- Вернуться к меню
- Вернуться к менюЦены
- Вернуться к менюИсследовать
- Вернуться к менюМероприятия
- Вернуться к менюПартнерский материал
- Вернуться к меню
- Вернуться к меню
- Вернуться к менюВебинары и Мероприятия
Кредитный рейтинг Америки помогает обосновать необходимость Bitcoin
По словам Майкла Кейси, понижение агентством Fitch рейтинга госдолга США на этой неделе является предупреждением американским политикам и подчеркивает, почему Bitcoin и другие открытые денежные системы имеют важное значение.

Всякий раз, когда кредитный рейтинг США попадает в поле зрения – как это было сНеожиданное понижение рейтинга Fitch На этой неделе у нас будет возможность обсудить связь между деньгами, долгом и властью, а также изучить, как Bitcoin и Криптo могут изменить эти отношения.
Для начала отметим, что хотя понижение рейтинга и отражает умеренно худшие перспективы для финансов правительства США, фактический дефолт США крайне маловероятен, несмотря на игру Конгресса в «курицу с потолком долга», которая периодически вызывает разговоры о «техническом дефолте». Страны, выпускающие долг в собственной валюте, редко пропускают выплаты по долгам в номинальном смысле, потому что им это T нужно. Они могут просто печатать деньги, чтобы производить выплаты.
Вы читаетеПереосмысление денег, еженедельный обзор технологических, экономических и социальных Мероприятия и тенденций, которые переопределяют наши отношения с деньгами и трансформируют мировую финансовую систему. Подпишитесь, чтобы получить полную рассылку здесь.
Конечно, печатание денег для погашения долгов не освобождает правительства от ответственности. Это обесценивает обменный курс и снижает покупательную способность валюты через инфляцию, тем самым налагая своего рода налог как на внутреннее население, так и на иностранных кредиторов. Это подрывает доверие иностранных инвесторов и усиливает недоверие налогоплательщиков, поскольку возникает самоподдерживающийся цикл обвала обменных курсов и роста цен.
Теоретически эти нездоровые экономические результаты должны побуждать правительства не использовать экспансивную денежно-кредитную Политика для погашения долгов. Но это предполагает наличие демократической подотчетности, а международные Рынки долга предполагают, что кредиторы по-разному судят о разных правительствах по этому поводу. Многие правительства развивающихся стран в Латинской Америке, Азии, Африке и Восточной Европе T могут выпускать долговые обязательства в собственных валютах, поскольку иностранные кредитные учреждения требуют более высокие процентные ставки, чем доступные, что не оставляет им иного выбора, кроме как выпускать облигации в иностранной валюте — в первую очередь в долларах.
In fact, because international sovereign credit markets largely trade in debt denominated in dollars, it’s the U.S. – the very same country that Fitch just declared to be a less-than-perfect credit risk – that most gets to shape those assessments, creating distortions in what should be a free market. It’s another way the dollar’s reserve status affords the U.S.’s “exorbitant privilege,” in this case the power to influence geopolitical outcomes and push for the profit-interests of its banks.
The U.S. wields this power, in part, through the International Monetary Fund, within which, as the largest shareholder, it is the only country with sole veto power.
When the IMF swoops in with a bailout offer because Argentina or Turkey or Nigeria is staring down the barrel at debt defaults, it attaches constraints on the deal – fiscal austerity, macroeconomic reforms, higher interest rates and so forth – all in the name of restoring the confidence of foreign creditors. These politically unpopular policies are largely dictated by what the U.S. wishes, and often they can be dialed up or down in intensity to put pressure on a political enemy or support a friend.
Banks, meanwhile, with the help of perhaps the most powerful lobbying entity you’ve never heard of – the DC-based International Institute of Finance, or IIF – regularly emerge out of negotiations with their assets more or less intact. It’s a giant, international version of the “corporate socialism” that was observed in the U.S. following the massive bank bailouts during the mortgage crisis of 2008.
Enter Bitcoin
When, as a journalist in Argentina, I covered that country’s decade-long, torturous debt restructuring in the 2000s, I found myself sympathetic to the domestic left’s critique of the U.S.-led IMF’s excessive power. But I also had little faith in the corrupt and dysfunctional Argentine political system, which led me to begrudgingly view the IMF as a necessary disciplinarian. I found Argentine government protestations that Washington was stripping the country of its economic sovereignty to be self-serving, as it was really about protecting a corrupt political class.
Then, four years later, I got interested in Bitcoin and began to look back on that period quite differently. I saw a third, middle way.
The core issue that should have been at stake in Argentina’s debt negotiations was not the independence or sovereignty of the government per se, but of the Argentine people. And when it came to their monetary system, Argentines’ sovereignty had been stripped away by politicians who’d debased their wealth and restricted their access to their bank accounts.
Thanks to Bitcoin, the citizens of developing economies can now opt out of this undemocratic and distorted international system in which they are caught between their own corrupt, domestic government models and a Washington-Wall Street nexus of self-serving power.
That citizen element is what made El Salvador’s move to declare bitcoin legal tender interesting, far more so than the fact that the government also chose to build a stash of the digital currency, which President Nayeb Bukele and his supporters often described as an act of asserting the nation’s sovereignty in breaking its dependence on dollar reserves. I tend to think Bukele’s purchases recklessly exposed the country’s finances to intense volatility and investor mistrust. But the idea of explicitly granting freedom for people to choose bitcoin if they desired was a powerful, symbolic act of affirming citizens’ agency and sovereignty.
El Salvador is not the only country claiming to restore monetary sovereignty. China and its allies are exploring ways to reduce their dependence on the dollar. They believe central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) can help them achieve that. Some are already working on digital swap models that provide workarounds to bypass the dollar in trade.
When combined with fiscal challenges in Washington, this process could move faster than we think, as the loss of confidence in dollar assets combines with an expansion of a parallel, Chinese-led system.
What should the U.S. do about it? It could exercise fiscal discipline, abandoning counterproductive debt ceiling standoffs for bipartisan efforts to sensibly reprioritize spending and taxation. But that currently sounds like an impossible utopia.
What it should do is lean into the principle of free choice and open systems in money. Giving people that choice would be consistent with its values, which are, in any case, the “soft power” pieces of what makes the dollar the preferred currency of the world.
There’s an implicit bargain in the world’s demand for dollars: it suggests people the world over expect the U.S. government to uphold its values with regards to human rights and property rights. They expect that it will not confiscate someone’s property, even if they are a foreigner without a vote, such as a bondholder (unless you’re a Russian oligarch, Iranian ruler or someone else on the sanctions list). And they expect the country’s democratic foundations are strong enough that a U.S. dictator won’t arise who would choose to debase the currency in favor of his own interests.
So, the counterintuitive way to boost the dollar’s standing and stave the threat posed by a deteriorating credit profile and challenges from China and co. is to let people choose how they want to transact. The U.S. should actively encourage the right to open monetary systems, whether that’s bitcoin or stablecoins, both of which will be shaped by the fate of two pieces of key crypto legislation currently in the House – which, it is feared, the Democrat-controlled Senate or White House will reject.
There’s much at stake in all this.
Примечание: мнения, выраженные в этой колонке, принадлежат автору и не обязательно отражают мнение CoinDesk, Inc. или ее владельцев и аффилированных лиц.
Michael J. Casey
Michael J. Casey is Chairman of The Decentralized AI Society, former Chief Content Officer at CoinDesk and co-author of Our Biggest Fight: Reclaiming Liberty, Humanity, and Dignity in the Digital Age. Previously, Casey was the CEO of Streambed Media, a company he cofounded to develop provenance data for digital content. He was also a senior advisor at MIT Media Labs's Digital Currency Initiative and a senior lecturer at MIT Sloan School of Management. Prior to joining MIT, Casey spent 18 years at The Wall Street Journal, where his last position was as a senior columnist covering global economic affairs.
Casey has authored five books, including "The Age of Cryptocurrency: How Bitcoin and Digital Money are Challenging the Global Economic Order" and "The Truth Machine: The Blockchain and the Future of Everything," both co-authored with Paul Vigna.
Upon joining CoinDesk full time, Casey resigned from a variety of paid advisory positions. He maintains unpaid posts as an advisor to not-for-profit organizations, including MIT Media Lab's Digital Currency Initiative and The Deep Trust Alliance. He is a shareholder and non-executive chairman of Streambed Media.
Casey owns bitcoin.
