pull down to refresh
Yeah, that last point makes sense on a per-dollar basis. The advantage to the US of stablecoins is how much market share they might absorb.
As to the first point, isn't that just a consequence of the dollar being the reserve currency and inflationary? Americans get the dollars first, before global prices adjust, so the rest of the world's stuff seems like a relatively better deal to us. Plus, we are better able to deficit spend because we can print more money to cover our expenses.
reply
I think the Obstfeld guy actually stuck the stablecoin thing in the article in order to get clicks. His real point seems to be that the US has a trade deficit because it buys more stuff than it can afford, not because the dollar is globally used as a reserve currency.
As far as the stablecoin argument goes, he's saying a foreigner who wants a stablecoin, might sell a real US dollar or a US treasury to get it, in which case, the stablecoin isn't helping to finance the US via magic demand for US debt.
I like his last point there about stablecoins (even those that are compelled to hold US debt as reserves) are less money making for the US than good old dollars. The US gets a really good deal on a dollar that is held abroad, but it only gets a somewhat good deal on a GENIUS-Act stablecoin held abroad.