Allowing anyone from any country with a smartphone the ability to hold and transact in US dollars, for one.
On a side note, "can't be done without blockchain" is not the bar to clear here. The bar is "could be improved by blockchain".
On a side note, "can't be done without blockchain" is not the bar to clear here. The bar is "could be improved by blockchain".
By breaking the law. People can do the same thing without blockchain for less.
I would be hard pressed to find someone who could more cheaply and easily smuggle physical dollars into Argentina than they could smuggle in stablecoins.
"This allows people to break the law", which is what you are saying, is not a good thing, even if a subset of the laws being bypassed are unjust. It's the opposite of utility as far as I'm concerned.
Your second point is entirely fair, but only insofar as the added value provided by blockchain cannot be attained by other means.
That said, in many countries it is only illegal for residents of that country to facilitate foreign money services for others, it's not strictly illegal for them to take advantage of money services that do exist. In those cases, a borderless app doesn't actually break the law.
Basically, I can't agree with you that it's "not a good thing" that Argentinians are able to hold 10 dollar balances on their phone so that they can afford groceries next month. I think that's a good thing. People can afford groceries who weren't able to before.
By the way, I'm going to adjust that bar one more time. Good applications are ones where the added value "cannot be attained with less effort by other means", not where the added value "cannot be attained by other means".