Thursday 31 July 2014

What does the rise of the Bitcoin imply for the future of Central Banking? (Pt. V)



The next step that investment bank would have to take to legitimize Bitcoin would be to regulate the securities valued and derived from Bitcoin- without this, specific, structure of conduct, the market for Bitcoin-based derivatives would spiral into the same destructive chaos that consumed both the derivatives market in its infancy, and subprime-mortgage market in its adolescent years. If Bitcoin securities are not managed or overseen by an authoritative body- not necessarily the SEC- their volatility will lead to eventual collapse, in the same vain as the dystopian, lawless market, the above paragraph aims to avoid. An extension of this regulation could be to introduce Reserve Requirement Ratios (RRRs) and discount or base rates for Bitcoin lenders, to allow for greater control over this currency.
The penultimate method by which the likes of Mr. Carney and the Mrs. Yellen would need to adapt to the rise of the Bitcoin would be to accrue liquid reserves of the Bitcoin so that they would be able to respond with shocks to the ‘foreign’ bilateral exchange rates between their own currency and Bitcoin. In the same way that the huge reserves of USDs in China, to support its pegged exchange rate, it may be necessary for the Federal Reserve (Fed) and the BoE to attain Bitcoin reserves to guarantee a reasonable amount of stability. Without this further amalgamation of Bitcoin with Central Banks’ domestic currencies, Bitcoin will become disenfranchised, and excluded from global markets, and may be abandoned entirely. The accumulation of Central Reserves will also help to restrain the almost inevitable process of deflation that will occur in the Bitcoin system.
The above step leads, logically –as was hinted at in the closing sentences- to the final step that Central Banks would have to take to acclimatize to Bitcoin. Managing monetary stimulus through the procedures, such as Open Market Operations, in Bitcoin, would be the final step that Central Banks would need to take to be able to meet their goals, outlined in the opening paragraph. The Central Banks would have to manage deflation possibly through the use of ‘Bitcoin bonds’ which it could trade with commercial lenders to increase liquidity, when necessary.
The above mentioned alterations to the relationship between Bitcoins and Central Banks would lead to a very unfortunate problem for Bitcoin followers, and acolytes of ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’. The Bitcoin, through these changes would essentially become the USD, or the GBP, or the Euro, or the Hong Kong Dollar, or any other internationally traded currency- the only difference being that it has no domicile. Another unfortunate truth that supporters simply must come to terms with is that the Bitcoin is a currency that is almost destined to fail, as it relies so heavily on its rapid uptake and use that long-term, serious investments will plainly not be made. This view was supported by another case involving Mt. Gox wherein the price of Bitcoin fell by over 800USD within the space of a month (see Fig. 3). Despite this problem supposedly being with Mt. Gox, previously the world leading Bitcoin exchange, alone, many other Bitcoin exchanges have faced drops by as much as 200USD.
The only real thing that Central Banks of the world need to do to contain Bitcoin is wait. In a recent Financial Times analysis column[i], Mark Williams (former Federal Reserve risk examiner and a finance lecturer at Boston University’s School of Management) highlighted that: Bitcoin is unregulated, and is decentralized, and thus cannot properly develop without the fundamental structure of it being changed. The article reads that even the most established currencies require an entire team of highly skilled individuals to be managed, and that no algorithm that contemporary computers can run will be able to replace this. Even if the problem of the cap of the number of Bitcoins was solved; there would still be countless other struggles that would arise, due to the irrationality that is a fundamental part of human nature.
Kavi Chauhan- 05/02/2014


[i] M. Williams (2014), A dangerous mistake lies at Bitcoin’s intellectual core. The Financial Times.

No comments:

Post a Comment