All of your criticisms are in the subjunctive mood: repeating merely that FIAT backing "will be," present in ample degree, despite the fact that, at present, this is simply not the case. The assumption or assertion that this state of affairs is a guarantee is controverted by the U.S.'s own hesitation and concern related to the very premise of the Libra project:



https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/25/tech/facebook-libra-hearings/index.html



and



https://thehill.com/policy/finance/450074-house-panel-to-hold-hearing-on-facebook-cryptocurrency-project



Considering that fact, it is fair for the author to make comparisons to MMFs; however, the scale of Libra, in terms of FIAT-backed buy-ins, presumes that the individual institutions within the "Libra Group" can match the full weight of the capital being invested by individual users or institutions (to start and barring further support from centralized banks across the globe). There is also the issue, which, again, was raised (albeit in an understandably cursory fashion) in the article, of obtaining and retaining the support of centralized banking institutions, whether state-based or private, a prospect which has, again, yet to manifest.



I think the premature promises made in the "White Pages" for Libra are what are at issue: even if they can deliver on the projected stability and scalability of the project, there is no such thing as financial security in perpetuity, especially for a private, international tech firm that has yet to dive headlong into international financial markets as a currency-producer, let alone navigate the complexities of international financial regulations.



The "buy and burn" strategy, as you put it, presupposes that a sudden financial downturn will not occur at some point in the future, no matter how distant and how localized, even to the handful of centralized banks that are making the initial capital investments. If just one of these institutions were to fail to be able to match their FIAT backing, there is the potential for a cascade effect, resulting in the additional demand for liquidation to feasibly be distributed among the remaining institutions within the group.



Again, however, this is all speculation at this point, as the state-based, "Federal" banks of the world (considering Facebook, with its 2.6+ billion users is an international organization that will have to conform to the institutional practices of any nation-state that would endorse and back the liquidity of its "product") have yet to support it in confidence. Libra is an interesting idea, but with an impending House Committee Meeting, it's apparent that many world governments are reticent, to put it lightly, to grant an endorsement of this pioneering system of crypto-currency reinvention.



Long story short, I think your statement that many of this article's assertions are erroneous might be a matter of wishful thinking, and the author has in fact provided factual, concrete evidence as to the *current* state of the project, not what it merely *hopes* to be.