I’m from Brazil and I study together with law professors at Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) the Monetary System here and the role of Brazilian Central Bank. I did a research in 2023 regarding the CDBC (now called Drex), and the stage of development is really impressive. Pix is already a success as you mentioned, and Drex has been tested for the wholesale model. I’m very happy to see a Nobel laureate professor as you talking about that and recognizing the innovation in Brazil’s monetary system.
The discussion of cryptocurrencies and CBDCs underscores an existential truth: money is a collective fiction. Whether it's printed paper, coins or seashells, money is a symbol of our mutual trust. The GOP's anti-government hysteria undermines public faith. The consequences of that hysteria could doom the U.S. economy.
Alas, hardly any Americans know about the banknotes that were common currency in the 19th century (and later, before the Federal Reserve? I dunno). I recall my high school classmates being bewildered by talks of currency, because a dollar is a dollar!-- reasonable enough, but taking too much for granted. (IANAE, corrections welcome)
Oh that's cute. Whoever is behind the damned spam bot is now just posting a link - that nobody with a brain will click - without the usual "I used to think..." tagline. Nice try. Reported.
My Brazilian language teacher (in SP) had me watch President Lula’s speech in which he defended Pix. It seems the attack on Pix is helping Lula become more popular.
And friendly, smiling, prosperous China has been making nice to resource suppliers and consumer markets like Brazil for a while. (Top EV carmaker BYD is building a factory in Brazil near where the Ford Motor Co. pulled up its roots and left.)
The GOP’s hysteria is actually hysterical. As if it isn’t totally obvious that they’re happy to destroy the economy for everyone else as long as they’re the ones that get away with it it all, and able to leave everyone else in the dust.
It's horrifying how gob-smackingly *stupid* a lot of Republican pols are.
This isn't just pretend (R Sen. John Kennedy is a savvy lawyer who "aw, shucks" to his base), these are people who not only make embarrassingly stupid claims, but have absolutely no mechanism for countering their crap beliefs.
Pix is universal, all banks support it. Pix is also very easy to use, you will see that from a Farmer's market to a car store. I usually use Pix to buy from a popcorn cart.
Also banks are always trying to get your money through tax and small letters on documents. Being something associated with our government is actually seeing as a good thing for most of our population.
PIX isn't a bank account, but just a way to give identification keys to accounts using the same API for all banks. So, let's say you link your phone number to one of your bank accounts: everyone could send you money just by knowing your number.
Now, the "advanced mode"! You can encode your key and the amount to be transferred in a QR Code and just show it to someone who owes you! Here, even the guy who sells popcorn on the street is able to generate a code on his cellphone and charge you in a moment without any extra fees! How is it interesting to banks? There are muuuuuuuuuuuch more people doing banking transactions than ever before.
Think of PIX as an API - not another bank. Every bank has a PIX gateway to their system. You can assign different ID to your accounts -- like one of mine is my email, one is my phone number, one is my social security number. If I want someone to pay me, they only need to know my phone number to make an instant payment into the account I have connected to that ID. If I want to pay a restaurant or shop they can just show me a QR code that I scan with my phone and it immediately knows the amount and the shop... it's all incredibly simple. So simple that people begging in the street will now show a QR code. This is really about open banking, but the central bank has to insist that every bank will use the same API.
What are "neobanks"? I am european and we just use SEPA instant transfer now, since that is becoming mandatory for banks to participate by the end of the year (most already are in it)... It's a system that allows for instant money transfers from bank to bank... it has some differences, but it is pretty much like PIX for the european area...
It is incredibly safe, so safe that more than 90% adults use it and trust it. The system has been in use for 5 years now. Many low-income individuals who were previously excluded from the traditional banking system now use PIX. Many small private digital banks were established to provide people with digital accounts and enable the use of PIX.
PIX isn't a bank account. You can't have money "on your PIX". A bank account can have PIX identification keys, which can only be used to receive money, not to send. So, even if somebody discover all of them, they will have no use. Some attackers would need to find a way to point your key to their account. Comparing to the bank system before PIX, the surface susceptible for attacks increases a little, but just because there are more parts in motion.
PIX: explaining a state-owned Fintech: This paper aims to explain the Brazilian Central Bank’s (BCB) decision to create and operate a new instant payment system: PIX. Understanding that “digital financialization” can take different forms, this study sheds light on the factors that led to the BCB’s choice to launch a “state-owned Fintech”. The analysis considers three complementary factors. Firstly, the BCB’s institutional trajectory has made it protective of its perimeter of power. Secondly, the ideas shared by transnational networks support the active role of central banks in managing instant payment issues. Thirdly, the interests of traditional banks were not significantly impacted to the extent that they would oppose the creation of PIX. Through examining BCB documents and secondary literature, this study provides a first-hand account of the motivations and circumstances that led to the creation of PIX in Brazil.
I knew ex GI’s from WWII who hated German products or who refused to buy Japanese cars well into the 1990s. In similar fashion, I will hate Republicans for the rest of my life.
I stopped considering voting for any GOP candidate during the Clinton campaign. I hoped they might change their ways. Instead they doubled down. Their hypocrisy during the two Trump impeachments put the final stake in the heart. At least it simplifies my life in the voting booth.
BTW, in local elections here in MA including the state legislatures, candidates stopped indicating their party affiliation on all the campaign materials so I only find out when I see it next to their names on the ballot.Having to hide your party isn’t a good sign, eh?
Unfortunately, Democratic party affiliation is not sufficient to indicate who to vote for. Some are DINOs (Democrats In Name Only.) Witness Massachusetts Governor Edward King (D), elected in 1978. In 1985 he revealed his true stripes and switched party affiliation to Republican.
Not so fast. I know, mostly young people, who are adamant that they aren’t democrats - because in fact they are pretty far to the left of democrats. Often they are focused entirely on environmental issues. They did, of course, vote against trump - but not always in ways you’d expect.
I don't consider myself a Democrat, because I'm not a political party person. It just so happens that the only sane, viable choice on ballots right now is Democrats (or sometimes Independents and even Libertarians).
I voted for a Libertarian here in Texas about 30 years ago because I was amused at him running for this negligible position (it was county animal management or something like that).
In the noughties I did spoiler voting in the Texas Republican primaries, but I stopped when I realized that even the most extreme whack-jobs might get voted in.
Bernie doesn’t run in MA. Here, it’s all Democrats or Republicans, and only the Dems tell you which they are. But you’re right, if someone did call themselves a socialist I would believe them.
IMHO, there are zero presidential elections from 1932 onwards in which voting for the Republican is a good idea. There's a long period from about 1932 to 1994 where, depending on where you are in the country, it can be a good idea to vote Democrat at the presidential level but Republican at the local or state one, but that too is far in the past now.
Eisenhower inherited a government machinery well oiled and fully upgraded by twenty years of New Deal governance, and mostly had enough sense to let it run itself and not go pushing any of the buttons.
The fact that this is what's now considered the pinnacle of Good Republican governance is an indictment all on its own.
Republicans act as though they alone are entitled to govern. This attitude seems to originate in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War, when Republicans could legitimately feel like they saved the Union and had some moral authority after abolishing slavery. But the party has morphed into the antebellum Democrats and is Republican in name only. It no longer can claim any superiority.
It's racism with class snobbery: both the pro-slavery forces and the current Republican/Trump party believe that proper elections means that white Christian men rule the roost, with the wealthy of that group making all the important decisions. All the garbage false claims of voter fraud are thinly disguised complaints about people of color voting.
The Republicans stopped identifying as such in New Jersey over ten years ago. In the last few elections, I also avoid anything with the words "great" or "first" in the party name.
Where I live Democrat is synonymous with evil for over half the population. 37% R, 39% unaffiliated, 19% D. The Republicans are winnowing out the rational, but with a two party system that leaves only a few making the decisions at the primary level. In areas like mine the Dems would be smart to encourage Independents. You should have seen the wing nuts who were on the ballot on the Democratic side. It was pathetic. I didn't vote for them.
It's not that I hate them, I just can't get on board with their antisocial and exploitive policies. With them in charge all will end in slavery and debtors prisons.
It's like anger. It may appear to the casual observer a useless expenditure of energy, but it in fact provides critical information.
Irrational hate, on the other hand, is another thing altogether -- and that's the kind of hate displayed by Republicans toward people of color, women, immigrants, trans teens, libtards generally, and progressive change of any kind, in a list that only gets longer by the year.
The kind of hate I'm talking about is more like William Blake's notion of wrath, which is highly moral.
I mean, even God displays righteous wrath. Right?
See also Karl Popper's Tolerance Paradox. In short, we have good moral and practical reasons not to tolerate intolerance, which will eventually undo a tolerant society.
Yeah, down here in the Deep (yet surprisingly shallow) South the concept of "righteous anger" has existed for at least as long as the Southern Strategy (requiring racial hate in order to be a church member in good standing) has been active.
Nice little hate exemption for only expressing hatred (like racism, xenophobia) with love/Jesus in one's heart.
What will those darn "Cherrypickers" come up with next!!
Yeah the cherrypicking of "Christian" racists is a wonder of cognitive dissonance, given that God says pretty clearly that we are all His children and are beloved by Him.
I don't believe in Him myself. But I nevertheless admire His principles in this regard.
The permanent imprimatur on American Politics of Ronnie Raygun is this hatred of government which the rethugs hold with religious zeal. The harm it is doing to our society is simply amazing.
I grew up in a Republican family. My parents were utterly dismayed by Reagan in 1980. They spent our family dinners lamenting the possibility a B grade movie actor with no outstanding qualifications and a bigoted campaign could be taken seriously as a candidate. As they struggled to understand why, they discussed the role TV had played in Kennedy’s win over Nixon in 1960 and radio had played in FDR’s campaigns. So while there is a clear direct line between Reagan and Trump, the problem starts earlier with the influence mass media has had in campaign outcomes. The media chose Reagan and Trump because they brought in the most advertising dollars through subscribers, viewers or websites clicks and because they promised lower taxes for wealthy publishers.
Reagan and Trump are cheap demagogues in service to corporations and the wealthy at the expense of everybody else.
And it sounds like this is what distressed your parents -- knowing that a B actor with the right sort of wrong messaging could break through FDR's legacy so readily.
In the thirteen years of his presidency, FDR gave 33 'Fireside Chats': scarcely an overwhelming frequency. Also, don't forget there were some very serious plots against FDR and his administration, the most well-known being the Wall Street Putsch. The aim of the putsch was to march on Washington (with weapons supplied by Remington Arms and funded to the tune of $30 million), oust FDR and the entire line of succession and establish a fascist dictatorship backed by a private army of former soldiers. I'm always surprised that a lot of Americans don't know much about the plotted coup.
There's also a clear direct line between Tricky Dickie and St. Reagan. We can go back further to 1953 and Sen. Joe McCarthy's "Un-American Activities Committee", of which Tricky Dickie was a major part of. Tricky Dickie -> St. Reagan -> King Bush I -> King Bush II -> King MAGA.
Like tRump, he was dumb as a stump. tRump's superpower is his ability to hypnotize people into letting him scam them. Raygun's was being able to appear kindly and avuncular while doing stupid and hateful things.
Yes, and the hypocrisy is galactic. “Poor people have all the resources.” “Government should be small except when it’s forcing everyone to do what we want.” “social programs waste money, but huge cost overruns to military contractors are fine.” Yuck.
I recall a play/movie based on L'il Abner. They had a song with the refrain that went "What's good for General Bullmoose is good for the USA." "General Bullmoose" was an obvious reference to General Electric.
"Starve the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives since Ronnie Raygun. Starvation leads to death, but once they have killed the "beast" then what? They will replace the "beast" with a "monster".
Unfortunately it is not enough to simply not vote for publicans. There are plenty of Dems who voted for the pro-crypto bills. There is simply no way to encourage crypto and democracy at the same time. While not as powerful politically as JPMorganChase and BoA etc., the crypto industry definitely falls in the entrenched power doing all they can to destroy the ability of voters to understand issues by paying to repeat lies.
My grandparents were the same regarding Japan for the same reasons, although oddly still bought Germam cars because they admired the engineering quality.
That’s consistent with the behavior of many Americans who were willing to give white people the benefit of the doubt. I’ve worked with many people of German ancestry and a few people of Japanese ancestry. My Japanese American coworkers continued to experience anti-Japanese bigotry although they weren’t even alive during WWII. They also had to cope with the deep generational trauma of the internment camps. German American coworkers were treated the same as the descendants of Brits.
And this rank bigotry after the 442 Infantry Regiment composed entirely of Nisei Japanese-Americans became the most decorated unit in the history of the US Army.
No doubt the day will come when Trump will be admired for keeping the trains running on time.
Or the internet running, or some other Bizarro World claim about something he had no control over. Or some other meaningless distraction, the endless sequence of which may continue until the sun expands to envelope Earth...
Thank you for sharing that. It's certainly food for thought just how people rationalize their guilt away. (Myself included.)
E. Jean Carroll said it was necessary to convince jurors that she had once been younger! Actually “his type” so much that he identified her in a photo as his second wife.
"...we think. And if he did, it was all consensual rape, committed with protection...of the Supreme Court, and a mandate of the people who choose exactly this behavior."
Also: "In his defense, he didn't know it was wrong. After all, wasn't it he who had that brain worm? Or am I mixing that up with somebody else? Ancient history at this point, since the United States hasn't existed for over 50 years now.."
I had a friend who was a security guard at the GE factory I worked at 25 years ago, though basically he simply greeted visitors and asked them to sign in.
But he had survived Tarawa. When Asian visitors arrived, special care was required. He had zero filter when he remembered the extreme levels brutality and death he'd been required to be a participant in more than 50 years earlier, and apparently hadn't forgotten a minute of.
Yeah Japan has never really atoned for it's atrocities during ww2. It's often forgotten how China was an important ally of Britain and the US in ww2. Rana Mitter has written a book about this.
It sounds like Japan will revert back to its jingoism following their recent election results. The performative nationalism contagion continues to spread and increases the risks of WWIII.
I have Jewish friends who refuse to buy Fords for similar reason. None of them were even alive during the original Henry Ford's shenanigans, but the community has a long memory, understandably given everything the man did to whip up anti-Semitism in America.
My father was one of those. He fought in Europe and his brother fought in The Pacific, so he resented both sides. After he died, my mother bought a Honda and remarked that "Pat's probably turning over in his grave."
Yeah. My mother and step dad were big fans of Nissan cars. One day my mother said to me that she "… didn't know what Tom (my father, killed in an Navy airplane accident) would have done if he had seen me in a Japanese car!" My father, who fought them in WW2, hated the Japanese with a passion.
I live in SP Brazil. I love pix. Best invention ever, way better than Zelle or m-pesa. But the real story of financial innovation is also the emergence of digital banks…. That combo is great.
That being said n1 safety risk in Sp: cellphone theft, and that is a serious issue. So while we need more pix, more digital money, we need more ciber security to stop the unlocking of phones and identity theft
I'm from Brazil, and I use it daily, it's a very effective platform, WhatsApp Pay and Zelle are also available here, but, no one uses them because they are too hard to use, and too expensive.
It´s considered here a national pride, and now, pix can be used to pay recurring payments like subscriptions and utility bills.
Canada has something called Interac that lets you send money to anybody who has an email address and a bank account. It’s quick and easy with no transaction fee and it’s been in place for decades.
Interac works fast and well and securely, but I pay about $1.50 per transaction as the payor. And there is a transaction limit of $3000 that can be raised if your bank trusts you to $5000, and maybe more. And it works to transfer by SMS as well as by email. It is run by the Canadian Payments Association,which includes all financial institutions.
Interact was built in the early '80s to support the national ATM network. Now owned and operated by the big 6 banks, it supports almost all debit card transactions, ETFs and email funds transfers. Its part of the reason why US banks have little or no presence here, or if you're DJT... nasty Canadians and their hidden tariffs...
I hate PayPal. When I first tried it I was swarmed by phishing scams. If you have a product that's a magnet for fraud, I don't want anything to do with you.
No reputable firm will send you email saying something like "There's a problem with your account. Click on this link to fix it." Your email provider should have a mechanism to allow you to have every mail from Paypal (or other problem children) put in your Spam folder. I've had no problems with PP and have been using it since it showed up in eBay.
the thing in Canada is that you can send a free e-transfer to anyone directly and instantly, using your first-party bank app. No need to use another service. I just checked mine, and the “send an interac e-transfer” is literally the most prominent button on the screen. the barrier to entry could not be lower
I probably pay a fee too, in effect, but it’s buried in my monthly checking account fee … and yes there’s a daily $3,000 limit. The convenience is the best, since everyone I know uses it.
Do republicans ever think about anything besides cutting taxes and creating boogie men to frighten the public into accepting their selfish view of the world?
Underage girls. And boys. And hurtin' them cuhlid folks reeeal bad. They never think about the true message of Christianity, leaving more time for hate.
The private Zelle system does not appear to be fit for purpose. After being responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars of fraud, Zelle and some of the banks behind it were hit by fines by the CFPB (Is this why it was gutted?). Now, Zelle limits transactions between parties to $500/day until it "trusts" the transactions (How it determines this is clearly vaporware, since they aren't saying). This of course makes Zelle useless for anything but paying a utility bill or giving your kids pocket money.
How did Zelle end up so bad? Obviously because they do such a piss poor job of authenticating the other party in a transaction. But if the other party must have a bank account, isn't all the information there to confirm their identity? My guess is they didn't want banks poaching customers from other banks. There are surely ways of sharing identity with the transacting customers without leaking to their banks, but banks are too cheap or too stupid to invest in these techniques.
I don't think Americans understand how bad retail banking in the US is, especially the "security" they provide to their customers funds. I know of people who will not use online banking because of the dangers of things like phishing attacks, but even writing someone a check in this country is fraught with peril, since a personal check contains all the information someone needs to empty your bank account. In the rest of the world, banks have checks and balances to prevent unauthorized funds withdrawals from your bank account, but US banks are too cheap or too stupid to invest in those checks and balances, you just have to hope someone at the bank will flag a withdrawal as suspicious. If they don't, sucks to be you.
There has been a significant amount of fraud perpetrated using PIX. It’s not a Zelle-specific problem, nor is it necessarily a technology problem. It’s a people/education problem in most cases.
It's a question of where you put the risk. US banks are happy to stick their customers with the risk. See for example Verified By Visa, which is an appallingly badly designed system for authenticating transactions, until you understand that the goal is not to effectively authenticate the transaction, it's to stick the customer with the liability if the transaction is fraudulent.
Senator Heidi Campbell has attempted to explain the GENIUS act to her Tennessee constituents: "A $1 bill is backed by public trust and issued by the Fed. After expenses, profits go back to the people. VS
Under the GENIUS Act, private companies issue Stablecoins—but they’re required to back them with public debt (U.S. Treasuries). Stablecoins are traceable by design—so every transaction could be logged, sold, or subpoenaed. Built on public infrastructure, run by private data miners.
Only “Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuers” (PPSIs) can play. Translation: big banks + well-connected fintechs get a legal moat. On paper, both are backed by Treasuries. But only one serves the public. The other? Privatizes the profits, socializes the risk. You buy the coin. They buy Treasuries. They keep the interest. Welcome to Fintech Feudalism."
Yup, the same way the GOP just torpedoed free and easy income tax payments via the IRS system. The same way they want to prohibit any constraints on the ability of AI to do whatever they want to us. The same way they want no regulations on pollution, including mercury in our water that damages fetal and young children's brain development. I could go on....
The payments system in India --Unified Payments Interface-- is widely used, even by street vendors for small transactions. Payments can be made free of cost almost instantaneously, just with a phone number or scanning a QR code. Also, the Indian government has provided free bank accounts with zero balance for all adults. This is a huge financial revolution. Prof. Krugman, for some reason, has rarely commented on the Indian economy, compared to say the Japanese economy. India pulled around 400 million people out of poverty in the last 15 years or so. In terms of the total number and the total amount of transactions, I think India is far ahead of Brazil.
UPI has also been exported from India and is live and accepted in countries like Singapore, France, UAE, Bhutan, Nepal, Mauritius, and Sri Lanka. According to ChatGPT, as of 2024 UPI had 400 million users in India (as compared to 150 million for Pix) and 13 billion monthly transactions (as compared to 4 billion for Pix). Size isn't everything, but India's success with UPI is definitely worth noting in this context.
Yes, UPI is a great thing, but I think he highlighted PIX for a number of reasons:
1. Cultural: He writes for the American public, and despite the language and the legal system, Brazilian spending habits are closer to American ones than India (both are former European colonies, with settlers descendants forming the majority of the population)
2. Demographics: Brazil's population is closer in size and characteristics to the US than the behemoth Indian population (you guys are number one)
3. Penetration: While 400 million users is an impressive feat, when you put the number into percentage of total population, it is clear that PIX achieved a way bigger part of brazilian society than UPI's managed to get in India so far.
4. Timing: Trump just slapped Tariffs in Brazil for political reasons, and our president reacted kinda hard, so this topic is hot in the news of the two countries.
Anyway, this is just a post justifying the probable reasons he chose PIX. I don't intend in any way to discredit the amazing progress of the Indian development, and I sincerely hope you guys keep growing to the spot you deserve in the world stage.
Yes, UPI is a great thing, but I think he highlighted PIX for a number of reasons:
1. Cultural: He writes for the American public, and despite the language and the legal system, Brazilian spending habits are closer to American ones than India (both are former European colonies, with settlers descendants forming the majority of the population)
2. Demographics: Brazil's population is closer in size and characteristics to the US than the behemoth Indian population (you guys are number one)
3. Penetration: While 400 million users is an impressive feat, when you put the number into percentage of total population, it is clear that PIX achieved a way bigger part of brazilian society than UPI's managed to get in India so far.
4. Timing: Trump just slapped Tariffs in Brazil for political reasons, and our president reacted kinda hard, so this topic is hot in the news of the two countries.
Anyway, this is just a post justifying the probable reasons he chose PIX. I don't intend in any way to discredit the amazing progress of the Indian development, and I sincerely hope you guys keep growing to the spot you deserve in the world stage.
Prof. Krugman doesn't like india especially the current regime. He represents the average racist american liberal. He might be an incredible economist but that doesn't change what he represents.
Yup. At the very time of its release my ex was stalking me & though I loved the band, that song really horrified me. I could not understand why so few people interpreted it appropriately & why it became such a huge hit. Par for the course in those days though.
Yeah, Joan, I was an undergrad the year it came out, and it's not like this kind of discussion was an everyday part of the ongoing discourse back then, but Sting's comments at the time confirmed what my eyes and ears were telling me. and I did try to talk to people about it. Can't say I recall anyone caring much. But your story relays that it had real consequences for real people that were simply overlooked because it was a hit tune.
It made it easier for me not to like the Police, whom I very defiantly did not like for purely aesthetic reasons. The music is awful and derivative and rode the coattails of much better artists who were part of the New Wave, particularly out of Britain.
Its a good song because it juxtaposes the truly creepy, dangerous with a light hearted upbeat. Very creative. Disturbing. But, stalking is disturbing and should be portrayed as such.
First, your link doesn't lead to the right article. Second, the article, when you find it, refers to comments Sting made about the song in 1991, eight years after it was released.
However, in 1983, Sting himself said, 'I think it's a nasty little song, really rather evil. It's about jealousy and surveillance and ownership.' That is, he said this about the song the year it was a hit -- and that's how I remember it. His comments were contemporaneous with its release.
That's very true. I was fussy enough as a child that it bothered me even then.
But I want to use this opportunity to point out that younger listeners hear something sinister that isn't really there. The lyric at the end, "So I lit the fire / Isn't it good / Norwegian Wood".
Kids -- he's not setting fire to her house. He's lighting a fire in the fireplace on a cold winter's morning!
"Sting has described "Every Breath You Take" as a "nasty little song, rather evil" due to its lyrics about a possessive and controlling lover who is constantly watching the other person. He has stated that the song is about jealousy and surveillance, not about love or longing. Sting has also mentioned that he was surprised by how many people interpreted it as a positive, romantic song, rather than the darker, more sinister piece he intended."
The expression on his face in the studio music video makes it plain. He clearly means it to be threatening.
The best you can say about it is that this sort of thing was much more in the mainstream and therefore slipped through.
The worst thing you can say about it is that this sort of thing was much more in the mainstream and therefore slipped through.
Especially with pop culture, I'm not sure how much authorial intent can be used to infer the cultural consequence of songs, etc. OTOH, I don't think we need Sting's statement to see how the dominant interpretation of the song is about control.
But it is most certainly the first word. The author knows what they intended and -- a pop song anyway -- there's not a lot of ambiguity involved. It's not Shakespeare.
We still have to physically add tip and physically sign credit card bills in the US for so many transactions. The US has already lost the technology war.
Well, actually, in the Netherlands we already have for the last 10 years a Pix-like implementation, operated by a consortium of all financial institutions. So technically not a CBDC, but practically exactly that.
Paper money and coins have virtually disappeared, transactions are contactless done with a phone app, also between individuals and at home transactions are done at home through the iDEAL app, used by all financial instutions. All transactions , paying and receiving, can be done with individuals and businesses all over the world (believe it or not, also with those in the USA), are free of charge for individuals and timeless: the payment is done in milliseconds. Money here is not physical but digital. A record on a computer. And it works without a glitch.
Your country is trustworthy. I don't trust most entities here, so only use credit card at multi-nationals or for online subscriptions, cash for my vices, write checks & money orders. I don't like the idea of having every transaction and every activity surveilled. I was also thinking of buying a hybrid until it came out that auto dealers make more money selling your data to insurers than they do on the sale of the vehicle.
Hi Paul, I usually love your takes on economics, but when you veer into payment systems, I think a few points are a little bit inaccurate. A few points to note and dig into a little deeper:
1. The US is trying to build similar systems to PIX. These are FedNow by the Federal Reserve (https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow) and RTP by the Clearing House (https://www.theclearinghouse.org/payment-systems/rtp) which you actually site. The uptake has been less for different reasons than you suggest, primarily because Brazil has far more unbanked people who are open to using tech systems (see also India, Kenya etc etc) as well as the fact that the US is a much more cash and cheque based economy for a number of complex reasons (eg; tipping culture etc). You could also argue that PIX has simply been built in a better and more friendly matter but this is probably a separate debate and this doesn't mean the uptake won't be more in the future. Zelle is slightly different as it is a private network and you need to be on Zelle to use it. The above systems are more like bank inter-connectors.
2. The suggestion that stablecoins can't produce low transaction costs is a pretty inaccurate one. They have been traditionally high, but like all new technological innovations, they come down over time. Things like the Hedera network are examples of blockchains that are setting incredibly low tx costs (https://hedera.com/fees). There are a number of incredibly reputable organisations coming into the space to manage cross border treasury etc (see Stripe 's acquisition of Bridge etc).
3. I think it's fair to question the "financial inclusion" narrative, but there is evidence that countries like Nigeria and Turkey are seeing increased stablecoin adoption as a way to avoid their unstable currencies, in lieu of being able to get more regulated access. That being said, they're certainly not as successful as PIX.
There are very legitimate criticisms to be laid at the feet of the crypto industry, Trumps blatant corruption being one of many. But I think it's important not to immediately think blockchain=evil. There are some good use cases being widely adopted that should be considered in good faith.
For context, I previously worked on providing access to Australia's version of PIX and helped expand our companies tech globally. I now work in the blockchain security industry in Europe, trying to prevent some of the harm that you rightly touch on.
No. Blockchain-style databases do not solve any real world problem that exists (that hasn't been solved already). If blockchain technology is so wonderful, why isn't everyone adopting it?
I am not well informed on this. It seems to my unsophisticated mind that Cryptocurrency is just another capital intensive commodity that allows the rich to get richer…and conceal their transactions in the bargain.
It's similar to a REIT but the ownership structure is less cumbersome. A REIT has a designated manager who has special rights and responsibilities. DAOs are purely democratic, though obviously if someone owns more than 50% they call the shots.
"Making it easier to invest in real estate" means "I can fleece a greater number of less-informed suckers by persuading them to gamble on crap properties that local investors have already turned down."
I personally have co-built and co-owned SEC-approved Reg D 506(c) real investment funds: one targeting New Jersey properties, one targeting Houston post-Harvey.
I would not invest in a real estate DAO under any circumstances. It's easy enough to be scammed by a person irl: there's no way to know who these types of sellers really are, and their business model is essentially one of selling shit to rubes.
And why would you want to put your money into an investment where some computer program--something that you cannot read or understand--is an essential part of the agreement governing your investment? That's just one of the points in this piece by a law firm (chosen at random, I have no connection) about possible legal issues with smart contracts. Their concerns are 100% legitimate--and the reality of the market is actually worse but their published concerns are bad enough.
You don't know what you're talking about -- which is why you linked to a random blog post from someone who benefits from the much more expensive status quo -- but I'm not going to bother trying to convince you.
For everyone else, here is one of my properties. Judge for yourself how transparent it is compared to the average real estate investment.
Also, bragging to everyone about your 506(c) deals has a hidden message: "only rich people are smart enough to invest in real estate."
For those who don't know, the (c) part of 506(c) means that except in a few circumstances, you have to be an accredited investor to participate. I've run those kinds of projects too.
Edit: here's a letter I sent to my congressman with some suggestions for sensible crypto legislation.
Looks like a very nice property. Workforce housing, something we need more of. Big builders want the high-margin high-end stuff so starter homes aren't being built (and have not really been built since 2008 when all the builders started moving upscale to protect their margins.
Transparency isn't the issue.
I don't know Colorado securities law but from my experience in California, New Jersey, and Texas, selling part ownership of any kind in a company intended to generate returns of any kind is considered to be selling a security. Pretending they're part owners (without having the kind of legal clarity discussed in the law firm article) doesn't change anything. But that's an issue with the platform not being transparent about the law; it's nothing to do with you.
The most famous blockchains, like bitcoin, are based on proof of work, which as you say waste obscene amounts of electricity in doing the work required for the proof. But there are other types of blockchains that are better. I'm not quite sure why they haven't taken off, though probably because bitcoin is so dominant. I suspect some of the stablecoins are not based on proof of work. That said while they may have fewer negatives I don't see the positives.
You're conflating the blockchain technology for managing a shared database without needing "trust" (basically, the files that computers keep data in) with crypto, which is the content of the shared blockchain database.
The shared database technology solves no genuine problems in a way that is objectively better than other solutions. If it did, there would be a rush toward implementing blockchain files everywhere, but that hasn't happened--and will not.
The cost of a distributed database will always be higher than a cost of a centralized database run by parties who trust each other and that’s the case with banks
To be fair, maybe it is the way to deal with rather lethargic commercial banks and credit card companies
I'm Brazilian and to use PIX you need to have a current account with any bank. Everyone has a checking and savings account in Brazil, you're wrong about that. There is a law in Brazil that guarantees the right of every citizen to have a current/savings account free of charge at any bank. Even homeless people have a PIX and a bank account.
Before exporting Pix to the U.S., we should learn from Brazil’s cautionary tale.
What began as a tool for financial inclusion has, in many cases, become a weapon in the wrong hands. Express kidnappings — where victims are forced to make instant transfers under threat — have surged alongside Pix’s rise.
Instant payments sound great… until there’s a gun to your head.
Fast money is great — until it’s someone else’s hand on your phone.
Security can’t be an afterthought. It must be built in, not bolted on.
This is a staple of dramas... forcing a person to hand over access credentials, sometimes including the related body parts (Angels and Demons comes to mind). It's an issue but the payment system can't own the entire solution.
I’m from Brazil and I study together with law professors at Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) the Monetary System here and the role of Brazilian Central Bank. I did a research in 2023 regarding the CDBC (now called Drex), and the stage of development is really impressive. Pix is already a success as you mentioned, and Drex has been tested for the wholesale model. I’m very happy to see a Nobel laureate professor as you talking about that and recognizing the innovation in Brazil’s monetary system.
The discussion of cryptocurrencies and CBDCs underscores an existential truth: money is a collective fiction. Whether it's printed paper, coins or seashells, money is a symbol of our mutual trust. The GOP's anti-government hysteria undermines public faith. The consequences of that hysteria could doom the U.S. economy.
"The GOP's anti-government hysteria undermines public faith."
----
...and what could *possibly* go wrong with private corporate scrip?
Alas, hardly any Americans know about the banknotes that were common currency in the 19th century (and later, before the Federal Reserve? I dunno). I recall my high school classmates being bewildered by talks of currency, because a dollar is a dollar!-- reasonable enough, but taking too much for granted. (IANAE, corrections welcome)
Mr Trump está ficando trilhonário com criptomoedas!
Oh that's cute. Whoever is behind the damned spam bot is now just posting a link - that nobody with a brain will click - without the usual "I used to think..." tagline. Nice try. Reported.
And I have just reported it again. The bot has moved on to Keto.
My Brazilian language teacher (in SP) had me watch President Lula’s speech in which he defended Pix. It seems the attack on Pix is helping Lula become more popular.
Trump is helping him become more popular, with his nutty tariffs.
Trump has helped the popularity of PM Carney, Presidenta Sheinbaum, and now President Lula. Quite an accomplishment.
Convicted Felon Cat Meat has done something no Canadian Prime Minister has been able to accomplish: unite Canadians against a common enema!
And friendly, smiling, prosperous China has been making nice to resource suppliers and consumer markets like Brazil for a while. (Top EV carmaker BYD is building a factory in Brazil near where the Ford Motor Co. pulled up its roots and left.)
BYD is actually retrofitting the former Ford factory itself...
I wasn't sure, so I weaseled out using "near" instead.
BYD is actually retrofitting the former Ford factory itself...
The GOP’s hysteria is actually hysterical. As if it isn’t totally obvious that they’re happy to destroy the economy for everyone else as long as they’re the ones that get away with it it all, and able to leave everyone else in the dust.
It's horrifying how gob-smackingly *stupid* a lot of Republican pols are.
This isn't just pretend (R Sen. John Kennedy is a savvy lawyer who "aw, shucks" to his base), these are people who not only make embarrassingly stupid claims, but have absolutely no mechanism for countering their crap beliefs.
Can you share your research? I’d love to learn more!
Hi, take a look at this report of central bank of Brazil. Ask a chatbot to translate to english. https://www.bcb.gov.br/content/estabilidadefinanceira/pix/relatorio_de_gestao_pix/relatorio_gestao_pix_2023.pdf?ck=1753035092
Thank you!
Yes. A link to it !
Hi, Elle!
The research is the chapter 3 of this book:
https://experteditora.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/NOVAS-FRONTEIRAS-DO-SISTEMA-FINANCEIRO-NACIONAL-v.-2.pdf
However, it is not translated to English yet. I’ll do it and share it later.
Thank you!!
How is Pix different from Europe's neobanks, like Wise and Revolut? Everyone in Europe seems to use a neobank for day-to-day transactions.
Pix is universal, all banks support it. Pix is also very easy to use, you will see that from a Farmer's market to a car store. I usually use Pix to buy from a popcorn cart.
Also banks are always trying to get your money through tax and small letters on documents. Being something associated with our government is actually seeing as a good thing for most of our population.
PIX isn't a bank account, but just a way to give identification keys to accounts using the same API for all banks. So, let's say you link your phone number to one of your bank accounts: everyone could send you money just by knowing your number.
Now, the "advanced mode"! You can encode your key and the amount to be transferred in a QR Code and just show it to someone who owes you! Here, even the guy who sells popcorn on the street is able to generate a code on his cellphone and charge you in a moment without any extra fees! How is it interesting to banks? There are muuuuuuuuuuuch more people doing banking transactions than ever before.
Think of PIX as an API - not another bank. Every bank has a PIX gateway to their system. You can assign different ID to your accounts -- like one of mine is my email, one is my phone number, one is my social security number. If I want someone to pay me, they only need to know my phone number to make an instant payment into the account I have connected to that ID. If I want to pay a restaurant or shop they can just show me a QR code that I scan with my phone and it immediately knows the amount and the shop... it's all incredibly simple. So simple that people begging in the street will now show a QR code. This is really about open banking, but the central bank has to insist that every bank will use the same API.
Ninguém paga taxas para usar o PIX! ou seja nenhum banco suga $$$ do povo brasileiro!
What are "neobanks"? I am european and we just use SEPA instant transfer now, since that is becoming mandatory for banks to participate by the end of the year (most already are in it)... It's a system that allows for instant money transfers from bank to bank... it has some differences, but it is pretty much like PIX for the european area...
Question. How susceptible is Pix to hackers?
It is incredibly safe, so safe that more than 90% adults use it and trust it. The system has been in use for 5 years now. Many low-income individuals who were previously excluded from the traditional banking system now use PIX. Many small private digital banks were established to provide people with digital accounts and enable the use of PIX.
PIX isn't a bank account. You can't have money "on your PIX". A bank account can have PIX identification keys, which can only be used to receive money, not to send. So, even if somebody discover all of them, they will have no use. Some attackers would need to find a way to point your key to their account. Comparing to the bank system before PIX, the surface susceptible for attacks increases a little, but just because there are more parts in motion.
Its less susceptible than a private bank system. I'm Brazilian and we use Pix a Lot here, like Krugman explained.
As no system is perfect, an attack has been recently made, and it involved an insider: https://dig.watch/updates/hackers-steal-180m-in-brazils-biggest-bank-breach
The research is the chapter 3 of this book:
https://experteditora.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/NOVAS-FRONTEIRAS-DO-SISTEMA-FINANCEIRO-NACIONAL-v.-2.pdf
However, it is not translated to English yet. I’ll do it and share it later.
Hi Yasmin, can you share your research on CBDC? I’ve also been working on that in my research.
Here is a great article about the motivations behind the creation of PIX: https://www.scielo.br/j/rep/a/nyNzzZP7CXyPHvJgmMQV6Xw/
PIX: explaining a state-owned Fintech: This paper aims to explain the Brazilian Central Bank’s (BCB) decision to create and operate a new instant payment system: PIX. Understanding that “digital financialization” can take different forms, this study sheds light on the factors that led to the BCB’s choice to launch a “state-owned Fintech”. The analysis considers three complementary factors. Firstly, the BCB’s institutional trajectory has made it protective of its perimeter of power. Secondly, the ideas shared by transnational networks support the active role of central banks in managing instant payment issues. Thirdly, the interests of traditional banks were not significantly impacted to the extent that they would oppose the creation of PIX. Through examining BCB documents and secondary literature, this study provides a first-hand account of the motivations and circumstances that led to the creation of PIX in Brazil.
https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-31572023-3470
Thanks for the info.
I knew ex GI’s from WWII who hated German products or who refused to buy Japanese cars well into the 1990s. In similar fashion, I will hate Republicans for the rest of my life.
I stopped considering voting for any GOP candidate during the Clinton campaign. I hoped they might change their ways. Instead they doubled down. Their hypocrisy during the two Trump impeachments put the final stake in the heart. At least it simplifies my life in the voting booth.
BTW, in local elections here in MA including the state legislatures, candidates stopped indicating their party affiliation on all the campaign materials so I only find out when I see it next to their names on the ballot.Having to hide your party isn’t a good sign, eh?
As a MA voter, at this point I assume anyone who doesn’t say they’re a Democrat is a deceptive Republican.
Unfortunately, Democratic party affiliation is not sufficient to indicate who to vote for. Some are DINOs (Democrats In Name Only.) Witness Massachusetts Governor Edward King (D), elected in 1978. In 1985 he revealed his true stripes and switched party affiliation to Republican.
Yes, it’s always better to find out about the specific candidates.
Not so fast. I know, mostly young people, who are adamant that they aren’t democrats - because in fact they are pretty far to the left of democrats. Often they are focused entirely on environmental issues. They did, of course, vote against trump - but not always in ways you’d expect.
I don't consider myself a Democrat, because I'm not a political party person. It just so happens that the only sane, viable choice on ballots right now is Democrats (or sometimes Independents and even Libertarians).
I was with you until you got to Libertarians.
Right now, I strongly prefer libertarians to MAGAts.
I voted for a Libertarian here in Texas about 30 years ago because I was amused at him running for this negligible position (it was county animal management or something like that).
In the noughties I did spoiler voting in the Texas Republican primaries, but I stopped when I realized that even the most extreme whack-jobs might get voted in.
That’s pretty close to right, but Bernie Sanders doesn’t say he’s a Democrat.
Bernie doesn’t run in MA. Here, it’s all Democrats or Republicans, and only the Dems tell you which they are. But you’re right, if someone did call themselves a socialist I would believe them.
Good place, MA.
IMHO, there are zero presidential elections from 1932 onwards in which voting for the Republican is a good idea. There's a long period from about 1932 to 1994 where, depending on where you are in the country, it can be a good idea to vote Democrat at the presidential level but Republican at the local or state one, but that too is far in the past now.
Agreed. At this point it's pretty clear Al Smith was the right choice in 28, too...
I’d say 1908 onward.
Eh, Eisenhower was okay as far as I know.
Eisenhower inherited a government machinery well oiled and fully upgraded by twenty years of New Deal governance, and mostly had enough sense to let it run itself and not go pushing any of the buttons.
The fact that this is what's now considered the pinnacle of Good Republican governance is an indictment all on its own.
Republicans act as though they alone are entitled to govern. This attitude seems to originate in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War, when Republicans could legitimately feel like they saved the Union and had some moral authority after abolishing slavery. But the party has morphed into the antebellum Democrats and is Republican in name only. It no longer can claim any superiority.
Their policies favor only the wealthy. Don't complicate it.
while pandering to the racists and bigots to secure enough votes to win.
It's racism with class snobbery: both the pro-slavery forces and the current Republican/Trump party believe that proper elections means that white Christian men rule the roost, with the wealthy of that group making all the important decisions. All the garbage false claims of voter fraud are thinly disguised complaints about people of color voting.
Republicans don't want to govern. What they want is to rule.
The Republicans stopped identifying as such in New Jersey over ten years ago. In the last few elections, I also avoid anything with the words "great" or "first" in the party name.
Candidate: "Oh, uh.. I'm from the party of Lincoln. You know - Abraham Lincoln."
Voter: "Oh, uh.. no thanks."
Where I live Democrat is synonymous with evil for over half the population. 37% R, 39% unaffiliated, 19% D. The Republicans are winnowing out the rational, but with a two party system that leaves only a few making the decisions at the primary level. In areas like mine the Dems would be smart to encourage Independents. You should have seen the wing nuts who were on the ballot on the Democratic side. It was pathetic. I didn't vote for them.
A história mostra que Extrema Direita Fascista destrói Democracias ! A sociedade norte americana está em perigo! Pensem nisso!
It's not that I hate them, I just can't get on board with their antisocial and exploitive policies. With them in charge all will end in slavery and debtors prisons.
So what's not to hate??
Hate is wasted energy and serves no useful purpose IMHO.
Oh, I really disagree.
It's like anger. It may appear to the casual observer a useless expenditure of energy, but it in fact provides critical information.
Irrational hate, on the other hand, is another thing altogether -- and that's the kind of hate displayed by Republicans toward people of color, women, immigrants, trans teens, libtards generally, and progressive change of any kind, in a list that only gets longer by the year.
The kind of hate I'm talking about is more like William Blake's notion of wrath, which is highly moral.
I mean, even God displays righteous wrath. Right?
See also Karl Popper's Tolerance Paradox. In short, we have good moral and practical reasons not to tolerate intolerance, which will eventually undo a tolerant society.
Nobody said this was easy!
Yeah, down here in the Deep (yet surprisingly shallow) South the concept of "righteous anger" has existed for at least as long as the Southern Strategy (requiring racial hate in order to be a church member in good standing) has been active.
Nice little hate exemption for only expressing hatred (like racism, xenophobia) with love/Jesus in one's heart.
What will those darn "Cherrypickers" come up with next!!
Yeah the cherrypicking of "Christian" racists is a wonder of cognitive dissonance, given that God says pretty clearly that we are all His children and are beloved by Him.
I don't believe in Him myself. But I nevertheless admire His principles in this regard.
I only wish His "followers" were as consistent.
I would upvote for the William Blake reference alone; as it is, I agree with wrath and with the Tolerance Paradox.
I agree with you, but I find your use of the non-word "libtards" disconcerting. Did you mean to put it in "scare quotes"?
Conservatives don't use scare quotes around the word libtards, so neither do I.
I have reappropriated the term. It's what I call myself.
I also call myself -- unironically -- a social justice warrior. Which still draws gasps.
each to his own...
Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man...
Really? Hate works great for Republicans. They’ve been using it successfully to win elections since 1968.
The permanent imprimatur on American Politics of Ronnie Raygun is this hatred of government which the rethugs hold with religious zeal. The harm it is doing to our society is simply amazing.
I despised Reagan. He started this Trumper crap. Never forget.
Yes. He. Did.
I grew up in a Republican family. My parents were utterly dismayed by Reagan in 1980. They spent our family dinners lamenting the possibility a B grade movie actor with no outstanding qualifications and a bigoted campaign could be taken seriously as a candidate. As they struggled to understand why, they discussed the role TV had played in Kennedy’s win over Nixon in 1960 and radio had played in FDR’s campaigns. So while there is a clear direct line between Reagan and Trump, the problem starts earlier with the influence mass media has had in campaign outcomes. The media chose Reagan and Trump because they brought in the most advertising dollars through subscribers, viewers or websites clicks and because they promised lower taxes for wealthy publishers.
It's not simply the medium. It's the message.
FDR was a liberal populist, after all.
Reagan and Trump are cheap demagogues in service to corporations and the wealthy at the expense of everybody else.
And it sounds like this is what distressed your parents -- knowing that a B actor with the right sort of wrong messaging could break through FDR's legacy so readily.
In the thirteen years of his presidency, FDR gave 33 'Fireside Chats': scarcely an overwhelming frequency. Also, don't forget there were some very serious plots against FDR and his administration, the most well-known being the Wall Street Putsch. The aim of the putsch was to march on Washington (with weapons supplied by Remington Arms and funded to the tune of $30 million), oust FDR and the entire line of succession and establish a fascist dictatorship backed by a private army of former soldiers. I'm always surprised that a lot of Americans don't know much about the plotted coup.
They don't know it because it's not taught in schools.
American fascism has been excised from the history books.
Which is why it flourishes in the open now.
The equivalent today of the $30 million would be $683,524,435. Serious dosh.
I’m Canadian and I’ve never heard of it. But I’m going to check this out.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
There's also a clear direct line between Tricky Dickie and St. Reagan. We can go back further to 1953 and Sen. Joe McCarthy's "Un-American Activities Committee", of which Tricky Dickie was a major part of. Tricky Dickie -> St. Reagan -> King Bush I -> King Bush II -> King MAGA.
He was Trumpy as Gov. of California.
Like tRump, he was dumb as a stump. tRump's superpower is his ability to hypnotize people into letting him scam them. Raygun's was being able to appear kindly and avuncular while doing stupid and hateful things.
It's not a coincidence that "Make America Great Again" literally began with St. Reagan. Trumpkopf usurped a lot of Reaganisms.
He also usurped a lot of Mussolini's mannerisms.
𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗻: "Government IS the problem."
𝗔𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗩𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗿: "You were a governor. Now you're the president. So YOU are the problem?"
𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗻: "There you go again.."
Yes, and the hypocrisy is galactic. “Poor people have all the resources.” “Government should be small except when it’s forcing everyone to do what we want.” “social programs waste money, but huge cost overruns to military contractors are fine.” Yuck.
And don't forget "big subsidies to giant corporations is good for the economy".
I recall a play/movie based on L'il Abner. They had a song with the refrain that went "What's good for General Bullmoose is good for the USA." "General Bullmoose" was an obvious reference to General Electric.
"Starve the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives since Ronnie Raygun. Starvation leads to death, but once they have killed the "beast" then what? They will replace the "beast" with a "monster".
They want to make "government" small enough to drown in the bathtub. As per Grover Norquist.
I'm decades beyond either forgiving or forgetting.
Unfortunately it is not enough to simply not vote for publicans. There are plenty of Dems who voted for the pro-crypto bills. There is simply no way to encourage crypto and democracy at the same time. While not as powerful politically as JPMorganChase and BoA etc., the crypto industry definitely falls in the entrenched power doing all they can to destroy the ability of voters to understand issues by paying to repeat lies.
Hell Richard, I still hate Southerners!:-)
Me too.
But I try to focus more on the ones I'm not.
(Some days are easier than others...)
My grandparents were the same regarding Japan for the same reasons, although oddly still bought Germam cars because they admired the engineering quality.
That’s consistent with the behavior of many Americans who were willing to give white people the benefit of the doubt. I’ve worked with many people of German ancestry and a few people of Japanese ancestry. My Japanese American coworkers continued to experience anti-Japanese bigotry although they weren’t even alive during WWII. They also had to cope with the deep generational trauma of the internment camps. German American coworkers were treated the same as the descendants of Brits.
As an Asian American we must all know the story of Vincent Chin, a Chinese American beaten to death in the 80s for "being Japanese."
Something about the whole, "But it's wartime!" excuse rings a bit too terrifyingly self-sustaining to my old ears.
Wasn't Thatcher supposed to have said something to Reagan about just how helpful an ongoing war is in a presidential campaign?
And this rank bigotry after the 442 Infantry Regiment composed entirely of Nisei Japanese-Americans became the most decorated unit in the history of the US Army.
Chenda,
No doubt the day will come when Trump will be admired for keeping the trains running on time.
Or the internet running, or some other Bizarro World claim about something he had no control over. Or some other meaningless distraction, the endless sequence of which may continue until the sun expands to envelope Earth...
Thank you for sharing that. It's certainly food for thought just how people rationalize their guilt away. (Myself included.)
"Well.. at least he didn't rape old ladies.."
Of course not, they weren’t his type.
E. Jean Carroll said it was necessary to convince jurors that she had once been younger! Actually “his type” so much that he identified her in a photo as his second wife.
"...we think. And if he did, it was all consensual rape, committed with protection...of the Supreme Court, and a mandate of the people who choose exactly this behavior."
Also: "In his defense, he didn't know it was wrong. After all, wasn't it he who had that brain worm? Or am I mixing that up with somebody else? Ancient history at this point, since the United States hasn't existed for over 50 years now.."
RFK Jr has the brain worm.
I had a friend who was a security guard at the GE factory I worked at 25 years ago, though basically he simply greeted visitors and asked them to sign in.
But he had survived Tarawa. When Asian visitors arrived, special care was required. He had zero filter when he remembered the extreme levels brutality and death he'd been required to be a participant in more than 50 years earlier, and apparently hadn't forgotten a minute of.
Yeah Japan has never really atoned for it's atrocities during ww2. It's often forgotten how China was an important ally of Britain and the US in ww2. Rana Mitter has written a book about this.
It sounds like Japan will revert back to its jingoism following their recent election results. The performative nationalism contagion continues to spread and increases the risks of WWIII.
It will be interesting to see if Japan continues to ally with the US or forms an independent path and rearms.
Trump is pushing them to rearm, but I believe he thinks they will buy military hardware from the US.
I have Jewish friends who refuse to buy Fords for similar reason. None of them were even alive during the original Henry Ford's shenanigans, but the community has a long memory, understandably given everything the man did to whip up anti-Semitism in America.
Guess VWs and Hugo Boss clothing are no-gos too?
Sole exceptions right now are Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. The rest of the Grand Ole Pedophile Party should be put in the ashbin of history.
My father was one of those. He fought in Europe and his brother fought in The Pacific, so he resented both sides. After he died, my mother bought a Honda and remarked that "Pat's probably turning over in his grave."
I've felt that way since 1968 - and I was just a little kid back then.
Chant after me: "Never again, Republican."
Yeah. My mother and step dad were big fans of Nissan cars. One day my mother said to me that she "… didn't know what Tom (my father, killed in an Navy airplane accident) would have done if he had seen me in a Japanese car!" My father, who fought them in WW2, hated the Japanese with a passion.
I'm like that about Republicans.
Welcome Richard. We've been expecting you!
I live in SP Brazil. I love pix. Best invention ever, way better than Zelle or m-pesa. But the real story of financial innovation is also the emergence of digital banks…. That combo is great.
That being said n1 safety risk in Sp: cellphone theft, and that is a serious issue. So while we need more pix, more digital money, we need more ciber security to stop the unlocking of phones and identity theft
Thanks. We'll be visiting Brazil next year. I'll caution my wife (I don't carry one).
And SIM card fraudsters.
I'm from Brazil, and I use it daily, it's a very effective platform, WhatsApp Pay and Zelle are also available here, but, no one uses them because they are too hard to use, and too expensive.
It´s considered here a national pride, and now, pix can be used to pay recurring payments like subscriptions and utility bills.
Canada has something called Interac that lets you send money to anybody who has an email address and a bank account. It’s quick and easy with no transaction fee and it’s been in place for decades.
Interac works fast and well and securely, but I pay about $1.50 per transaction as the payor. And there is a transaction limit of $3000 that can be raised if your bank trusts you to $5000, and maybe more. And it works to transfer by SMS as well as by email. It is run by the Canadian Payments Association,which includes all financial institutions.
But not the Canadian government right? Any system needs to be actually run by the government at a trivial cost to its users..
The cost needs be a lot lower. These are automated systems so the costs should reflect the efficiency of automation!
Interact was built in the early '80s to support the national ATM network. Now owned and operated by the big 6 banks, it supports almost all debit card transactions, ETFs and email funds transfers. Its part of the reason why US banks have little or no presence here, or if you're DJT... nasty Canadians and their hidden tariffs...
Paypal does that in the US.
I hate PayPal. When I first tried it I was swarmed by phishing scams. If you have a product that's a magnet for fraud, I don't want anything to do with you.
No reputable firm will send you email saying something like "There's a problem with your account. Click on this link to fix it." Your email provider should have a mechanism to allow you to have every mail from Paypal (or other problem children) put in your Spam folder. I've had no problems with PP and have been using it since it showed up in eBay.
I started using it on eBay, way back when and that's when I got the phishing attacks. Of course, I know that now but it almost got me then.
There’s really nothing that could be done about phishing attack and PayPal was a pioneer in Internet payments by always being on the consumer side
the thing in Canada is that you can send a free e-transfer to anyone directly and instantly, using your first-party bank app. No need to use another service. I just checked mine, and the “send an interac e-transfer” is literally the most prominent button on the screen. the barrier to entry could not be lower
I pay $1 per transaction (Scotiabank). It’s very convenient though.
I probably pay a fee too, in effect, but it’s buried in my monthly checking account fee … and yes there’s a daily $3,000 limit. The convenience is the best, since everyone I know uses it.
Yes, it’s very convenient.
Do republicans ever think about anything besides cutting taxes and creating boogie men to frighten the public into accepting their selfish view of the world?
The religious wing thinks about how to best control women and how to hasten the rapture.
No.
Underage girls. And boys. And hurtin' them cuhlid folks reeeal bad. They never think about the true message of Christianity, leaving more time for hate.
Yes, Republicans. But the bill was passed on a bipartisan basis. The grip of the financial industry on the system runs very deep
The private Zelle system does not appear to be fit for purpose. After being responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars of fraud, Zelle and some of the banks behind it were hit by fines by the CFPB (Is this why it was gutted?). Now, Zelle limits transactions between parties to $500/day until it "trusts" the transactions (How it determines this is clearly vaporware, since they aren't saying). This of course makes Zelle useless for anything but paying a utility bill or giving your kids pocket money.
How did Zelle end up so bad? Obviously because they do such a piss poor job of authenticating the other party in a transaction. But if the other party must have a bank account, isn't all the information there to confirm their identity? My guess is they didn't want banks poaching customers from other banks. There are surely ways of sharing identity with the transacting customers without leaking to their banks, but banks are too cheap or too stupid to invest in these techniques.
I don't think Americans understand how bad retail banking in the US is, especially the "security" they provide to their customers funds. I know of people who will not use online banking because of the dangers of things like phishing attacks, but even writing someone a check in this country is fraught with peril, since a personal check contains all the information someone needs to empty your bank account. In the rest of the world, banks have checks and balances to prevent unauthorized funds withdrawals from your bank account, but US banks are too cheap or too stupid to invest in those checks and balances, you just have to hope someone at the bank will flag a withdrawal as suspicious. If they don't, sucks to be you.
There has been a significant amount of fraud perpetrated using PIX. It’s not a Zelle-specific problem, nor is it necessarily a technology problem. It’s a people/education problem in most cases.
It's a question of where you put the risk. US banks are happy to stick their customers with the risk. See for example Verified By Visa, which is an appallingly badly designed system for authenticating transactions, until you understand that the goal is not to effectively authenticate the transaction, it's to stick the customer with the liability if the transaction is fraudulent.
You can scammed in Canada. My best friend and her husband got scammed out of $300,000.
Someone posed as in internet friend, built up their confidence then convinced her husband to send money. He thought it was some type of investment.
I personally hope I could not be persuaded to send money to a total stranger on the Internet.
Senator Heidi Campbell has attempted to explain the GENIUS act to her Tennessee constituents: "A $1 bill is backed by public trust and issued by the Fed. After expenses, profits go back to the people. VS
Under the GENIUS Act, private companies issue Stablecoins—but they’re required to back them with public debt (U.S. Treasuries). Stablecoins are traceable by design—so every transaction could be logged, sold, or subpoenaed. Built on public infrastructure, run by private data miners.
Only “Permitted Payment Stablecoin Issuers” (PPSIs) can play. Translation: big banks + well-connected fintechs get a legal moat. On paper, both are backed by Treasuries. But only one serves the public. The other? Privatizes the profits, socializes the risk. You buy the coin. They buy Treasuries. They keep the interest. Welcome to Fintech Feudalism."
Yup, the same way the GOP just torpedoed free and easy income tax payments via the IRS system. The same way they want to prohibit any constraints on the ability of AI to do whatever they want to us. The same way they want no regulations on pollution, including mercury in our water that damages fetal and young children's brain development. I could go on....
The payments system in India --Unified Payments Interface-- is widely used, even by street vendors for small transactions. Payments can be made free of cost almost instantaneously, just with a phone number or scanning a QR code. Also, the Indian government has provided free bank accounts with zero balance for all adults. This is a huge financial revolution. Prof. Krugman, for some reason, has rarely commented on the Indian economy, compared to say the Japanese economy. India pulled around 400 million people out of poverty in the last 15 years or so. In terms of the total number and the total amount of transactions, I think India is far ahead of Brazil.
UPI has also been exported from India and is live and accepted in countries like Singapore, France, UAE, Bhutan, Nepal, Mauritius, and Sri Lanka. According to ChatGPT, as of 2024 UPI had 400 million users in India (as compared to 150 million for Pix) and 13 billion monthly transactions (as compared to 4 billion for Pix). Size isn't everything, but India's success with UPI is definitely worth noting in this context.
Yes, UPI is a great thing, but I think he highlighted PIX for a number of reasons:
1. Cultural: He writes for the American public, and despite the language and the legal system, Brazilian spending habits are closer to American ones than India (both are former European colonies, with settlers descendants forming the majority of the population)
2. Demographics: Brazil's population is closer in size and characteristics to the US than the behemoth Indian population (you guys are number one)
3. Penetration: While 400 million users is an impressive feat, when you put the number into percentage of total population, it is clear that PIX achieved a way bigger part of brazilian society than UPI's managed to get in India so far.
4. Timing: Trump just slapped Tariffs in Brazil for political reasons, and our president reacted kinda hard, so this topic is hot in the news of the two countries.
Anyway, this is just a post justifying the probable reasons he chose PIX. I don't intend in any way to discredit the amazing progress of the Indian development, and I sincerely hope you guys keep growing to the spot you deserve in the world stage.
Yes, UPI is a great thing, but I think he highlighted PIX for a number of reasons:
1. Cultural: He writes for the American public, and despite the language and the legal system, Brazilian spending habits are closer to American ones than India (both are former European colonies, with settlers descendants forming the majority of the population)
2. Demographics: Brazil's population is closer in size and characteristics to the US than the behemoth Indian population (you guys are number one)
3. Penetration: While 400 million users is an impressive feat, when you put the number into percentage of total population, it is clear that PIX achieved a way bigger part of brazilian society than UPI's managed to get in India so far.
4. Timing: Trump just slapped Tariffs in Brazil for political reasons, and our president reacted kinda hard, so this topic is hot in the news of the two countries.
Anyway, this is just a post justifying the probable reasons he chose PIX. I don't intend in any way to discredit the amazing progress of the Indian development, and I sincerely hope you guys keep growing to the spot you deserve in the world stage.
Prof. Krugman doesn't like india especially the current regime. He represents the average racist american liberal. He might be an incredible economist but that doesn't change what he represents.
The Police's Every Breath You Take is a song about stalking.
Even Sting acknowledged as much 40 years ago.
It's not just that the culture changes, our perception of it does, and it's important to recognize that.
Yup. At the very time of its release my ex was stalking me & though I loved the band, that song really horrified me. I could not understand why so few people interpreted it appropriately & why it became such a huge hit. Par for the course in those days though.
Yeah, Joan, I was an undergrad the year it came out, and it's not like this kind of discussion was an everyday part of the ongoing discourse back then, but Sting's comments at the time confirmed what my eyes and ears were telling me. and I did try to talk to people about it. Can't say I recall anyone caring much. But your story relays that it had real consequences for real people that were simply overlooked because it was a hit tune.
It made it easier for me not to like the Police, whom I very defiantly did not like for purely aesthetic reasons. The music is awful and derivative and rode the coattails of much better artists who were part of the New Wave, particularly out of Britain.
Its a good song because it juxtaposes the truly creepy, dangerous with a light hearted upbeat. Very creative. Disturbing. But, stalking is disturbing and should be portrayed as such.
The implication of using that song while advocating for the government to create a CBDC is absurdly funny when you start thinking about it.
I hadn’t heard it for years, and listening to it here, I thought that’s a totally creepy song. Ugh!
It's not just that it hasn't aged well.
It should never have got out of the starting gate.
https://americansongwriter.com/behind-the-song-every-breath-you-take-by-sting/The REAL Story Behind The Song: The Police's "Every Breath You Take," by Sting - American Songwriter
First, your link doesn't lead to the right article. Second, the article, when you find it, refers to comments Sting made about the song in 1991, eight years after it was released.
However, in 1983, Sting himself said, 'I think it's a nasty little song, really rather evil. It's about jealousy and surveillance and ownership.' That is, he said this about the song the year it was a hit -- and that's how I remember it. His comments were contemporaneous with its release.
and compare the Beatles' Run for Your Life (from 20 years earlier): "I'd rather see you dead, little girl, than to be with another man."
Yeah, this song... I was thinking about it recently.
John Lennon's lyrics can make the back of your neck prickle:
"I used to be cruel to my woman
I beat her and kept her apart from the things that she loved".
I mean, that's the opening of the bridge to a delightfully cheerful song called "Getting Better"!
Also, Norwegian Wood has some very dark undertones, as it related to an ill-fated affair John was involved in where he committed arson.
That's very true. I was fussy enough as a child that it bothered me even then.
But I want to use this opportunity to point out that younger listeners hear something sinister that isn't really there. The lyric at the end, "So I lit the fire / Isn't it good / Norwegian Wood".
Kids -- he's not setting fire to her house. He's lighting a fire in the fireplace on a cold winter's morning!
Yes the lyrics sound a lot more sinister when you know that. I don't think Sting was endorsing stalking though.
Maybe not, but he knew what he was writing about:
"Sting has described "Every Breath You Take" as a "nasty little song, rather evil" due to its lyrics about a possessive and controlling lover who is constantly watching the other person. He has stated that the song is about jealousy and surveillance, not about love or longing. Sting has also mentioned that he was surprised by how many people interpreted it as a positive, romantic song, rather than the darker, more sinister piece he intended."
The expression on his face in the studio music video makes it plain. He clearly means it to be threatening.
The best you can say about it is that this sort of thing was much more in the mainstream and therefore slipped through.
The worst thing you can say about it is that this sort of thing was much more in the mainstream and therefore slipped through.
It would certainly be much more taboo now.
Especially with pop culture, I'm not sure how much authorial intent can be used to infer the cultural consequence of songs, etc. OTOH, I don't think we need Sting's statement to see how the dominant interpretation of the song is about control.
BTW, Vonzell Solomon has a different interpretation in the version she did with Postmodern Jukebox. https://youtu.be/ojbFSARiN14?si=P0F3TKqTJhQXnak-
Authorial intent is not the last word, of course.
But it is most certainly the first word. The author knows what they intended and -- a pop song anyway -- there's not a lot of ambiguity involved. It's not Shakespeare.
We still have to physically add tip and physically sign credit card bills in the US for so many transactions. The US has already lost the technology war.
Well, actually, in the Netherlands we already have for the last 10 years a Pix-like implementation, operated by a consortium of all financial institutions. So technically not a CBDC, but practically exactly that.
Paper money and coins have virtually disappeared, transactions are contactless done with a phone app, also between individuals and at home transactions are done at home through the iDEAL app, used by all financial instutions. All transactions , paying and receiving, can be done with individuals and businesses all over the world (believe it or not, also with those in the USA), are free of charge for individuals and timeless: the payment is done in milliseconds. Money here is not physical but digital. A record on a computer. And it works without a glitch.
Yes I really can't remember the last time I used physical cash for anything. Must have been before covid at least.
Looks like the inventers of money are leading in its digitization.
Your country is trustworthy. I don't trust most entities here, so only use credit card at multi-nationals or for online subscriptions, cash for my vices, write checks & money orders. I don't like the idea of having every transaction and every activity surveilled. I was also thinking of buying a hybrid until it came out that auto dealers make more money selling your data to insurers than they do on the sale of the vehicle.
Hi Paul, I usually love your takes on economics, but when you veer into payment systems, I think a few points are a little bit inaccurate. A few points to note and dig into a little deeper:
1. The US is trying to build similar systems to PIX. These are FedNow by the Federal Reserve (https://www.frbservices.org/financial-services/fednow) and RTP by the Clearing House (https://www.theclearinghouse.org/payment-systems/rtp) which you actually site. The uptake has been less for different reasons than you suggest, primarily because Brazil has far more unbanked people who are open to using tech systems (see also India, Kenya etc etc) as well as the fact that the US is a much more cash and cheque based economy for a number of complex reasons (eg; tipping culture etc). You could also argue that PIX has simply been built in a better and more friendly matter but this is probably a separate debate and this doesn't mean the uptake won't be more in the future. Zelle is slightly different as it is a private network and you need to be on Zelle to use it. The above systems are more like bank inter-connectors.
2. The suggestion that stablecoins can't produce low transaction costs is a pretty inaccurate one. They have been traditionally high, but like all new technological innovations, they come down over time. Things like the Hedera network are examples of blockchains that are setting incredibly low tx costs (https://hedera.com/fees). There are a number of incredibly reputable organisations coming into the space to manage cross border treasury etc (see Stripe 's acquisition of Bridge etc).
3. I think it's fair to question the "financial inclusion" narrative, but there is evidence that countries like Nigeria and Turkey are seeing increased stablecoin adoption as a way to avoid their unstable currencies, in lieu of being able to get more regulated access. That being said, they're certainly not as successful as PIX.
There are very legitimate criticisms to be laid at the feet of the crypto industry, Trumps blatant corruption being one of many. But I think it's important not to immediately think blockchain=evil. There are some good use cases being widely adopted that should be considered in good faith.
For context, I previously worked on providing access to Australia's version of PIX and helped expand our companies tech globally. I now work in the blockchain security industry in Europe, trying to prevent some of the harm that you rightly touch on.
Do the “advantages” of blockchains justify the obscene waste of electricity needed to mine the coins…or are those two unrelated issues?
No. Blockchain-style databases do not solve any real world problem that exists (that hasn't been solved already). If blockchain technology is so wonderful, why isn't everyone adopting it?
I am not well informed on this. It seems to my unsophisticated mind that Cryptocurrency is just another capital intensive commodity that allows the rich to get richer…and conceal their transactions in the bargain.
Your comment is 100% accurate, but crypto is actually far worse than that.
edit: clarity
There are some narrow use cases like providing a neutral chain of custody for assets. Lofty.ai uses it for real estate DAOs.
Isn't a DAO similar to a REIT upgraded for the electronic age?
It's similar to a REIT but the ownership structure is less cumbersome. A REIT has a designated manager who has special rights and responsibilities. DAOs are purely democratic, though obviously if someone owns more than 50% they call the shots.
"Making it easier to invest in real estate" means "I can fleece a greater number of less-informed suckers by persuading them to gamble on crap properties that local investors have already turned down."
I personally have co-built and co-owned SEC-approved Reg D 506(c) real investment funds: one targeting New Jersey properties, one targeting Houston post-Harvey.
I would not invest in a real estate DAO under any circumstances. It's easy enough to be scammed by a person irl: there's no way to know who these types of sellers really are, and their business model is essentially one of selling shit to rubes.
And why would you want to put your money into an investment where some computer program--something that you cannot read or understand--is an essential part of the agreement governing your investment? That's just one of the points in this piece by a law firm (chosen at random, I have no connection) about possible legal issues with smart contracts. Their concerns are 100% legitimate--and the reality of the market is actually worse but their published concerns are bad enough.
https://www.legalgps.com/crypto/legal-risks-smart-contracts-enforceability
A real SEC would have killed off this crap long ago.
edit: typos
You don't know what you're talking about -- which is why you linked to a random blog post from someone who benefits from the much more expensive status quo -- but I'm not going to bother trying to convince you.
For everyone else, here is one of my properties. Judge for yourself how transparent it is compared to the average real estate investment.
https://www.lofty.ai/property_deal/326-332-S-Alcott-St_Denver-CO-80219
Also, bragging to everyone about your 506(c) deals has a hidden message: "only rich people are smart enough to invest in real estate."
For those who don't know, the (c) part of 506(c) means that except in a few circumstances, you have to be an accredited investor to participate. I've run those kinds of projects too.
Edit: here's a letter I sent to my congressman with some suggestions for sensible crypto legislation.
https://djcodes.substack.com/p/open-letter-to-rep-french-hill
Looks like a very nice property. Workforce housing, something we need more of. Big builders want the high-margin high-end stuff so starter homes aren't being built (and have not really been built since 2008 when all the builders started moving upscale to protect their margins.
Transparency isn't the issue.
I don't know Colorado securities law but from my experience in California, New Jersey, and Texas, selling part ownership of any kind in a company intended to generate returns of any kind is considered to be selling a security. Pretending they're part owners (without having the kind of legal clarity discussed in the law firm article) doesn't change anything. But that's an issue with the platform not being transparent about the law; it's nothing to do with you.
The most famous blockchains, like bitcoin, are based on proof of work, which as you say waste obscene amounts of electricity in doing the work required for the proof. But there are other types of blockchains that are better. I'm not quite sure why they haven't taken off, though probably because bitcoin is so dominant. I suspect some of the stablecoins are not based on proof of work. That said while they may have fewer negatives I don't see the positives.
You're conflating the blockchain technology for managing a shared database without needing "trust" (basically, the files that computers keep data in) with crypto, which is the content of the shared blockchain database.
The shared database technology solves no genuine problems in a way that is objectively better than other solutions. If it did, there would be a rush toward implementing blockchain files everywhere, but that hasn't happened--and will not.
Ethereum is the dominant stablecoin platform and it is extremely energy efficient because it doesn't use proof of work.
The cost of a distributed database will always be higher than a cost of a centralized database run by parties who trust each other and that’s the case with banks
To be fair, maybe it is the way to deal with rather lethargic commercial banks and credit card companies
I'm Brazilian and to use PIX you need to have a current account with any bank. Everyone has a checking and savings account in Brazil, you're wrong about that. There is a law in Brazil that guarantees the right of every citizen to have a current/savings account free of charge at any bank. Even homeless people have a PIX and a bank account.
Ah thanks for clarifying Atenéia! Sorry for the inaccuracy
Thats Ok!
Before exporting Pix to the U.S., we should learn from Brazil’s cautionary tale.
What began as a tool for financial inclusion has, in many cases, become a weapon in the wrong hands. Express kidnappings — where victims are forced to make instant transfers under threat — have surged alongside Pix’s rise.
Instant payments sound great… until there’s a gun to your head.
Fast money is great — until it’s someone else’s hand on your phone.
Security can’t be an afterthought. It must be built in, not bolted on.
That's why there's a value limit for night transactions... don't create drama.
This is a staple of dramas... forcing a person to hand over access credentials, sometimes including the related body parts (Angels and Demons comes to mind). It's an issue but the payment system can't own the entire solution.