Worth a read. I've copy/pasted the summary conclusion below, but the paper itself gives more, imho.
Conclusion
Bindseil and Schaaf frame Bitcoin as a speculative and unstable asset while promoting CBDCs as the superior solution for the future of digital finance. However, a deeper analysis of their working paper reveals fundamental flaws in Bindseil and Schaaf’s assumptions and theoretical model, as well as a basic misunderstanding of Bitcoin’s technological fundamentals and advances. Their overreliance on Bitcoin’s price volatility as an indicator of instability ignores the broader context of emerging technologies, where volatility is often a characteristic of early-stage adoption. This narrow focus also overlooks the real-world benefits Bitcoin offers in financial inclusion, cross-border payments, and technological innovation.
In addition to these analytical shortcomings, the paper’s emphasis on U.S. political dynamics—culminating in a narrative about the potential impact of Bitcoin on U.S. elections—suggests that the authors have gone beyond neutral academic analysis and are aiming to influence public policy debates. This overt political framing, which does not fit with the paper’s supposed economic focus, raises questions about its intended audience and the objectivity of its conclusions.
Bindseil and Schaaf’s professional roles at the ECB introduce potential conflicts of interest that further undermine the paper’s credibility. Their vested interest in advancing CBDCs likely skews their portrayal of Bitcoin as a speculative asset, while ignoring the considerable risks posed by CBDCs, such as state surveillance, financial instability, and the loss of privacy.
Given these significant flaws, the paper’s conclusions clearly render their preprint unsuitable for academic publication. The combination of methodological weaknesses and personal or institutional biases undermines the rigor and objectivity required for scholarly inquiry: the working paper fails to provide a credible analysis of the utility or future of Bitcoin.
Comments