Unless an ET reader has experience with handling crypto assets on a local wallet, the magnitude of this will not be fully understood
According to sources of crypto history, BTC is 14 years old and stablecoins are 8 years old. Depending on pov, the asset class itself, and these particular flavors can be considered young, perhaps even infants. Fair enough. But Im sorry. We are talking about a USD VALUE (real or perceived) of billions and billions, in addition to the invent and marketing of investment and trading products marketed directly to the public at large, from premier, entrenched, and supposedly trusted, institutional-grade bodies. The FACT this "problem" was not "solved" previously does not get a pass. And then what is the solution? The StableCoin Transparency Act? Nothing more than a peg to a fiat currency in the waning years of it's global dominance? I think @Pekelo mentioned elsewhere that an investment in tether one year ago has produced an 8% loss due to inflation! How is that better than a USD account at a legitimate financial institution located anywhere in the world? Nevermind that throughout history, pegs only work until they cause (great) pain or are removed outright. What about the stupid argument that stablecoins will end up buying trillions worth of USD debt? So by government mandate, the US will be able to offload inferior asset(s)... Oh, but think of the juicy, below the rate of inflation interest rate that will be earned!! It's a noble and patriotic business model, with less fees too! Don't be a useful idiot.
USD for past year is up 12% but .... it was up 21%. No one knows the future and what USD or Tether or Gold, etc will return.
Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like you're saying that stablecoins are useless to begin with because they are pegged to an inferior asset called the US Dollar. It sounds like you are primarily frustrated at the decline of a dollar's purchasing power due to inflation, and anything pegged to that is just a digital alias of the same dollar bill. But that's not really an argument against stablecoins.
As a US citizen, domiciled in the USA, of course I'm "frustrated" (sic) with inflation. But I am not against stablecoins. Furthermore, you are correct that as currently proposed, the Stablecoin Transparency Act is nothing more than a digital alias for USD. In currency vernacular, a peg. In that light, the entire crypto space has gas-lit the participants. Crypto was supposed to be a decentralized, readily available currency to anyone (with access to modern technology) worldwide, no bank account needed. The number of lives that would be improved is in the billions! None of it has been proven successful. Anyway... I am not a expert on coins, tokens, blockchain, crypto networks, crypto exchanges, etc... I don't have answers to stability... of price, value, transactions, validation, energy, speed, existence, and/or other aspects necessary for the next great currency of the world. I do know pegs do not work forever. I do know governments do not allow power to be taken from them; currency certainly represents power. I do know USD is entering it's waning years. On the plus-side, because of it's stature and still required global convertibility, the US/USD will likely be (one of) the last to fall.
Bitcoin IS decentralized. Bitcoin is readily available to anyone worldwide. I can send BTC (or virtually any other coin) to anyone on the planet with a wallet app installed on their smartphone or computer. That's a friggin' lot of people. I'm not sure if we're at billions yet, but we are definitely headed in that direction. See, your core problem is that you're using crypto as a catch-all word for everything, but the ecosystem is too broad to do that. An example would be using the word "money" every time you wanted to reference a physical dollar bill, a digital Yen, physical coins, or electronic fund transfers. So if you said, "Money is so inconvenient because it's such a pain in the ass to transfer." you'd be right if you were actually referring to 30 truckloads of pennies, but wrong if you were referring to an electronic funds transfer of the same amount. So by using crypto as a generic term, you're actually making a lot of false statements because the fact of the matter is that some cryptos have solved a certain set of problems, and others have taken on a whole different set of issues with varying levels of success. That's why you can't just go around saying things like crypto isn't decentralized or isn't readily available because it's just not true.
Same that cryptos facilitate crime. As if all crime didn't exist prior to 2009, hasn't continued through present day via cash and the banking system, and not likely to as well far into the future. Brooklyn Bridge is for sale for all those who believe that. Cash only.
Well it's hard to price the Brooklyn Bridge in Crypto because it fluctuates so violently. It seems we have to have fiat to value crypto.