Stablecoins make XRP redundant
No, XRP’s speed, low cost, and bridging efficiency complement rather than compete with stablecoins, enhancing cross-border flows where stablecoins alone fall short.
Argument
Critics argue that stablecoins—like USDT, USDC, or DAI—already handle stable value transfers effectively, rendering XRP’s role as a payment and bridging asset unnecessary in the crypto ecosystem.
Response
The "stablecoins shove XRP aside" claim is a blinkered bust that skips history. XRP Ledger didn’t just join the stablecoin party—it threw the first one. Before USDT was a twinkle in Tether’s eye, XRPL rolled out USD, GBP, EUR, TRY, JPY, CNY as native IOUs—nearly 1,000 nodes minting pegged assets since 2012. Stablecoins? Been there, done that—XRPL’s DEX, the original, swapped them cheap and fast while Ethereum was still a whiteboard dream. So, redundant? Hardly—it’s the OG stablecoin hub.
But here’s the kicker: those stablecoins—then and now—are tethered to fiat, centralized by design. USD pegs bow to the Fed, EUR to the ECB—politics and printers call the shots. XRP? No counterparty, no leash—100 billion, capped at birth, free from central bank whims or global tug-of-war. Nearly 1,000 nodes settle it in under 4 seconds—ODL flips MXN to PHP without a fiat overlord. XRP’s the neutral asset, not a pegged pawn—stablecoins can’t touch that freedom.
Stablecoins lock to fiat’s rails—XRP runs its own track. XRPL’s got the pegs, sure—but XRP’s the untamed ace, no central strings attached.