Decentralized Finance (commonly referred to as DeFi) is a blockchain based and cryptographically secure form of finance. Inspired after the financial crisis of 2008, DeFi does not rely on central financial intermediaries such as brokerages, exchanges, or banks to offer traditional financial instruments, and instead utilizes smart contracts on blockchains, the most common being Ethereum. DeFi platforms allow people to verify any transfer of ownership, lend or borrow funds from others, speculate on price movements on a range of assets using derivatives, trade cryptocurrencies, insure against…
Read moreNarrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Zipcode:
These active users have achieved advanced knowledge of the terminology, history, and legal implications regarding the topic of Decentralized Finance
@ISIDEWITH4yrs4Y
Yes
@9FNSSWC2yrs2Y
Centralized finance allows the government to control who has money. If you do something they don't like they could take away your money.
@9FJB4JB2yrs2Y
Centralized finance allows the government to control who has money. If you do something they don't like they could take away your money.
@ISIDEWITH4yrs4Y
No
@9FLYGRTProgressive2yrs2Y
Finance should remain centralized so that way congress can funnel money into issues that are prevalent in today's society, like drug misuse, and overdosing/underage drinking.
@9F7XVNZIndependent2yrs2Y
Centralized Finance can empower governments to manipulate the economy in such a way to only help monopolies .
If it's controlled by multiple people or companies then it'll become just as corrupted as the internet. There would be too much control over the economy coming from too many different sources. It would be almost impossible to track any fraud back to its original source.
@9N5FP6W1yr1Y
The ledger is public, all fraud is traceable.
"Too much control from too many different sources" -- do you hear yourself? Fewer sources = more control, not the other way around.
@9F8VPZ72yrs2Y
I don’t need to convince anyone. We patriot will not let it happen. Do not mistake our kindness and passiveness as weakness.
@ISIDEWITH4yrs4Y
Yes, but only if it’s truly decentralized and cannot be manipulated by any person, group, or government agency
@9FLYGRTProgressive2yrs2Y
It would allow money to go to what the people truly want, instead of what a certain group or person would like.
@9F8VPZ72yrs2Y
It allows too much surveillance and control by the govt of what we are doing. The govt has proven time and time again it cannot be trusted, honest, or accountable. Those in power are bought by the wealthy and interests not of the American people. Without cash you lose the ability to do simple things like donate to homeless on the street. To conduct lawn-sales, to slip money under your child pillow from the tooth fairy, kids allowances etc. The government wants to micromanage our every move and that is not what they were hired for. They work and answer to me! An every other American they swore to represent. They are in position by our authority and they will be removed just as quick. By force if necessary, a right ensures to us by our founding fathers. We will not cower and bend the knee to corrupt politicians and their agencies.
@9MMJ7MD1yr1Y
It would allow money to go to what the people truly want, instead of what a certain group or person would like.
@9FWVP3J2yrs2Y
Currency is credit of a country. It is not possible to be truly decentralized. Decentralized Finance is a fake concept.
@ISIDEWITH2yrs2Y
Yes, this could reduce income inequality by providing more transparency and inclusive access to financial services
@notme3yrs3Y
I don’t understand the concept of decentralized finance
@9FHWW9T2yrs2Y
I don’t even know what this means
@9FKRMRS2yrs2Y
@9FFJJDF2yrs2Y
I don't understand what this means.
@9F83TJN2yrs2Y
@9D5RHR8Constitution2yrs2Y
Go back to the gold standard
@9D9ZSWQ2yrs2Y
@9DFD8LN 2yrs2Y
I don't understand what this is talking about.
@9D98YFK2yrs2Y
I don't understand any of this
@9D6QVHQ2yrs2Y
@9C5HJHG2yrs2Y
I don’t really understand the question
@9FCT6BQ 2yrs2Y
I don't understand enough about this topic.
@ISIDEWITH2yrs2Y
@9FQ4ZBF2yrs2Y
No, It should however be controlled only by private individuals and companies and not regulated by the state.
@VulcanMan6 2yrs2Y
How is it a good idea in the slightest for our nation's financial system to be owned and controlled by private interests..?
Create LOH, Legion of Homeless, in which all of our funds, i.e. trillions of dollars, are to be managed by drunk homeless people.
@4PTXS6S10mos10MO
#1 Engaged Decentralized Finance
As someone who is actually very familiar with the blockchain, I think it would be a mistake to go to a decentralized financial system. There has to be servers that are constantly verifying the transactions, similar to the miners for any blockchain currency. If this happens, I believe that there will be fees for financial access, limiting people that are lower income from accessing the system or having complete access. Within the answers to this question, another reason was for increased transparency, while you would be able to verify/look up transactions, you shouldn't be able to specifically look up another individual's transactions. This hinges on the verge of invasion of privacy and letting the government have that much control is not something that I'm willing to agree to.
@846NK4L10mos10MO
You're right that miners or validators in decentralized systems perform a crucial role by verifying transactions, but the assumption that fees would automatically limit access for lower-income individuals doesn’t hold up universally. In fact, centralized systems often impose hidden fees and barriers—think overdraft charges, minimum balance requirements, or transfer fees—that disproportionately affect the financially vulnerable. Decentralized systems, if designed properly, could actually lower costs because they cut out middlemen, making the system more accessible overal… Read more
@97NYRBTProgressive3yrs3Y
i don’t understand what this is asking
@8WG34Q94yrs4Y
I don't really know what this means
@9DKZPXS2yrs2Y
I don't understand question
@9DNHT9T2yrs2Y
Dont have an opinion on this
@9FLHXZV2yrs2Y
I don't understand what it's asking.
@9NHS5NN1yr1Y
No, I feel that is still in a early concept and should be adapted or developed more before we consider the change.
@9FB24KC2yrs2Y
I don't have enough information to have an opinion.
@9F8NRX5Libertarian2yrs2Y
Bring back the gold standard.
@9L5DG4R1yr1Y
We should have limited Government, less spending, lower taxes, and Deregulation. We should decentralize it to a healthy amount.
@9DZK2NS2yrs2Y
i dont understand this topic
@9D9GC93Independent2yrs2Y
No, the anonymity of decentralized protocols makes it easier for criminals to transfer funds
@ISIDEWITH2yrs2Y
@9GKPFYJRepublican2yrs2Y
No, companies are constantly making your money and bank accounts more secure and they can't do that if it is decentralized
@9CJ6CB62yrs2Y
They can also more easily sell that information to those bank accounts, which happens way too often to even describe. Every agreement you click without reading, every subscription you buy, it all sells your info and makes it more free. Decentralizing helps them stop that.
I don't really understand this question
@ISIDEWITH2yrs2Y
Don’t understand question.
@9BPYH4Y2yrs2Y
I don't really have a stance on this
No, the anonymity of decentralized protocols make it easier for criminal financial activity to occur
@8WFS34X4yrs4Y
i dont understand this enough
I don't understand the concept of decentralized finance
@9CKGW4ZRepublican2yrs2Y
No, the anonymity of decentralized protocols make it easier for criminals to transfer funds
@8WFW5WL4yrs4Y
Girl I understood one word in this whole sentence
@9DY44S6 2yrs2Y
Don’t have enough information on this
@9DSX2F62yrs2Y
The government should not seize any means of production, even under the ironic claim of decentralization. That said, the technology in question should not be held from someone for political, or religious beliefs, no matter how controversial.
@9D4X9D4Libertarian2yrs2Y
It seems that corrupt people want control and will use this to control
@9CF4K962yrs2Y
Yes, abolish the federal reserve and turn its owners into a human centipede but only after you skin them with a potato peeler and cover them in salt and acid.
@B64JCTN2wks2W
No but possibly yes.no cause the. Anyone can get money for the basic necessities.but no cause that means what if people spend it on random things such as drugs or other illegal things.
I chose no because I think there's still can be a lot of corruption within the system itself, especially if powerful people get their hands on it.
@B62J79N3wks3W
Yes, but centralized planning would be essential to the overall goals of a future approach. It must be centralized in its principles of how it plans, and what its purpose is, and it should be decentralized in its flexibility to meet the needs of all no matter what, and the wants of all if they are in a cooperative manner that helps society and not themselves to dominate others.
@B629RCG4wks4W
I would be interested in understanding this better before I settle on an answer. I feel like I'd say yes, as long as it couldn't be manipulated by anyone.
@B5ZT8BPTranshumanist4wks4W
Yes, however with moderate government oversight with more open access to financial services and transparency.
Maybe, decentralization could increase fairness, but only if it’s safe, stable, and accessible for everyone.
@B5Y825BIndependent1mo1MO
Transitioning the financial system to a decentralized protocol has both benefits and challenges. On one hand, decentralization can increase transparency, reduce reliance on big corporations, and give people more control over their money, similar to how the internet operates. This could help prevent abuses of power and improve security.
On the other hand, managing a decentralized financial system is complex. It requires strong safeguards against fraud, ensures stability, and protects users who may not be tech-savvy. While it’s an interesting idea with potential, any shift like this needs careful planning and regulation to balance innovation with safety and fairness.
@B5Y36V21mo1MO
We must move towards a moneyless post-capitalist society. This is an unimportant issue because of this.
@B5XXTLCLibertarian1mo1MO
Use decentralized elements (like cryptographic verification or open standards) within a regulated framework. Governments or consortia could adopt public-good-style protocols—but with safety nets, privacy protections, and oversight.
@B5XS7TZProgressive1mo1MO
I would say yes, but the problem is when it comes to trust with who controls it. Because the digital currency isn't really real like actual money. If there was a more safe way then we could try.
@B5XJ46Q1mo1MO
I'm open to an alternative, but I also understand the opponents argument and I think it's very important. transparency would be a welcome addition! but as we've seen recently, things like coins and anonymity are easy ways to transfer money from bad actors to other people (ahem, this administration).
@B5XCFW61mo1MO
Yes, but we need a hybrid system: one that leverages decentralized protocols for transparency and access, while retaining democratic oversight and safeguards to prevent abuse, fraud, or instability.
@B5X4STG1mo1MO
No, this seems like a way to limit lower income people of accessing their money or getting aid. Until the government and ensure everyone has wifi all the time, there should be no system like this.
@B5VYSLX1mo1MO
Maybe, the world is unpredictable and its a 50/50 chance if it can work out or fail and we lose everything we've built.
@B5TJSXD2mos2MO
The financial system should explore decentralized technologies carefully — but not fully abandon centralized oversight.
Open protocols could improve transparency, reduce costs, and expand access, but strong legal protections, oversight, and public accountability are still needed to maintain trust and stability. A hybrid model may offer the best balance: decentralized infrastructure with smart regulation.
@B5SX5MF2mos2MO
I support moving toward more decentralized financial tools, but with regulation to protect people from fraud and confusion. Financial freedom matters — but so does safety, especially for underserved communities.
Deleted2mos2MO
No, The security vulnerabilities are too great to be decentralized. There needs to be oversight and security.
@B5RDB5J2mos2MO
Abolish the Federal reserve, bring monetary responsibility to congress. Let people use bitcoin, gold, silver, any thing that has value for medium of exchange.
@B5L8F2P2mos2MO
No, working within a democratic system where everyone owns the means of production and plans the economy based on the needs of the people is, in my opinion, how capital should work
@B5J962N3mos3MO
Yes because we're not trying to get a digital monopoly. Just because it's not physical doesn't mean it won't create a monopoly.
Deleted3mos3MO
No. The US dollar is part of our traditional culture, and therefore should be maintained. It is too late for the European Union, who abolished their national currencies in favour of a sovereignity-restricting shared currency.
@B5CRFXP3mos3MO
No, this causes a national financial system security issue, and financial security is very important.
@B5BZCLD3mos3MO
I feel there should be a combination of both. If it is owned or controlled by a corporation, there is room for manipulation and malice. If there is a decentralized protocol and it is run like the internet, there is room for mistakes if it isn't monitored by a group of qualified individuals.
@B5BSQWY3mos3MO
No, A balanced coexistence of decentralized and centralized systems may be the most effective approach.
@B57Y5GC3mos3MO
Yes, I would enjoy a system with more personal freedoms like this would imply to create. However, a system without regulations or safeguards will always be exploitable.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
