Stablecoins are a tale of two cities
Why USDC and USDT don’t really compete
USDC and USDT don’t really compete.
They dominate two different financial realities.
One world is for dollars that are compliant, programmable, and institution-ready
The other is for dollars that are permissionless and often politically adversarial
One is the future of banks and financial services
The other has already replaced banks where they’ve failed
Fintech 3.0 (Global North)
Large institutions (JPM, BofA, Worldpay, now Fiserv) are preparing to launch stablecoins, custody, payouts and P2P flows.
These are reactive moves, triggered by regulation.
Regulated dollars, rebuilt for speed, programmability and democratized yield. Not access.
It’s fintech’s next chapter, and there's great opportunity here.
Permissionless Dollars (Global South)
But there’s a different story playing out across the Global South.
Here, stablecoins aren't the future, they're the present for people escaping currency collapse, capital controls, and political instability.
No KYC, no yield, no trust in institutions.
Just dollars that work, without permission, to power use cases across the moral spectrum.
Two Worlds, Two Logics
One world wants better infrastructure.
The other just wants access.
One bets on policy and partnerships.
The other thrives on chaos and failing systems.
A stablecoin issuer can’t just “scale globally”. They must choose which market logic to serve: regulated programmability or permissionless necessity.
Two systems. Two incumbents. One decision that determines your strategy.