THIS is the stablecoin power angle that nobody is talking about

ambcryptoPubblicato 2026-02-02Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-02-02

Introduzione

Dollar-backed stablecoins are increasingly serving as a tool for the U.S. to extend its monetary influence abroad without physically moving dollars overseas, according to a Rabobank report. When foreign entities demand dollar stablecoins, U.S. issuers convert this demand into Treasury bill purchases, helping fund U.S. deficits at lower rates while digital tokens circulate internationally. This mechanism allows dollars to remain within the U.S. financial system while still facilitating global trade. Non-USD stablecoins are also gaining traction, with their supply surging 260% over the past year to a combined market cap of $1.55 billion, though they remain small compared to dollar-pegged alternatives. A key application driving adoption is crypto-backed payment cards, which have grown into an $18 billion market. Monthly transaction volumes have increased from $100 million in early 2023 to over $1.5 billion, growing at an annual rate exceeding 100%. These cards operate on top of traditional networks like Visa and Mastercard, using stablecoins to settle transactions in the background while maintaining a familiar user experience. In summary, dollar-backed stablecoins are expanding U.S. monetary power digitally without exporting physical dollars, while crypto payment infrastructure accelerates their real-world use.

Dollar-backed stablecoins are now more than just a crypto payment tool. Recent reports say that they may also be helping the U.S. extend dollar influence abroad, in a way that keeps real capital at home.

Here’s what you need to know.

Stablecoins – A secret weapon?

A report by Rabobank has stated that dollar-backed stablecoins are spreading dollar influence, without letting real dollars leave the country.

Source: X

The idea is that when a foreign firm wants a dollar stablecoin, a U.S. issuer converts that demand into Treasury bill purchases. Dollars flow back to the U.S. government, helping fund deficits at lower rates, while the firm gets digital dollars instead of cash.

In trade, it goes a step further. U.S. importers can pay exporters in stablecoins, while the underlying dollars stay parked in Treasuries. Only tokens move across borders.

With comparisons to the Soviet-era trade ruble, dollars are exported digitally… all while keeping the power at home.

Non-dollar stablecoins step up

That growing influence hasn’t gone unnoticed, with non-USD-pegged alternatives gaining ground.

For long, more than 99% of stablecoins were pegged to the U.S. dollar. That number is now decreasing at the margins.

Over the past year, non-USD stablecoins have surged 260% in supply, pushing their combined market cap to about $1.55 billion.

Source: X

It’s still small next to dollar-backed giants, but it certainly matters.

All of this theory matters because…

…it’s already showing up in day-to-day payments. One of the fastest-growing payment modes for stablecoins right now is crypto cards.

Source: X

Once a niche product, crypto cards are now an $18 billion market.

Monthly volumes went from about $100 million in early 2023 to over $1.5 billion today, growing at a 100%+ annual rate.

Source: X

Importantly, these cards don’t replace Visa or Mastercard.

Rather, they sit on top of them. Stablecoins fund the transaction in the background, while card networks handle acceptance. For users and merchants, what looks like normal payments are actually digital dollars doing the work.

Final Thoughts

Dollar-backed stablecoins are exporting U.S. monetary power, without exporting actual dollars.
As crypto cards grow, digital dollars are moving fast.

Domande pertinenti

QHow are dollar-backed stablecoins helping the U.S. extend dollar influence abroad without exporting real dollars?

ADollar-backed stablecoins allow foreign firms to obtain digital dollars while U.S. issuers convert that demand into Treasury bill purchases. This keeps actual dollars within the U.S., helping fund deficits at lower rates, while only tokens move across borders.

QWhat is the current market trend for non-USD-pegged stablecoins?

ANon-USD stablecoins have surged 260% in supply over the past year, reaching a combined market cap of approximately $1.55 billion, though they remain small compared to dollar-backed stablecoins.

QHow are crypto cards contributing to the growth of stablecoin payments?

ACrypto cards, now an $18 billion market, use stablecoins to fund transactions in the background while leveraging traditional card networks like Visa or Mastercard for acceptance. Monthly volumes grew from $100 million in early 2023 to over $1.5 billion, with a 100%+ annual growth rate.

QWhat role do U.S. Treasury bills play in the stablecoin ecosystem?

AWhen foreign demand for dollar stablecoins arises, U.S. issuers purchase Treasury bills with the incoming dollars, effectively recycling foreign demand into U.S. government debt and keeping capital domestically parked.

QWhy are non-USD stablecoins gaining traction despite the dominance of dollar-backed options?

ANon-USD stablecoins are growing as alternatives to reduce reliance on U.S. dollar influence, with a 260% supply increase reflecting heightened interest in diversified digital currency pegs.

Letture associate

A major Bitcoin market player, inactive for four years, transferred Bitcoin worth about 46 million dollars! Here are the details

A large Bitcoin investor, inactive for four years, has moved 730 BTC worth approximately $46.12 million. The assets, accumulated over seven years, were transferred to a newly created wallet from an address with no prior transaction history. Analysts suggest the move could be linked to recently discovered security vulnerabilities in hardware wallets, potentially prompting long-term holders to migrate funds for safety. There is no evidence the bitcoins were sent to an exchange, leaving the intent—whether for security or potential sale—unclear. This follows another recent large transfer of over 16,400 BTC (worth >$1 billion) by a separate long-term holder. Such activity signals renewed movement of funds among major investors, though transfers between wallets do not necessarily indicate imminent selling and can be for security or portfolio management purposes.

cryptonews.ru7 min fa

A major Bitcoin market player, inactive for four years, transferred Bitcoin worth about 46 million dollars! Here are the details

cryptonews.ru7 min fa

Bitcoin may find bear market bottom in August: 10x Research

Research firm 10x Research suggests Bitcoin could confirm a bear-market bottom in August if it achieves a monthly close above $63,000, which would turn several of their technical indicators bullish. While their analysis was prepared with Bitcoin trading at $63,140, a slight gain from July's close could trigger this signal. The report cites steady Federal Reserve rates as a base case but notes risks from potential rate hikes and geopolitical conflict. Additional selling pressure is expected from miners and treasury companies. Grayscale's research head separately suggested Bitcoin may have bottomed earlier than the traditional four-year cycle, with macro conditions being the primary price driver. Other indicators, like over half of Bitcoin's supply being held at a loss and a record balance held by long-term investors, are also seen as signs a market bottom is approaching.

cointelegraph22 min fa

Bitcoin may find bear market bottom in August: 10x Research

cointelegraph22 min fa

In-depth: The Foreign Guest Genspark

The article "The Foreign Guest: Genspark" investigates the identity and business practices of AI startup Genspark, which presents itself as a Palo Alto-based "AI Costco" offering a subscription bundle of over 70 models and numerous AI agent tools. Despite its official Silicon Valley narrative, Genspark's founding team has deep roots in Chinese tech giant Baidu, a history systematically downplayed in its branding. The company actively cultivates an image as an elite US firm, heavily publicizing partnerships and endorsements from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Microsoft, while distancing itself from the Chinese AI community and obscuring its connections to Chinese investors and open-weight models (like those from DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax) that power its services. Genspark's core strategy involves rapidly cloning and integrating successful AI product concepts (e.g., from Perplexity, Manus, Plaud) into its unified platform, supported by aggressive marketing, including Super Bowl ads and paid native content in publications like The Wall Street Journal. Critically, the article suggests a significant portion of its engineering and product development is conducted by a team in Beijing, operating outside its official US corporate structure. This duality allows Genspark to leverage Chinese talent and models for efficiency and cost reduction while constructing a public facade as a purely American success story. The piece concludes that Genspark's most effective agent is its own corporate identity, meticulously engineered to obscure its Chinese underpinnings and be perceived solely as a Silicon Valley company.

marsbit40 min fa

marsbit40 min fa

Should Bitcoin Be "Immutable"? Craig Wright Reignites Governance Route Dispute

The debate over Bitcoin's governance is reignited by Craig Wright, who argues the protocol should remain permanently fixed and immutable. He views Bitcoin's core value as its transparent, unchangeable monetary rules, contrasting it with traditional finance. This stance sparks discussion on whether Bitcoin should evolve to address security threats, user demands, and efficiency, or if its determinism is its primary strength. The article notes that Bitcoin has undergone significant upgrades like SegWit and Taproot, achieved through community consensus rather than top-down decisions. However, tension persists between the need for stability—which fosters trust—and the need for adaptation to remain competitive. A key concern is the influence of core developers versus the decentralized ideal. Ultimately, the debate centers on finding a governance model that balances immutable core principles with the ability to innovate. This challenge is fundamental to Bitcoin's future as a decentralized global system.

marsbit42 min fa

Should Bitcoin Be "Immutable"? Craig Wright Reignites Governance Route Dispute

marsbit42 min fa

Debate: Korean Workers Fear Unemployment, While Musk Envisions a Society 'Without Work'?

While South Korean auto workers fear job losses from robotics, Elon Musk envisions a future where AI and robots render most work optional. This article explores the growing tension between immediate anxieties over automation and long-term visions of a post-work society. The piece begins with recent strikes at Hyundai's Korean plants, where unions, amid standard wage negotiations, also sought job guarantees against advancing robotics—specifically mentioning Boston Dynamics' Atlas. This reflects how anxiety about technological displacement is emerging even before robots are fully capable of replacing skilled labor on assembly lines. The author argues that while current robotics still struggle with the nuanced, experiential knowledge of veteran workers, the *perception* of imminent replacement is fueling social conflict prematurely. This modern "Luddite" sentiment is compared to the 19th-century English textile workers who smashed machines. Historically, Luddites weren't simply anti-technology; they were protesting the rapid devaluation of their skills and the unequal distribution of productivity gains. Similarly, today's workers ask who will bear the cost of transition and share in the new wealth created by machines. In contrast, figures like Elon Musk propose an optimistic endpoint: with AI and robotics driving extreme abundance, the link between work and survival could break. He suggests concepts like "Universal High Income" could allow society to share the technological bounty, transforming work from a necessity into a choice. The core challenge, however, lies in the transition. The author notes that technology's benefits diffuse slowly, while its disruptive costs—job losses, skill obsolescence—can be concentrated and immediate. The risk is a painful interim period where productivity gains are captured by a few before new social contracts, safety nets, and retraining systems are established. The conclusion calls for proactive governance. Just as past industrial revolutions gave rise to labor standards and social safety nets, the robotics era needs its own frameworks. These should address job transition support, distribution of productivity gains, safety liability, and ethical deployment. Embracing such "constraints" is not opposition to progress but a necessary step to ensure technology benefits society broadly. The discussion sparked by Hyundai's workers, therefore, is not premature but essential.

marsbit53 min fa

Debate: Korean Workers Fear Unemployment, While Musk Envisions a Society 'Without Work'?

marsbit53 min fa

Trading

Spot