriel Roubini

Writing for PS since 2007
163 Commentaries

Nouriel Roubini, Professor Emeritus of Economics at New York University’s Stern School of Business, is Chief Economist at Atlas Capital Team, CEO of Roubini Macro Associates, and Co-Founder of TheBoomBust.com. He is a former senior economist for international affairs in the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers during the Clinton Administration and has worked for the International Monetary Fund, the US Federal Reserve, and the World Bank. His website is NourielRoubini.com, and he is the host of NourielToday.com.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 22 Comments on this article

Tayeb D Dec 7, 2018

Why is one of the sharpest minds in economics wasting his time on Cryptocurrencies. The US financial markets lost more than 5% this week, that's at least two trillion. Roubini is obsessed with Cryptocurrencies which are worth less than 100 billion. We need Roubini's sharp intellect and acute intelligence to make sense of the big questions of the day like how to prepare for the consequences of Brexit? What are the economic consequences of the riots in France and possible solutions to the French malaise? The Italian Budget and the potential crisis with the EU? Advice on how to resolve the US-China trade dispute.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Yordan Radev Dec 6, 2018

● Lots of irritating inaccuracies and mistaken conclusions in that article:
1. In fact, central banks around the world started discussing CBDC years ago, approx. since 2012, and ever more actively since 2015.
2. None of the central bank discussion papers I have read so far, some of which referred to by the author, speaks of CBDC as a substitution of the banking system. In fact, most papers have a balanced view of CBDC business case, based on their statutory tasks, responsibilities and objectives. Some of these paper also say that adoption of CBDC may require a change in state constitutions and central banking statutes.
3. These reports say that cash is used less only in a number of countries, this isn't true for the majority of other economies, incl. major reserve fx currencies.
4. It is not said that CBDC will have nothing to do with blockchain. There are a number of scenarios considered, e.g. token- and account-based CBDC with different levels of anonymity, holding limits, cross-border accessibility, maturity, availability, interest, etc.
5. It is not clear whether CBDC would "immediately displace cryptocurrencies". As seen in the Annex of the IMF November 2018 discussion paper, cryptocurrency is one of the technological alternatives, providing for full anonymity, like today's cash in circulation. While CBDC can't be 100% anonymous due to AML/CFT.
6. The IMF Novermber 2018 paper doesn't really say that the fractional-reserve system will be replaced by a narrow-bank system, neither does it say anything about "financial revolution that would yield many benefits". In fact, central banks are still in the initial phase of their CBDC talks, and most of them agree that further research and analysis on CBDC use case are absolutely necessary.
7. And others.
● The author should first read the papers, and then write articles
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
dilbert dogbert Nov 30, 2018

To paraphrase Chairman Mao: All Money Comes Out Of The Barrel Of A Gun.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Nomad Locus Nov 25, 2018

Sadly, I believe that Roubini has lost his bellwether status as a provider of sound economic information to the public. He's not doing his homework...

"The world’s central bankers have begun to discuss the idea of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and now even the International Monetary Fund and its managing director, Christine Lagarde, are talking openly about the pros and cons of the idea."

Lagarde has been talking openly about the pros and and cons of blockchain technology at the IFM for some time now. At least since March of 2016.(https://www.imf.org/en/news/articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sp032016a)

Roubini's diatribes against blockchain technology display not only a misunderstanding of the technology, but he's also making claims that he cannot substantiate such as:

"Likewise, if CBDCs are ever issued, they will have nothing to do with these over-hyped blockchain technologies."

See IMF POLICY PAPER - THE BALI FINTECH AGENDA (https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/Policy-Papers/Issues/2018/10/11/pp101118-bali-fintech-agenda) which incluces discussions of the potential uses of blockchain technology in support of CBDC.

"Most of these fintech innovations are still connected to traditional banks, and none of them rely on cryptocurrencies or blockchain."

Wrong again. In PwC's 2018 blockchain survey of 600 executives from 15 territories, 84% say their organisations are actively involved with blockchain. (https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/blockchain/blockchain-in-business.html)

The professor continues to equate bitcoin with blockchain, which is a foolhardy attempt to subvert digital distributed ledger technology.

Maybe these attitudes are a result of too much social media. With 17,786 tweets since January 2009, I encourage Nouriel Roubini to get off twitter and do some real work.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Robert Khan Nov 25, 2018

Absolute hogwash on many levels. If you think central banking can quash this liberation movement - you'er just naive - or paid to be such - so which is it?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
douglas ungredda Nov 25, 2018

Problem with CBDC is that it gives very strange ideas to those holding political power. Banks are a countervailing force with a quota of political power. The mere proposal hits a raw nerve on interest groups, able to influence policymaking and political outcomes. If a central bank could access individuals citizens without the need of conventional monetary policy a much more ominous revolution would rake place. It could imply a perfected, fully fledged Orwellian State;an idea not worth tinkering with.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
K.V. Sadasivan Nov 24, 2018

The problem for Individuals is that his/her Money will always with banks,which itself amounts to Confiscation.Bring in NIRP,in Future and Confiscation of Individual Wealth is a certainty!The person will simply be at the Mercy of the Banks and the Governments..
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Resurrekt - Nov 22, 2018

Do you know why Roubini can't stop talking about cryptocurrencies? Why he calls open source software a scam over 360 times in his tweets? why he calls a periodic element a scam over 150 times in his tweets? Yet never ONCE mentions any of the hundreds of billions of dollars in baking scandals over the entire 7 year time he has been tweeting? Because he is a bank shill. And he is obsessed with bitcoin, well, for the only reason anyone ever becomes fixated on something. Because they are terrified of it, or they are in awe of it.

People are DONE with banks. The exodus is already starting. And just wait until ten years from now when gen x'ers completely dominate the income generating workforce. We are too aware of what goes on behind the scenes. The baby boomers, they lack our tenacity and resourcefulness and communication channels when it comes to acquiring information outside of the narrative spread by mainstream media and shills like Roubini.

Here is an actual fact: The amount of FIAT money invested into ALL cryptocurrencies since 2009, is less than 1/3 of the total amount that BOA, Wells Fargo, Chase, and Citi charged during 2017 in ATM overdraft fees. So the thing that Roubini tweets about nonstop, and calls the greatest scam ever, is not even four months worth of atm overdraft fees from the major banks.

He's terrified of cryptocurrency and so are the banks because the general population, the 99% of people who really don't have any money are on the verge of collectively saying, "You know what 1%, you selfish contemptuous banksters, that endlessly hoard money and are so blinded by your own greed and egos to realize that you are COMPLETELY USELESS TO US AND TO SOCIETY....well you can keep your dollars. and your yen. and your euros. Because we are sick of this world being like this. Because we are good, and we care about other people, and we are taking your power away because you dont deserve to have it. So keep your money. All of it. We are going to use our own money. Because we really don't need you. At all.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
ankurkashyap85 Nov 21, 2018

Not sure if this approach will work, how u will solve double spending problem ? you need blockchain for that.
- Michael Sheeran Nov 23, 2018
  
  He expects us to just trust the central banks to make sure everything goes smoothly
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Avraam Dectis Nov 20, 2018

.
Something like CBDC is inevitable, if we can assume that wisdom will prevail.

Cash is obsolete.

I suggest that thorough consideration be given to the user interfaces and security interfaces of the cashless infrastructure that has the maximal efficiecies described above.

Avraam Jack Dectis
.
- Michael Sheeran Nov 23, 2018
  
  Cash (or some electronic equivalent) will never be obsolete. A huge portion of the population is not going to use a chip or a card for a lot of their smaller daily transactions.
  - Wimal Samarasinghe Nov 30, 2018
    
    "A huge portion of the population is not going to use a chip or a card for a lot of their smaller daily transactions." > Presumably, you have not experienced how exactly this is happening in China today. Even the rare beggar on the streets of Shanghai accepts digital money transfers because passers by don't carry any cash ever!
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dimas Camacho Nov 20, 2018

I loved this title! First of all... A lot people say that cryptocurrencies are the "future" but can't explain the value in the time
- Michael Sheeran Nov 23, 2018
  
  It's quite simple. Cash but in electronic form. So you can send that online seller in Bangladesh $2.79 for a scarf without having to expose your credit card details or pay some middle-man while retaining the ability for escrow if you choose. There's the added bonus of not having amazon (or whoever it might be) building a database of all your purchases and such. The immutable record of every transaction (the actual blockchain) is also a bonus
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Marc Laventurier Nov 20, 2018

For an extended discussion of such issues, see this Brookings sponsored panel discussion held last April (90 mins ):
https://www.brookings.edu/events/digital-currencies-implications-for-central-banks/

Particularly alarming, Mr. Prasad suggests therein that monetary policy stunts such as 'helicopter drops' and 'negative deposit rates' could be more efficient through CBDCs. Thus capitalism and the hathayoga contortions required to keep the structural profit motive intact will be proven to be the true 'road to serfdom' and just the kind of machination crypto types seek to avoid - 'force and fraud'.

(Etherium is seldom mentioned as a deeper cryptoesque model, being not primarily a digital currency but a technological platform to support all manner of social interaction, commonly expressed as contracts. Beyond it, a fully transparent digital implementation of a society in all its' functions and dimensions might serve as a hyper-efficient 'utility' optimizing what could turn out to be a precisely intelligent, trusted and deeply humane socialism.)
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Gerdes Nov 20, 2018

Actually, far far less is necessary for governments to displace existing cryptocurrencies and with far less danger to the existing banking system. Current cryptocurrencies are fundamentally attractive almost exclusively as a medium of exchange and not as a store of value. While some people might like to bet on the success of failure of a given cryptocurrency in the grand scheme of things there is little demand for bitcoin denominated savings accounts or bonds denominated in bitcoins.

So what does bitcoin offer that existing forms of online money transfer not? Simple. Non-repudiation and the lack of a large payment processor subject to legal and social pressure to minimize certain kinds of transactions. This creates a system which has low barriers to entry and can be used for pretty much whatever people feel like using it for with the burden placed on those who wish to stop them.

These two factors are really different sides of the same coin. Large companies handling large amounts of cash draws regulation to minimize fraud and other harms. On the other hand the lack of non-repudiation , once you've sent someone your bitcoins you can't initiate any process short of a lawsuit to get them back, is what discourages large companies offering money transfer programs from letting anyone accept business (rather than merely personal) payments.

While I doubt the central banks of the major western powers will set up anything of the kind eventually some small nation will see the advantage of offering the equivalent of digital cash (what paypal aspired to in the beginning). This will be tolerated by the major economies because the system will make it easier to track transactions, identify terrorist funding etc.. than cyrptocurrencies but will still attract users by not asking questions and requiring their countries of residence to legally come after the users, say, if they are using it to run their (state legal) pot businesses rather than pressure the financial intermediaries.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Daley Nov 20, 2018

Good idea, but not for the reasons Roubini cites. Cryptocurrencies will fade because of their inefficiencies, and the problems that arise from disintermediation are larger than Roubini suggests. But Central Banks do need means to supplement income directly during the recovery from recessions. Right now, they effectively only provide asset price supports; income effects have to pass first through property owners pockets. Private accounts would allow central bankers to lend directly against income, ideally through income tax withholding accounts that would both limit advances and provide security for advances without completely displacing commercial banks. Individual accounts would end the price distortions that result from central bank detours through asset markets; that is their virtue.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
M M Nov 20, 2018

Instead of centralising monetary policies further, why didn't the author consider decentralising it and therefore bringing it closer to reality?
- M M Nov 20, 2018
  
  There is no such a thing as Cryptocurrency and there can never be such a thing as a "true" CBDC. Blockchain technology is outdated and is prone to manipulation, it shall soon become obsolete. If Lagarde is in a favour of the scheme, one should look the other way!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
ethanw2424 Nov 20, 2018

While Roubini addresses the uncertainty in cryptocurrencies, he fails to address the consensus of the public for a major system like this to succeed. People need to have faith in the technology involved to protect their data as well as a public desire for a new system for the financial system to fully reap the proposed benefits the author presents.
There not only are people perfectly content with using credit cards, but also people who lack trust in banks. A major hype in the banking and finance world from the public is required for a proposition like this to succeed. Such high lofted ideas need to be understood from the people’s perspective, Will they think they need it? Will they shoot it down?
With the recent mega millions jackpot reaching record highs, an already known human tendency involving cheap entries and very high low probability payout was shockingly evident. This human nature could be what a new system like this needs for a kick start. If we look at what people get in interest from a savings account, a small amount, and use that to create a buzz in the finance world for that kick start the system needs. Let’s say, hypothetically, you have accumulated 50 cents throughout the year in your savings account in interest, you could use that small amount to be entered in a lottery, for example, for $500 for 1/1000 odds. Considering the lottery, roulette wheels, and casinos in general, people will love it and may be what the finance world needs for a new age in savings and possibly digital currency.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.