
Episode 168
Understanding the STABLE Act and the Push to Regulate Crypto | Rohan Grey

Episode 168
Rohan Grey
Understanding the STABLE Act and the Push to Regulate Crypto | Rohan Grey
summary
In Episode 168 of Hidden Forces, Demetri Kofinas speaks with Rohan Grey, an expert on the legal design and regulation of digital fiat currency and one of the prime authors of the recently proposed STABLE Act put forward by congresswoman Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and congressmen Jesús García and Stephen Lynch of Illinois and Massachusetts respectively.
The stated justification for the bill is to “protect consumers from the risks posed by emerging digital payment instruments, such as Facebook’s Libra and other Stablecoins,” which the authors define as “digital currencies, whose value is permanently pegged to or stabilized against a conventional currency like the dollar and which pose new regulatory challenges while also representing a growing source of market, liquidity, and credit risk.”
The goal of this conversation was to get absolutely clear on the language and intent of the regulation, not just as a standalone document but as part of a much larger regulatory agenda that is being put forward by the more progressive factions of the democratic party. What is clear is that much of this depends on how we define money and what we mean when we talk about “a deposit.”
Regardless of what your personal beliefs are, regulation is coming. The question is what is it going to look like and how is it going to impact you and your community, whether that community is your local community, your business community, or a crypto community?
This conversation is meant to help you begin to wrap your arms around this new paradigm, to understand what you think about it and how you want to respond to it.
You can gain access to the episode overtime, Demetri’s additional conversation with Jeremy Allaire, as well as the transcript and rundown to this week’s episode through the Hidden Forces Supercast Page.
All subscribers gain access to our overtime feed, which can be easily added to your favorite podcast application.
If you enjoyed listening to today’s episode of Hidden Forces you can help support the show by doing the following:
Subscribe on Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Stitcher | SoundCloud | YouTube | CastBox | RSS Feed
Write us a review on Apple Podcasts
Subscribe to our mailing list through the Hidden Forces Website
Producer & Host: Demetri Kofinas
Editor & Engineer: Stylianos Nicolaou
Subscribe & Support the Podcast at https://hiddenforces.supercast.com
Join the conversation on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter at @hiddenforcespod
Episode Recorded on 12/08/2020
bio
Rohan Grey is an Assistant Professor of Law at Willamette University and the author of the forthcoming Digitizing the Dollar: The Battle for the Soul of Public Money in the Age of Cryptocurrency (Melville House, 2021). His research focuses on the design and regulation of digital fiat currency. He is the President of the Modern Money Network, the Research Director of the Digital Fiat Currency Institute, and a consultant to the International Telecommunications Union’s Focus Group on Digital Currency. He is also a Research Fellow with the Global Institute for Sustainable Prosperity, and a member of ClassCrits and the Association for the Promotion of Political Economy and Law (APPEAL). He holds a J.D. from Columbia Law School and a L.L.M. from the London School of Economics, and prior to entering academia practiced as an attorney for children in New York City.
transcript
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. De malis autem et bonis ab iis animalibus, quae nondum depravata sint, ait optime iudicari. Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Nam et complectitur verbis, quod vult, et dicit plane, quod intellegam; Nullis enim partitionibus, nullis definitionibus utuntur ipsique dicunt ea se modo probare, quibus natura tacita adsentiatur.
Si enim ad populum me vocas, eum. Istam voluptatem perpetuam quis potest praestare sapienti? Sed nunc, quod agimus; Nec tamen ille erat sapiens quis enim hoc aut quando aut ubi aut unde? Eam si varietatem diceres, intellegerem, ut etiam non dicente te intellego; Quo minus animus a se ipse dissidens secumque discordans gustare partem ullam liquidae voluptatis et liberae potest. Illum mallem levares, quo optimum atque humanissimum virum, Cn. Memini vero, inquam;
Nihil minus, contraque illa hereditate dives ob eamque rem laetus. Sed tamen est aliquid, quod nobis non liceat, liceat illis. Potius inflammat, ut coercendi magis quam dedocendi esse videantur. Philosophi autem in suis lectulis plerumque moriuntur.
Idem iste, inquam, de voluptate quid sentit? Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Id enim volumus, id contendimus, ut officii fructus sit ipsum officium. Sequitur disserendi ratio cognitioque naturae; Conclusum est enim contra Cyrenaicos satis acute, nihil ad Epicurum. Verum tamen cum de rebus grandioribus dicas, ipsae res verba rapiunt; Claudii libidini, qui tum erat summo ne imperio, dederetur.
Full Episode
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed quid ages tandem, si utilitas ab amicitia, ut fit saepe, defecerit? Quare hoc videndum est, possitne nobis hoc ratio philosophorum dare. Piso igitur hoc modo, vir optimus tuique, ut scis, amantissimus. Dicet pro me ipsa virtus nec dubitabit isti vestro beato M. Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Quando enim Socrates, qui parens philosophiae iure dici potest, quicquam tale fecit? Vide, ne etiam menses! nisi forte eum dicis, qui, simul atque arripuit, interficit. Qua tu etiam inprudens utebare non numquam. Et quidem iure fortasse, sed tamen non gravissimum est testimonium multitudinis. Neque enim civitas in seditione beata esse potest nec in discordia dominorum domus;
Hic quoque suus est de summoque bono dissentiens dici vere Peripateticus non potest. Nihil enim iam habes, quod ad corpus referas; Scaevola tribunus plebis ferret ad plebem vellentne de ea re quaeri. Cum sciret confestim esse moriendum eamque mortem ardentiore studio peteret, quam Epicurus voluptatem petendam putat. Ea, quae dialectici nunc tradunt et docent, nonne ab illis instituta sunt aut inventa sunt? Sint modo partes vitae beatae. Omnia contraria, quos etiam insanos esse vultis. Sed ut iis bonis erigimur, quae expectamus, sic laetamur iis, quae recordamur. Quam ob rem tandem, inquit, non satisfacit? Proclivi currit oratio.
Sumenda potius quam expetenda. Philosophi autem in suis lectulis plerumque moriuntur. Non igitur de improbo, sed de callido improbo quaerimus, qualis Q. Quae cum ita sint, effectum est nihil esse malum, quod turpe non sit. Illud quaero, quid ei, qui in voluptate summum bonum ponat, consentaneum sit dicere. Nosti, credo, illud: Nemo pius est, qui pietatem-;
Vitae autem degendae ratio maxime quidem illis placuit quieta. Similiter sensus, cum accessit ad naturam, tuetur illam quidem, sed etiam se tuetur; Ipse Epicurus fortasse redderet, ut Sextus Peducaeus, Sex. Tenent mordicus. Semper enim ex eo, quod maximas partes continet latissimeque funditur, tota res appellatur. Utilitatis causa amicitia est quaesita.
intelligence report
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Hic ego: Pomponius quidem, inquam, noster iocari videtur, et fortasse suo iure. Est igitur officium eius generis, quod nec in bonis ponatur nec in contrariis. Modo etiam paulum ad dexteram de via declinavi, ut ad Pericli sepulcrum accederem. Ne amores quidem sanctos a sapiente alienos esse arbitrantur. Quae diligentissime contra Aristonem dicuntur a Chryippo. Sed quid attinet de rebus tam apertis plura requirere? Nec mihi illud dixeris: Haec enim ipsa mihi sunt voluptati, et erant illa Torquatis. Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Qui non moveatur et offensione turpitudinis et comprobatione honestatis?
Quae in controversiam veniunt, de iis, si placet, disseramus. Et ego: Piso, inquam, si est quisquam, qui acute in causis videre soleat quae res agatur. Sed tempus est, si videtur, et recta quidem ad me. Age sane, inquam. Nummus in Croesi divitiis obscuratur, pars est tamen divitiarum. Nam ista vestra: Si gravis, brevis; Quoniam, si dis placet, ab Epicuro loqui discimus. Certe nihil nisi quod possit ipsum propter se iure laudari. Non enim iam stirpis bonum quaeret, sed animalis.
Expressa vero in iis aetatibus, quae iam confirmatae sunt. Nummus in Croesi divitiis obscuratur, pars est tamen divitiarum. Qui autem de summo bono dissentit de tota philosophiae ratione dissentit. Itaque a sapientia praecipitur se ipsam, si usus sit, sapiens ut relinquat. Ita fit cum gravior, tum etiam splendidior oratio. Quid ergo attinet dicere: Nihil haberem, quod reprehenderem, si finitas cupiditates haberent? Sed emolumenta communia esse dicuntur, recte autem facta et peccata non habentur communia. Quis enim potest istis, quae te, ut ais, delectant, brevibus et acutis auditis de sententia decedere? Oratio me istius philosophi non offendit; Nunc agendum est subtilius. Utinam quidem dicerent alium alio beatiorem! Iam ruinas videres.
Nos vero, inquit ille; Nunc ita separantur, ut disiuncta sint, quo nihil potest esse perversius. At enim, qua in vita est aliquid mali, ea beata esse non potest. Sed in rebus apertissimis nimium longi sumus. Alterum significari idem, ut si diceretur, officia media omnia aut pleraque servantem vivere. Quid ergo aliud intellegetur nisi uti ne quae pars naturae neglegatur? At enim sequor utilitatem. In motu et in statu corporis nihil inest, quod animadvertendum esse ipsa natura iudicet?
related episodes
Episode 109
Rana Foroohar
Rana Foroohar | How Big Tech and Finance Betrayed Us and What We Can Do About It
Episode 148
M. Anderson & V. Spencer
The Rise of Decentralized Finance | Framework Ventures’ Michael Anderson & Vance Spencer
Episode 49
Vitalik Buterin & Vlad Zamfir
The Ethereum Roadmap and Solving the Blockchain Scalability Problem | Vitalik Buterin & Vlad Zamfir
Episode 153
Tim Lee, Jamie Lee, & Kevin Coldiron
The Rise of Carry: the New Financial Order of Decaying Growth & Recurring Crisis | Tim Lee, Jamie Lee, & Kevin Coldiron
Episode 118
Jim Grant
What’s the Price of Mispricing Risk? Interest Rates, Repo Markets, and an Activist Fed | Jim Grant
Episode 54
Barry Eichengreen
Barry Eichengreen | A History of the Great Moderation: Currency, Populism, and Credit
Episode 155
Bill Nelson
‘Accommodative’ Monetary Policy & Risks to Central Bank Independence | Bill Nelson
Episode 123
Grant Williams & Ben Hunt
Market Nihilism: Price Discovery in a World Where Nothing Matters | Ben Hunt & Grant Williams
Episode 73
Daniel Peris
Quantifying Uncertainty: A History of Financial Theory and its Implications | Daniel Peris
Episode 101
Michael Casey
Michael Casey | The Age of Cryptocurrency and the Remaking of the Modern World
Episode 79
Shoshana Zuboff
Surveillance Capitalism in the Age of the Unprecedented | Shoshana Zuboff
Video
content locked
or Subscribe to Access Premium Content
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Qui-vere falsone, quaerere mittimus-dicitur oculis se privasse; Atque haec coniunctio confusioque virtutum tamen a philosophis ratione quadam distinguitur. Haec et tu ita posuisti, et verba vestra sunt. Eiuro, inquit adridens, iniquum, hac quidem de re; Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Quae quo sunt excelsiores, eo dant clariora indicia naturae.
Sed utrum hortandus es nobis, Luci, inquit, an etiam tua sponte propensus es? Quod autem satis est, eo quicquid accessit, nimium est; Varietates autem iniurasque fortunae facile veteres philosophorum praeceptis instituta vita superabat. Ab hoc autem quaedam non melius quam veteres, quaedam omnino relicta. Non est igitur summum malum dolor. Summus dolor plures dies manere non potest? Quae duo sunt, unum facit. Conferam tecum, quam cuique verso rem subicias; Mihi, inquam, qui te id ipsum rogavi? Ut in geometria, prima si dederis, danda sunt omnia.
Ampulla enim sit necne sit, quis non iure optimo irrideatur, si laboret? Quid iudicant sensus? Easdemne res? Quodsi vultum tibi, si incessum fingeres, quo gravior viderere, non esses tui similis; Profectus in exilium Tubulus statim nec respondere ausus; Honesta oratio, Socratica, Platonis etiam. Nec enim, dum metuit, iustus est, et certe, si metuere destiterit, non erit; Itaque a sapientia praecipitur se ipsam, si usus sit, sapiens ut relinquat.
Sed virtutem ipsam inchoavit, nihil amplius. Quarum ambarum rerum cum medicinam pollicetur, luxuriae licentiam pollicetur. Ac tamen hic mallet non dolere. Atqui iste locus est, Piso, tibi etiam atque etiam confirmandus, inquam; Ut non sine causa ex iis memoriae ducta sit disciplina. Quid est igitur, cur ita semper deum appellet Epicurus beatum et aeternum? Aliis esse maiora, illud dubium, ad id, quod summum bonum dicitis, ecquaenam possit fieri accessio. Videmus igitur ut conquiescere ne infantes quidem possint. Cave putes quicquam esse verius.