#稳定币生态发展 When Libra was announced in 2019, I witnessed near-existential panic throughout the entire financial system. The mainstream narrative was a broken record: stablecoins are coming to drain bank deposits. I too was troubled by this question—if billions of people could hold instantly transferable digital dollars on their phones, who would keep money in zero-interest, fee-laden demand deposit accounts?

But data from these years has humbled me, and taught me what it means to calmly reflect on history.

A Cornell University study fundamentally shifted my analytical framework. It revealed a counterintuitive truth: despite explosive growth in stablecoin market capitalization, virtually no clear correlation has been found between bank deposit outflows and stablecoin emergence in reality. Why? Because deposit stickiness is far more powerful than we imagined. Mortgages, credit cards, direct salary deposits—the bundling effects of these services lock users in tightly, and mere basis points of yield cannot move the needle.

The real change happens in another dimension. The mere existence of stablecoins has become a disciplinary constraint, forcing banks to raise deposit rates and optimize operational efficiency. This isn't a force killing banks—it's a catalyst pushing them to evolve. Like the music industry being forced from CDs to streaming—initially resistant, only later discovering it was a goldmine.

The emergence of the GENIUS Act is even more interesting. It doesn't suppress stablecoins; rather, it transforms offshore shadow finance into transparent, robust domestic infrastructure. This gives the dollar an upgrade opportunity, gives banks a chance to rebuild that aging clearing system. Atomic-level settlement, instant cross-border transfers, liquidity release—for these efficiency dividends, if banks learn to charge for "speed" rather than "delay," the rules of the game are completely rewritten.

Looking at this cycle, I finally understand—true competitive threats are often the best catalysts for reform.