Financial nihilism ... describes the sense that the economic system no longer rewards prudence or long-term planningFinancial nihilism ... describes the sense that the economic system no longer rewards prudence or long-term planning
It might seem reckless for Gen Z to gamble money on meme coins and sports, but many of us have lost confidence in the traditional ladder of success. It’s known as financial nihilism, a term coined by podcaster Demetri Kofinas several years ago, and it describes the sense that the economic system no longer rewards prudence or long-term planning.
When every conventional path narrows, people start to look for alternatives.When every conventional path narrows, people start to look for alternatives.
When every conventional path narrows, people start to look for alternatives. And in practice, that has meant turning toward the few places where a real upside still appears possible, even if the risks are high. In this environment, prediction markets, sports betting and cryptocurrency start to look like some of the only levers they have left. Nearly two-thirds of Gen Z and Millennials think that the only way to build wealth today is through alternative methods like gambling and crypto, according to the Harris Poll.
A small chance at a large return beats a near-certainty of a slow declineA small chance at a large return beats a near-certainty of a slow decline
Faced with that reality, taking a gamble on Fartcoin or betting how many times Elon Musk tweets in a week can feel strangely rational. A small chance at a large return beats a near-certainty of a slow decline. Even a stock market with an almost 20% gain over the course of 2025 can’t compete psychologically with the promise of a 1,000% gain in one day. The logic is closer to game theory than pure irrationality.
Taking a page out of Den's playbook and highlighting some key quotes in header font.
Also, I did a CTRL+F for Bitcoin with zero hits. Boooooo! Lots of mention of "crypto" but no mention of Bitcoin, no mention of Cantillon, no mention even of the word fiat. Disappointing!
That sucks. Too bad they don't see the potential of hodling.
edit: btw, @sox quote reply wasn't working for me. Maybe that's related to the new editor.
It seems like I can't reproduce it, even though I'm not really sure about my recent fix on quote reply. I'll take a look now, thank you!
Did you try highlighting text from the original post and selecting quote reply from the drop down?
Started working on this the moment I got your live comment. I didn't thought of that button at all!!
The problem was that the editor didn't support quote selection updates if already open. Pushed, thanks again!
Of course
wait *didn’t think
I think what they might be missing too is how quickly things can change.
If a major real estate or stock market crash hits, those who have been patiently saving up cash could have a great opportunity to buy into assets at a cheap price so they can build wealth.
To be fair, if I were a young person struggling to make ends meet, I don't know if I'd be able to think that way. Especially when history teaches us that the current regime is willing to monetize every crisis.
The market can stay irrational longer than they can stay in cash.
It's also not usually obvious when something's a bargain. If it were, someone else probably would have bought it already.
Imagine all the advice they're getting about how dumb they are for not being in the market, too. Letting their cash melt away. And those critics are right, too, except when they're not right.
I don't envy 'em, I'll tell you that. There's a path forward, and great opportunities, but I don't know that I would have been able to seize them at that age.
I have a friend attending a school known for finance, and they are actively pushing students to start investing now (at 18, 19) because, if they only save in cash, they won't keep up with inflation.
I'm pretty confident I wouldn't have seized them because I didn't when I had the chance to.
Yes, but they are not saving cash because "Cash is trash." They're saving in those exact markets that can rugpull them.
You hit the nail on the head… does the article mean ‘crypto’ or does it mean… bitcoin? Crypto could mean some little known memecoin that pumps… or it could mean multi-decade Bitcoin savings.
Which one? who knows. so many of these finance ‘articles’ put a big orange B on the front cover illustration but they don’t actually clarify what the ‘crypto’ is that they’re referring to.
‘Crypto‘ to financial publications also refers to ‘stablecoins’ which they mention constantly… but what does that have to do with ‘risky bets’ if it’s so risky why is the US embracing stablecoins???
I suspect it's not about bitcoin if they're also seeing gambling as a reasonable income strategy.
My 20-something daughters think it's already impossible for them to own a home. I remember thinking the same thing in my 20s, but it turned out doable in my 30s. That said, today's cost would have put me out of reach as well.
They are basically right in today's economy unless—and this is the point of the article—they land an exceptionally high income or get lucky on a successful speculation.
And just like how "it got worse" from the time you were in your 20s until now, it'll also get even worse again because the currency won't stop devaluing.
In 1971 the even vague premise of money being backed by gold was cancelled. I remember as a kid (in the 1960s - before 1971) we were encouraged to save in a bank account and back then the interest rate and low inflation made it make sense. But since 1971 fiat has been in full debasement mode and saving money does not make sense. So people were forced to take risks with their savings to have a chance of growing a nest egg and future security- stocks, bonds and real estate were the options offered by the bankers and government or you could invest in a business or education. Nearly all these options (except stocks and bonds) are leveraged by debt- fiat debt- and so the notion of using fiat debt to leverage investment returns became normalised. Today we are still in full fiat but Bitcoin does provide a new alternative and so far it has outperformed any of the fiat debt based offerings- I believe because enough people can see the fiat debt based system for what it is- a regime of slavery to the banks and governments. Crypto muddies the water with its DINO shitcoin offerings but as long as Bitcoin remains an option- it is an option and one that has proven its integrity. Most people do not have the time or inclination to question the status quo but as the status quo continues to decline into ever more crony capitalist bullshit and lies some are opening their eyes and taking the option of Bitcoin- to build an alternative monetary system free and independent of the fiat debt slavery bankers cartel that owns your government and seeks to enslave humanity. I rejoice we have this option and that it has already freed millions of us from fiat debt slavery- at least partially. Think of how many projects have been enabled and new innovations build upon the base of Bitcoin. As long as that building continues there is hope. If you are happy to be a slave to fiat debt slavery ok- good luck with that- but if you want a better option- one that treats all participants equally without fear or favour- we have Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a peaceful constructive protest, and alternative monetary system that anyone can be part of but nobody is forced to use. Perhaps most people are so conditioned to be slaves to the fiat debt system they cannot yet see the monetary freedom and integrity Bitcoin represents...
Because mentioning Bitcoin is a no go for them—the media doesn't want to amplify it. Even when they have to write about it, they rather refer to it ambiguously as "Crypto" and mix the concept with all the meme coins.
And yes, this is absolutely part of the bullshit. The financial nihilism benefits many people.
You've reminded me of a game I used to play while travelling, when I'd have time to visit bookstores of an airport or train station; I'd find the most specific shelf of English-language non-fiction, and search the indices of the books for mention of Bitcoin (and related terms). One notable offender was a book that I did end up buying, named Signals[1], which to my mind was screaming "buy Bitcoin!" cover-to-cover, except had zero mentions of Bitcoin nor any other cryptocurrency in the entire text. I'm guessing the author of that one (a conventional economist) had probably been working on her book for several years and although she might have encountered Bitcoin in its early years, probably considered it something too new for inclusion in her attempt to build a reputation as an author of general economic advice.
horribly general name, and I'm currently failing to narrow down the noise to an ISBN or author name... stay tuned ↩
It's almost as if the writer is a financial nihilist herself.
It's almost as if she doesn't want others knowing that there is a escape hatch because her fiat lifestyle, her future pension, her real estate, her stock portfolio, all depend on people not finding out the truth.
how do we fix this?
there are multiple levels to the problem; it doesn't matter if you try pushing new financial products on a population who psychologically aren't interested in the sort of bargain you're offering.
deleted by author