The Future of Money
The Last Time Humans Reinvented Who Gets to Print Money
The most consequential financial decision of the next century is already being made — not by elected governments, but by engineers, central bankers, and tech executives working in quiet competition with each other.
The Idea
Money has always been a political technology. Whoever controls its supply shapes who prospers, who suffers, and how power flows through a society. For most of modern history, that control has sat — imperfectly, contentiously — with central banks acting on behalf of nation-states. But that arrangement, barely a century old in its current form, is now being challenged from two directions simultaneously. From above: central banks in dozens of countries are developing Central Bank Digital Currencies, or CBDCs — essentially state-issued digital money that bypasses commercial banks entirely. A CBDC wouldn't just be a digital version of cash. It would give governments unprecedented visibility into every transaction, and potentially the ability to issue money with conditions attached — currency that expires, or can only be spent on certain things. From below: decentralised cryptocurrencies and stablecoins issued by private firms propose a world where no single authority controls the supply at all. The rules are encoded in software, and the ledger is maintained by a distributed network rather than a central institution. What makes this moment genuinely strange is that both alternatives are gathering momentum at the same time, pulling in opposite directions. One concentrates monetary power further into the state; the other tries to dissolve it entirely. The question of which wins — or whether some hybrid emerges — will quietly determine the texture of economic life for billions of people.
In the World
In 2021, China became the first major economy to begin mass trials of a state digital currency, the digital yuan. The rollout wasn't announced with fanfare — it arrived through lottery giveaways in cities like Shenzhen and Chengdu, where citizens downloaded a wallet app and received small amounts to spend at local merchants. On the surface, it felt like a loyalty programme. Underneath, it was a live test of something far more significant. The digital yuan is programmable. Early pilot versions included expiry dates — if you didn't spend the money within a set window, it vanished. This sounds like a technicality, but it represents a fundamental shift in what money means. Cash, by design, is inert. It doesn't care what you do with it or when. A programmable currency is different: it can be steered, nudged, and ultimately controlled in ways physical money never could be. China's motivations are layered. Reducing reliance on dollar-dominated payment systems like SWIFT matters geopolitically. Gaining real-time data on how money moves through the economy matters for policy. Marginalising private payment giants like Alipay and WeChat Pay matters domestically. The European Central Bank, the Bank of England, and the US Federal Reserve are all in various stages of exploring their own versions. None has launched publicly. But China's experiment has concentrated minds considerably — and the race to define what digital sovereign money looks like is now very much underway.
Why It Matters
This isn't an abstract policy question. The architecture of money shapes what's possible in your daily life in ways that rarely announce themselves. If the future is CBDCs, the practical implications are striking: governments could, in principle, deliver stimulus directly to individuals without going through banks, eliminate tax evasion with near-perfect transaction visibility, or implement monetary policy by making money time-sensitive during downturns. Whether those sound like features or threats depends heavily on how much you trust the institutions wielding them. If the future is decentralised and private, the implications are equally double-edged: more financial access for people excluded from traditional banking, but also less accountability, more volatility, and the concentration of a different kind of power in whoever writes the protocols. Most likely, both will coexist uneasily — and individuals, businesses, and governments will navigate between them in ways that are partly chosen and partly imposed. Understanding the contest now, before the outcomes harden into infrastructure, is one of the more useful things a financially literate person can do.
A Question to Ponder
If the currency in your pocket could be programmed to expire or be restricted to certain uses, would you trust the institution doing the programming — and what would it take for that trust to be earned or lost?
Get a new one of these every morning.
Start learning with Thinkable