,
8 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
1/8 Key misunderstandings in @JosephEStiglitz’s piece on @Libra_: the reserve is designed to build on the progress central banks have made in ensuring stability and value preservation. Libra is a complement to their monetary policies, not a substitute.
2/8 Libra is only minted and burned in response to market demand. The development of central bank digital currencies would be a positive development for Libra, as it would allow the reserve to integrate with them directly, increasing efficiency and robustness.
3/8 Libra is designed with the goal of reducing exactly the types of frictions in payments and financial services @JosephEStiglitz is worried about, increasing competition, driving lower fees for consumers, improving access and financial inclusion.
4/8 Wallets like the @calibra one will comply with AML/KYC regulations, and will actively work to stop illicit activity and crime on the network. They will also work with regulators to ensure high financial transparency, visibility on market liquidity, etc.
5/8 @JosephEStiglitz is correct, US consumers have better alternatives for their deposits than holding a balance in Libra! Libra is designed for payments and to work as an efficient medium of exchange (e.g. for cross border transactions).
6/8 Utility of @Libra_ will increase over time as new types of applications are built on top of its network using its smart contracts language, Move.
7/8 For Facebook, a digital wallet is an opportunity to drive engagement, diversify into new business models that are not based on advertising/user data, reduce frictions in payments (e.g. advertising payment fees are currently absorbed by the platform), and innovate.
8/8 This is why @calibra financial data will be separated from social data, see: scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.2365-6/6…
