That’s short-sighted, IMHO. BCash doesn’t solve a single problem for anyone. USDT solves access to a dollar denomination, something real people actually want all over the world, but with the security of bitcoin and the speed of Lightning. This essay made it make sense for me. View article →

I get the appeal, it's good for NGU, more money to buy Bitcoin pushing up prices. Stablecoins like USDT also give people access to dollars they can't easily get, and running them over Lightning adds speed and accessibility. But it's not something we are willing to promote. Stablecoins don't fix the system, they reinforce it. They don't inherit Bitcoin's security. USDT is a custodial IOU, not a bearer asset. If the issuer is compromised or pressured, users can be rugged. There's no self-custody and no guarantee. Worse, stablecoins preserve and even intensify the fiat system’s structural flaws. They keep the Cantillon effect alive, benefiting those closest to issuance, while ordinary people suffer dilution. Instead of ending financial injustice, stablecoins put it on faster rails. And we can’t ignore the Triffin dilemma. Stablecoins drive global demand for USD denominated assets. That forces issuers to scale their reserves by acquiring US Treasuries or Bitcoin. This mirrors the same unsustainable dynamic that collapsed the gold standard, global demand backed by finite reserves. A future redemption crisis could lead to frozen convertibility and systemic loss, just like 1971. Only this time, it's Bitcoin that risks being confiscated or over leveraged. Bitcoin wasn’t created to upgrade fiat, it was created to end the theft at its core. Supporting stablecoins means participating in what Austrian economists, Bitcoiners, and sound money advocates have always opposed: a system that steals from the poor and gives to the rich.