Saylor Said Lending Your bitcoins for Yield From A Bank is Risk-Free I disagree \ stacker news ~conspiracy

I agree with Saylor on a lot of things but I think he is wrong on this. I listened to the recent interview he did with Saifedean

I enjoyed the first segments but my diagreement came when he starts talking about lending your #bitcoin for more yield is risk free. As a student of the pass my alarm went off, bc he reminds me of Raoul Pal. He didn't want to let Saifedean speak to prove a point but he wanted to over satisfy his ego as he already made his mind and thinks he is right.

My question is Where is the yield coming from? Saylor said it's risk free and the banks will not be allowed to fail since the government will always be there to print more money to save them, which I would is false otherwise SVB wouldn't go burst back in 2023, and even if he was right the government itself is on a massive risk of failling bc of the debt problem, US is insolvent since they need to issue new debt to pay old debts(ponzy scheme) but leave that for another debate. To me it's not worth the risk of losing it all chasing an etra 2% yield, given the fact that #Bitcoin goes up 40% a year in average.

Saifedean point is that on #Bitcoin there is no lender of last resort, which means in an economy of an inelastic supply of 21Million coins, the only way to get it is to: Mine it or Earn it, and there is nothing wrong selling it to cover your cost since you can earn it back. I think that's where Saylor disagree, he never want to sell the bitcoin to cover his expenses but instead borrow against it. Which I think is completely fine if you understand the risk envolve, but don't tell people it's risk free and keep saying it's risk free only make you look like a vilain.

109 sats \ 1 reply \ @DrStacker 17 Sep

The core of the issue you're pointing out, and I think you're right to be cautious here, revolves around where the yield comes from. There's a famous saying that applies: "There is no such thing as a free lunch." Yield is never truly risk-free.

It is a moral hazard to believe that governments will bail out banks, and therefore it’s "risk-free." However, 2008 and events like the collapse of SVB in 2023 clearly show that even though many big banks were bailed out by government intervention, not all institutions survive.

Saifedean’s argument is consistent with Austrian Economics principles that highlight the importance of sound money and minimizing leverage in an environment with inelastic money supply.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @piecover OP 17 Sep

You're 100% correct on that too

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @piecover OP 17 Sep

Full interview: https://youtu.be/k7XhzXMSAPo?si=jbLbJBY2-2qlFE8-