What gives XRP its value? In an exchange on X, Ripple CTO David Schwartz \u2013 known as \u201cJoelKatz\u201d \u2013 tried to answer that question without pretending crypto already behaves like traditional assets. He didn\u2019t lean on marketing language about instant settlement or global payments. He talked about power, control, censorship, incentive design, and speculation.<\/p>\n
First, Schwartz reframed<\/a> what XRP is actually for. He argued that the XRP Ledger is built for people and institutions that don\u2019t want an intermediary sitting in the middle of their transactions. He put it in blunt terms: \u201cDo you want to use a blockchain where people can be their own bank and no middlemen tax their transactions or do you want to be someone else\u2019s bank and tax their transactions? If you want the latter, there are dozens of blockchains for you. If you want the former, there\u2019s XRP.\u201d<\/p>\n In that framing, XRP is not just another token. It\u2019s the only counterparty-free asset native to XRPL. Everything else on the ledger is an IOU from someone \u2013 a promise by an issuer, bank, fintech, money transmitter, or gateway. XRP is the exception. It exists on-ledger, without an issuer, and can move between any accounts without anyone else\u2019s permission, freeze authority, or seizure authority.<\/p>\n Schwartz made that explicit: \u201cXRP is the only asset without a counterparty that can be accessed by every account in every jurisdiction with no risk of default, freeze, or clawback<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n That point is central to how Ripple has always positioned XRP: the ledger is multi-currency, but only one asset on it is universally clean. What Schwartz is arguing is that this special status is not cosmetic. It is economic. He said: \u201cI do think XRP\u2019s special place on XRPL ensures that XRP will capture some of the value XRPL transactions generate.\u201d<\/p>\n To understand that claim, you have to understand how most blockchains try to \u201ccapture value.\u201d The dominant 2020\u20132025 playbook in crypto is explicit extraction. Protocols design fee switches, burn mechanisms, staking capture, MEV capture, sequencer rent, or other tolls, and then say to the market: holding this token entitles you to a share of that toll.<\/p>\n Schwartz is openly saying XRPL is not built like that. The XRP Ledger was not designed to tax users at the protocol layer. In his view, that\u2019s a feature, not a bug. He described XRPL as a public good, not a rent machine.<\/p>\n He explained it by analogy: \u201cWhen you ask what eBay is good for, you normally don\u2019t think about it being a good way to enrich the people who invest in eBay. You think of it as a way of bringing buyers and sellers together with the buyers and sellers wanting the costs to be as low as possible. The buyers and sellers shouldn\u2019t want eBay\u2019s investors taxing their transactions as much as they can get away with because that is mostly money the buyers have to pay but sellers don\u2019t get.\u201d<\/p>\n Then he applied that logic directly to XRPL: \u201cI think of XRPL as a public good that doesn\u2019t tax people who want to use its capabilities. I am not arguing that it is the best design or even that it\u2019s better than most other designs. But it is different. XRP really is about being your own bank and having no middlemen passively taxing your transactions.\u201d<\/p>\n This is where the philosophical tension becomes an economic tension. If XRPL is designed not to skim value from users, then how does XRP appreciate? Why should holding XRP benefit from the ledger\u2019s success?<\/p>\nXRP Price Is Driven By Speculation<\/h2>\n