What do you mean it wouldn't be stable by definition? Just because every "stable coin" you know of loses value over time doesn't mean ours has to. It would become more stable than every fiat currency. Meaning in 100 years You could still buy say a pound of apples for say 3 HBD while it would cost at least $30 USD. It would be stable and store value. They aren't mutually exclusive.
This works because crypto captures value from technology and distributes it to everyone rather than letting a centralized entity siphon all the gains of progress. Just look at the Feds interest rates 30 years ago.
I don't understand why you think there is speculative risk here. I'm saying the speculative risk is using fiat and we can make a superior product. The value of HBD will only go up compared to fiat and stay even with goods and services. Zero risk; all demand minted by CDP overcollaterized loans. That's the opposite of fractional reserve banking. You can't get any more stable than that.
I do not think you would take this stance if we had been in a bull market for the last 2 years.
Truth be told, the most problematic thing you said is that it's not a good idea to burn HBD for other perks. No one can stop this from happening. I'm going to do it, and if not someone else will. This system must adjust accordingly, this network has no choice in the matter. To say something shouldn't happen because that would be bad when that thing is definitely going to happen no matter what... I don't even know what to say to that.
It's literally already happening with paid promotions for the trending tab. This isn't a consensus issue. It's a frontend issue and a layer 2 issue and it needs no permission and cannot be prevented. I want the network to get in front of the bullshit before it hits the fan. This isn't something that gets wished away.
Started with I humbly disagree.... but obviously you know what you're talking about by mentioning merchants so many times while referring to a stable coin. Have you ever pitched blockchain tech to corporations and/or groups like local chambers of commerce? I doubt it. Not with that speculative view on how things work.
I'd like to add natural (losses and mistakes) and built in use cases ie the promo button can not be compared to consciously burning tokens with the intent to raise value. Wake up. The tokens are burned because they have been 'used' not burned because someone thinks burning a capless coin ultimately affects supply/demand.
Your lack of experience off of Steem/Hive shows every time.
Have a day dude, wish you a lot of rewards 😀 lmoao
I'm not trying to be rude and act like I know everything.
I want to talk about this more so I understand the issue better.
But you still haven't said anything to me that I find particularly enlightening.
In fact it seems you're doubling down on misinterpreting my words, so I'm confused.
Let me be clear:
There is no speculation. Coins are not being burned to increase the value of HBD. In this scenario HBD always trades near the peg because supply is provided dynamically with CDP Maker loans.
We can not stop users from using frontends and 2nd layer to send assets to @null, and we wouldn't want to. It's there for a reason.
Your positioning in this argument is extremely concerning to me because I know many other people share this view. Which means either I'm wrong (fine) or lots of other people are wrong and have no idea what they are talking about and we are leaving gobs of free money on the table (that would be a pretty bad situation, wouldn't you agree?)
I humbly request that you provide an actual example with numbers and math to show the worst case scenario, because I don't think you can.
Here's a thought experiment for this topic:
Hive has just gone x100 in value from various factors including hyperinflation of USD. Several business on the Hive blockchain are now crying out that we increase the peg of HBD to make up for their losses.
Let's say before the hyperinflation our debt ratio was 10%, now after going x100 our debt ratio is 0.1%. What are we going to tell those businesses? "Sorry! Fuck you! We don't have the money to subsidize the failure of USD!"
We clearly do have the money.
As a show of good faith we should obviously subsidize and increase the peg.
HBD is our stable coin, and we should clearly work to stabilize it.
Assuming that we should 100% rely on the monetary policy of fiat for stability is a mistake.
Why would we not invent our own policies to create a more stable asset?
You've made the claim that such policies go against the very definition of 'stable-coin'.
Again, I find this highly frustrating.