Saturday, September 6, 2025

Nobody needs reserves


Stablecoins increasingly replacing reserves for settlements… lol nobody needs any… RRR still 0% …  btw MMT silent on this technological development …  will allow Fed to continue to do their QT system reserve asset balance reduction ie  “destroying  money!”  more than most people realize…  they could probably go to zero reserves …  monetarist brain dead zombies will think  “no money!” …  monetarist morons will be all bearish on their “M1!” or “M2!” gong to zero…  



20 comments:

NeilW said...

Stablecoins are hardly a technological development. They are just bank accounts with a lower 'know your customer' requirement. Remember that 'reserves' are a US concoction. The UK operated without any notion of reserves for hundreds of years until this century. Currently the Bank of England is trying to get back to that state of affairs.

Matt Franko said...

The public nature of the stablecoin transactions are a new development… and Fed has used reeerve lending as basis to maintain policy rate… so if eventually reserves go away hypothetically FFR and IOR will go away with it…. What would govt then do to regulate the risk free rate?

Domenic said...

Matt, I believe what Neil is referring to is a 0% reserve banking system adopted for years in UK, Canada and others. My understanding is that the CB creates reserves on the fly when needed to settle a net intrabank payment balance with the paying banks providing good assets as collateral. Neil will explain it better than I can. The US theoretically switched to a 0% system in 2020.

Matt Franko said...

Yeah I get that but if reserves go to zero how is Fed going to set rate? Iow even commie MMT poobah Art degree academe people say “Fed should set overnight rate to zero!” iow Fed is still setting rates.,, just at zero… if no reserves than how set rates even at zero? Do they think the stables will set to zero ? Our monetary/settlement system is rapidly changing …

Matt Franko said...

Hoe does BOE set rates if zero reserves now?

Matt Franko said...

This from AI: “ The Bank of England (BoE) sets interest rates by applying Bank Rate to reserves that eligible banks hold with the central bank. Even with zero reserve requirements, banks still need balances to meet payment system settlement needs and act as a liquidity cushion, and these balances are what the Bank of England manages to influence money market rates and achieve its inflation target”… says they still use reserves in BOE system.., what they going to do if GBP stablecoins become used exclusively for settlements?

Matt Franko said...

Mike used to cite a Fed study on reserves that came back and said the US system probably needed about 600B reserves to do settlements… that was a while ago so maybe it went up .. so even if it 900b now USDT has 170b and USDC has 72B … many others filing… even Trumps USD1 has 3B and it just getting started a few weeks ago… where is this going?

Matt Franko said...

If Fed study correct and US system only needs about 900B for settlements and US has 32T in USTs issued then only a short period of time until stables buy only about 3% of UST float to take settlement function away from Federal Reserve System and Fed is finished.. meanwhile Powell expending all Fed resources defending fellow Fed DEI Art degree moron who can’t even fill out mortgage application from fraud charges.,,

Matt Franko said...

This would save us from monetarist Fed artdegree morons from adding reserves “to lend out!” and causing crashes periodically …

Domenic said...

Matt, regarding to the setting of the interest rate in a system with 0% reserve it's an interesting question, I think reserves do accumulate during the business day so interest rate is applied to intraday balances, Hopefully Neil can chime in.

Domenic said...

Matt, on a second thought, I believe that in a 0% reserve banking system the Central Bank can set the short interest rate by applying it to the bank in need of "reserves on the fly" to settle a payment during the business day.

Matt Franko said...

Going to be interesting… if eventually most/all settlements occur via stables and Fed loses control of rate setting function via FFR/IOR then we might see MMTs “natural rate is zero” come to fruition.., as stables compete …

NeilW said...

"Stablecoins" are just bank accounts. They are pegged assets. That's what makes them 'stable'. A distributed ledger over a centralised doesn't change that - it just makes it more expensive and slower to clear the payment. So the question always is, where are you going to get the conversion assets when you are short and somebody else has cornered the market in them? Follow the chain up and you'll find it is the 'lender of last resort' - and they charge a fee. That's how the rate is set.

Matt Franko said...

They’re not bank accounts they are stablecoins… they are a financial alternative to bank accounts… they may one day preclude the current function of reserve balances in the FRS which the Fed uses to regulate the risk free rate (monetary policy)..,

Matt Franko said...

Neil you are trained to synthesize I am trained to discriminate… stable-coins are not bank accounts.,, that is an analogy..,.. ie figurative language… you can’t do this stuff via figurative language..,

NeilW said...

Stablecoins work exactly like bank accounts. Otherwise they are not stable coins. The coin has to be exchangeable at par into another asset. Just like a bank deposit. "Coins" in a "wallet" are functionally identical to "credits" in an "account". It doesn't matter what sort of stabilisation system is used, pegging is what it always boils down to. If it doesn't the coin fails.

Domenic said...

Neil, let's say they work as uninsured bank accounts, until they have an iron clad backstop like the government insurance in the actual bank accounts....

Matt Franko said...

Use of analogies is a tip-off..

Adam1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Adam1 said...

I’m with Neil.

First off, the FED doesn’t set the FFR based upon fiat. The only interest rate the FED sets by rule is the Discount Window rate and that is the true Lender of Last Resort Rate in the US.

So called stable-coins imply a conversion to some (assumed) sovereign currency. If some crisis happens, the presumed backstop is the assumed sovereign and its central bank.

The FFR is not a set rate, it’s managed on a semi-real-time basis… even if it’s need goes away because of stable-coins; the eventual backstop is still the US FED at the discount window – assuming you are correctly accounting all of the risks.

In reality, why is there a difference between the FFR and the Discount Window? To catch those small town bankers who are asleep at the wheel or who are true (small time and unknown) fraudsters? Those days are long gone.