Michael Saylor On Bitcoin Yield
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Check out my paid material here:
www.bitcoinuni...
In this video, I discuss the ongoing debate over whether it's a good idea to attempt to earn yield on your Bitcoin, by analyzing points made by Michael Saylor and Saifedean Ammous in a recent, heated argument on Saif's podcast.
On a Bitcoin standard, I would expect people to both borrow and lend BTC, in addition to earning and spending it.
Unlike fiat, Bitcoin is not a melting ice-cube and will already keep up with inflation, so that can lessen the pressure on people to attempt to earn yield on their BTC.
Not investment advice! Consult a financial advisor.
Watch the whole debate between Saylor and Ammous:
• 239. Michael Saylor's ...
"I no longer trust Saylor":
x.com/AdamSime...
Watch the USD purchasing power decline:
www.visualcapi...
I am not being paid or otherwise compensated by any company or cryptocurrency project that I mention in my videos. My opinion is not for sale. Please do not contact me with any affiliate or advertising deals.
#Bitcoin
#Saylor
#Ammous
Disclaimer
Neither Matthew Kratter's Bitcoin University, nor any of its directors, officers, shareholders, personnel, representatives, agents, or independent contractors (collectively, the “Operator Parties”) are licensed financial advisors, registered investment advisors, or registered broker-dealers. None of the Operator Parties are providing investment, financial, legal, or tax advice, and nothing in this video, on this RUclips channel, or at www.Trader.University or www.BitcoinUniversity.com (henceforth, “the Sites”) should be construed as such by you. This video, channel, and the Sites should be used as educational tools only and are not replacements for professional investment advice. Trading or investing in new and volatile assets like Bitcoin can be risky.
Check out my paid material here:
www.bitcoinuniversity.com/join
With respect you are way off pace. What Saylor is talking about is, your BTC never leaves your wallet.
Have a closer look at who he has been rubbing shoulders with recently.
Then look into something called BeL2 - then look into the people/project behind that.
@@bingowings65 No, BeL2 is just a stupid shitcoin token, like so many other Layer 2 scammy projects
Matt, I am a big fan! I really appreciate that you don't sell out. Thank you for your content
Thanks for your support
The problem is people really don't understand Saylor, or the meta game he's playing. He basically never says the quiet part out loud. He is 100% dedicated to driving adoption, specifically among of the movers and the shakers of the world. He sees himself as uniquely positioned to reach that target audience, and so he is super careful not to say anything incendiary to that group. He's tried to make that clear on so many occasions its not even funny. But here he is, in a conversation with Saifedean Ammous, and Saif is railing on about how hyberbicoinization will end interest rates. Saylor knows that is not what his target audience wants to hear, and that's why Saylor was getting visibly putout with Saif, and why he called Saif an ideologue (because he's so hyper focused on his ideology he's missing the practical matter of how to accomplish it, it was a warning shot telling him to back off, which Saif didn't catch). At the end Saif was trying to smooth the waters, and invited Saylor back on the show later, and Saylor was clearly non-committal about it (which is VERY unusual for Saylor), and the reason is, because Saylor doesn't want to be associated with those kind of ideas, and he doesn't want to appear to promote them.
Saylor really thinks people like Saif are completely missing the plot. There will be no hyberbicoinization unless you carve a channel to the ocean of capital in the world, and you coax it onto the Bitcoin Cruise Ship. Regardless of your thoughts of what happens after that, you first have to achieve it. Saylor is doing his best to make it happen, as quickly, and as orderly, as possible. He doesn't want to be in open conflict with the powers that be. He wants a peaceful changing of the guard, not a discordant revolution. Saylor is simply operating at a very high, pragmatic, level. But if you listen to all of his talks, and you're quick on your feet, it's pretty obvious he's not laying down his full thoughts, and what you're hearing is very curated for "public" consumption. I think Saylor really truly is a maxi, but he's a general and not a private, and he knows it.
Absolutely excellent analysis and the opinon we formed of Saylor's approach from the start.
hm you are assuming a lot here but it could make sense! saifedean just says what he thinks not thinking of the implications. which is perfectly fine of course but not always helpful. i hope you are right with your theory and sailor is not just rude, interrupting and strawmaning for no reason.
thank you for sharing your thoughts!
@@essassasassaass I'm not really assuming anything. I've watched every video Saylor has done, many more than once. It's pretty clear what Saylor's deal is.
I think you are largely correct in your assessment of the conversation and of the two personalities involved. I don't think that the storage fees for bitcoin will eventually become so high that the average person would rather take on the risk of lending it out without charging interest just to avoid the storage fees. Even if storage fees get high, you can still charge a fair interest rate if you loan out your BTC. Charging a fair interest rate and using an intermediary such as a trusted bank to handle the loan, is generally going to be much better and more attractive to people who have BTC to lend and allows BTC loans to happen at scale.
And/or Saylor is making a Faustian Bargain ... 😈
Finally, a sane, thought out reaction from someone with a sizeable voice in Bitcoin. Everyone else overreacted and applied a straw man to either side.
I agree with you 100%.
Completely overblown catfight over credit facilitation...
I agree about 92%
Saylor has a more realistic view of the future than Saifedean.
In this case, I agree
100% agree. Saif is an idealist. Saylor is a businessman and pragmatist.
Yep that was my takeaway too. Make no mistake: the US gov, Fed, 'too big to fail' US banks and the actual US dollar itself are not going away during our lifetime.
If 'Bitcoin is for everyone' then it's inevitable TradFi were going to 'dip their beak' and create such products.
It will work until it doesn't.
Might take 100 years, but if history teaches anything, it's that nothing is too big to fail.
@@beerkegaard Saylor is more Wall Street
a steel man of both sides.
i listened to their whole conversation the other day. they were kind of talking past each other over one idea.
change in time preference effects rate of interest.
lower time preference reduces cost of borrowing. both agreed
saifadean takes that to the nth and says eventually it will cross over and cost u money to lend, a negative interest rate. he explicitly says he not telling people they shouldn’t, but rather that they won’t cause they will lose money
saylor said he “doesn’t believe that thesis” and thinks there is some limit to its range caused by the asymmetry between the old people who have capital and the young people that don’t, will always keep a positive yield for lending.
no one was really schooling anyone. they both just showed the limit of the depths of their intellect, ability to process what the other was actually saying.
as are people making a fuss of this.
both had valid arguments for their position.
both very intelligent men, not mitwits, but they kept strawmanning each other on this issue
Saylor call him a communist 🤔
@@geoms6263 what does that have to do with the issue of the effect of time preference on interest?
they were talking past each other.
meaning they weren’t speaking to what the other was actually saying.
if u want to get worked up about nothing, you’re just demonstrating objectively how there isn’t much horsepower in your mind.
Can't believe I'm saying this because I really love Saylor, but he was a complete knob head the other day on Saifs podcast!! He came on the show with a premeditated plan to argue with Saif on nearly everything Saif said!! It was bullshit really!! Just my opinion.
@@waynerichardson1051 hard to argue with what someone is saying when ur not addressing what they said.
think of it more of two people giving monologues, who just so happen to be split screen
Sailor is biased, he accumulated his wealth using usury, he will not accept any arguments against. no one can convince him the tool that he used to become rich is evil.
There's a big difference between advocating for something and simply observing its existence. This seems to trip a lot of people up.
here is something not discussed: under a BTC standard might be harder to take out a loan given that asset tend to depreciate in BTC prices.
If you need to borrow btc to buy a house in btc it might be harder and harder to pay back the monthly fee.
If you borrow to start a business, then your business need to outperform btc, which is difficult especially for new and small businesses.
Of course there will be a hybrid, but is interesting to see how the fiscal policies will evolve.
You make an important point here I think. If I borrow for a business and earn five million sats a month, and then the value of bitcoin goes up by 30% in a year I have to lower my prices and maybe only earn four million sats a month. At that point the interest plus principal loan payment is a larger proportion of my income. It will certainly feel weird for those of us who have been on the fiat standard for several decades to get caught in the sliding scale of deflationary economic forces. The measure of fairness in the economy as a whole in the Bitcoin Standard will be whether my purchasing power remains constant throughout as it reflects the value of my time and energy.
BTC will be tier 1 backing an unfixed token. It’s the way it has to be for economic expansion.
All future think. Will need a much bigger adoption rate that stabilizes before BTC starts looking for something to appreciate faster than itself.
@@Monchkrit : Another thing to think about. As deflationary money takes hold, governments will have to lower their tax demands in sats as bitcoin's purchasing power grows, because no one will be willing to hand over ever more purchasing power under the ruse that it's the same number of sats this year as last and next year as this. It gets mind boggling to think about all of the inversions to come as "all prices trend toward zero" (per Jeff Booth).
Btc 100% annual appreciation is its income.
Why hand an asset that has 100% roi to someone for 5%!... madness!
It's been more like 50% ARR over the past few years, so 5% kicker is significant. Different people will make different choices here
Bingo!
A return isn’t a return until you realize it. By lending it, you get the 5% AND the 100%
Maybe because you need the money and don't want to sell your bitcoin. Just a thought.
@Bitcoin_University Thanks for your risk & sacrifice to get the word out. Your a friend of liberty in world full of thieves.
Borrowing or lending a deflationary currency/asset makes no sense to me. Im trying to think it through with simple math. I lend 10 BTC for 10 years with a house worth 10 BTC as collateral. Five years later, the loan balance is 5 BTC but the house is only worth 2 BTC. Is there a market for borrowing and lending gold. I am not seeing how this can work with a fast appreciating asset unless you are renting your BTC to degenerate traders. I have often thought about this subject. Please enlighten me.
It might trigger margin call and thus liquidated if the collateral value is too low
@@danendra_l Right. But since it's a a margin calll in BTC not dollars, you just dont get your BTC back.
Lending bitcoin right now… may be a little weird because the asset is too small, too new, to have appreciated to its full potential.
Bitcoin is 1/10th the market cap of gold… and many times smaller than real estate, stocks, bonds etc… when it is 1/10th the size of real estate or bonds maybe then maybe it will be more fully fleshed out… but most people still don’t know anything about bitcoin yet.
You say "Borrowing or lending a deflationary currency/asset makes no sense to me." but you are missing that people have long been borrowing and lending delfationary assets like stocks and lands. They do it because they have different perspective, strategy, and timeframe for investment. For example, they borrow stock to short it. So, it is very natural to lend and borrow bitcoin even if it is a deflationary asset.
@@user-iz5yt2bt3h Lending an asset so a degen can trade with it might be one case. But what about productive lending like for house or a business or an education?
Saylor has no concerns of custodial risk. I think the guy is a bad actor for the community.
Great sane evaluation of Saylor’s on Saif’s podcast.
Been waiting for this one!
Matt you have the best BTC channel on RUclips
facts
FIRST COMMENT!!
Excellent, balanced and insightful. Thank you Matthew.
Thanks Mat!!!
Day 98 of telling Matthew his uploads are appreciated!
Bitcoin Maxidom can be a continuum.
Ammous is an Bitcoin anarcho capitalist (also Max Keiser). These types are uncompromising and clear in their vision of a future ideal where the existing financial order and institutions of credit are dismantled and replaced with Bitcoin. Any effort (by Ammous or Keiser) to promote a future alternative where banking, credit, and bitcoin coexist; or anything short of Bitcoin absolutism is a waste of time in their view.
Ammous is also a supporter of Islamic finance which does not permit lending and credit - it only allows for equity. There is a value to having people like Ammous and Keiser who are uncompromising in their world view.
Saylor is a more "moderate" Bitcoin Maxi because his world view coexists with the existing institutions, fiat currencies, and systems of credit (at least for the foreseeable future within the span our life times).
That was the disconnect that was captured on the podcast.
As we transition into hyperbitcoinization, borroring will trend towards being harder and lending will trend towards becoming more risky. This just means that the global credit markets and banks will be proportionally smaller.
We are currently nowhere near hyperbitcoinization. I need to be able to use bitcoin to buy groceries and coffee. Then we’ll be well on our way imo
Very very interesting, thank you, those were some fast 16 minutes. Note that Adam Simecka actually changed his mind the day after.
Good to know-- I hadn't seen that
AND FIRST VIEW
You’re the goat 🐐
Do you really think a society that is not able to prevent the steady decline of real wages can ever enforce to be paid in real money (bitcoin)?
I honestly don't think so.
Oh boy 👀🍿
If you borrow 1 Bitcoin to buy a house in a long term loan of 20 or 30 years, you would have to pay back 1 Bitcoin to be made whole? That sounds like a nightmare.
Wouldn't you pay it of faster as BTC appreciates in value?
Homes would get infinitely cheaper. A home shouldn’t need a loan. Everything we have should be cheaper year over year the crooked money has broken our brains.
Good point.
Believe this concept to be far in the future when Bitcoin is global and stable price/value.
Yes, it's hard to get used to the idea of being on a deflationary standard (Bitcoin) vs. our current inflationary standard (fiat). When you borrow in fiat, over time you pay back more money than the current home's value (to make up for the fact the fiat value goes down compared to the home value during the pay back period). When you borrow BTC, you'll pay back less BTC than you actually borrowed to make up for the fact that the home went down in value compared to BTC during the payback period. Weird, right? But we'll quickly get used to it 😅
comment for vis
Thank you for bringing some clarity and sense to the discussion. 👍
Thanks for the advice! Got AWS33M, feeling bullish! 🚀
Bought AWS33M after watching your video, super excited! 💰
Wow what an incredible video. Either side excluded, huge nutsack for posting.
Great summary Matthew,
the core disagreement comes down to the need to borrow capital. Saylor thinks there will always be a need, and Saif thinks bitcoin + technological innovation will lead to abundance and reduce the need for credit, thus lowering the rate.
So they’re both right (in my opinion)
There will always be credit markets, but the rate will likely decrease over time.
Appreciate the advice! Bought AWS33M at $1, holding for 10x gains. Major exchanges like Coinbase, Bybit, and Binance are set to list it soon. Your insights always lead to great investments. Excited about this opportunity, thanks for the tip! Looking forward to significant returns!
BTC standard will NOT happen as long as there is a crappy fiat around somewhere. Gresham's Law. Crappy money drives sound money into hiding.
Do you think you'll be at "Adopting Bitcoin" conference in El Salvador?
Saif and Saylor can both be right but in different timeframes. Saylor is probably right in our lifetime, but Saif could end up being right 200 years from now. We just don't know. But i think most people are missing the AI component. AI will wipe out most of the banks, financial planners, CPA's, and investment firms. Decentralized AI protocols will be able to spread 15% of your Bitcoin across thousands of investment streams in real time 24/7/365 with no or little fees. Analyze tax implications and calculate how long your money will last and make adjustments every second of every day. The next few decades will be a whirlwind.
Could you please review the video transcription where Michael Saylor says, 'Wouldn't you like JP Morgan to just pay you 5% of your Bitcoin value, risk-free?' So I think Michael Saylor did actually say that it's risk-free to lend money to JP Morgan.
If only the banking model as described at the beginning of this chat, was actually the one that banks implemented and followed. Instead one of my banks has embarked on a path of political advocacy and wokeness. I'm moving to close accounts there.
Matt, I listened to the whole interview and, yet again, was impressed with Saylor's continued prescient thinking. Thank you for recapping it.
I think Michael Saylor nailed it. Why is earning a 5% yield a bad idea? Saif wasn’t making sense. He tried to describe this economic utopia that will never occur! Michael Saylor is still the undefeated, undisputed Bitcoin Heavyweight Champion of the World!!
I don't trust banks.
But maybe Saylor figures he's already running at risk due to his BTC being custodied by Coinbase, so might as well earn a yield on his BTC. If the gov't is going to confiscate BTC, they would confiscate from both Coinbase and banks. He could use the yield to pay Microstrategy's debt.
Do you think in the future MSTR will issue a dividend? If the banks offer a yield, won't that be a lure away from MSTR?
Swapping one currency for another except Saylor will be in charge 😂
Great idea….NOT!
The rich lend out equities or borrow against equities. Why shouldn't we have this opportunity for Bitcoin?
Here are my concerns about banks being allowed to custody Bitcoin. We all know currently if you deposit any amount to the bank. Bank can lend up 10x more money than there was deposited. And we all know that if all depositors will come to get their money any bank won't be able to pay it back. So, what may happen when bitcoin is in banks custody, banks might be allowed to have the same 10% of Bitcoin in reserves. Like they do with cache nowadays. So, when some retail investor comes to the bank and buys bitcoin with a 1000$, the bank may show 1.5M sat in his account. But in reality, there will be only 150K sat on the bank's balance shit to cover that account. So, that's how the actual price of btc could be suppressed in the future. As the gold suffers paper gold price manipulations. If you say nobody will custody with the banks if they allowed not fully backed bitcoin. Then why people are ok to do the same with fiat currencies all over the world? Obviously, they were tricked into that. And they might be tricked the same way again. Any thoughts on that?
Yes Matthew!! This was probably the most interesting podcast in months. Thanks for commenting on it.
Saylor seems to put out a new 2 hour interview on a daily basis. I'm just not that dedicated a fan. But more power to him. The thing about stacking half a BTC or half a million BTC, it's yours and you can do whatever you damn well want with it, even lend it out. The biggest threat I see on my BTC radar screen is the collusion b/t Wall Street, the US Treasury, and Tether where the threesome somehow gang up on BTC. Otherwise I'm glad I have BTCU to summarize the Saylor interviews when something interesting pops up.
Complicated things are broken down on this site like a nuclear physicist breaks down a problem, even checking obvious math in the process. That's proof
Anyone who didn't see bitcoin being financialized doesn't understand economics... if it wasn't bitcoin it would have been something else... as ot gets bigger and more popular wallstreet will financialize it. This goes for everything.
Exactly, great explanation! Thank you, Matt!
Matheeeeeew KRAtter's Bitcoin University
Appreciate the clarity! I always cross check my own thoughts with your videos for new ideas in Bitcoin, thanks for this video Matthew!
Hyperbitcoinization has a major flaw in that people's nominal salaries need to decrease every year. Human psychology just can't handle that - only like 20% of the population can abstract well enough to understand it's not a bad thing. The normie currency has to be inflationary, so that nominal salaries can at least stay the same (or slowly rise).
Thank you Matthew for your calm, rational step by step simplification after seeing 2 big minds in Bitcoin get fired up and disagree. Your content is always outstanding. I so appreciate your channel.
Where you headed...El Salvador, Singapore, Costa Rica, Uruguay?
I'm staying in the US for now-- we still have the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments, which don't seem to be available anywhere else in the world
Saif is viewing things from a theoretical perspective with Bitcoin as a true replacement for fiat. Saylor is viewing things pragmatically considering how the existing system may adopt Bitcoin within the existing economic framework. They both understand Bitcoin, they just differ in terms of how they think things will play out.
I'll just continue to run my node and use Bitcoin to save my wealth and purchase goods and services.
What do you think about the problems in relation to deflationary money theory? -> deflationary spiral, people spending too less and safing too much resulting in a death spiral for businesses and the economy? Im a btc maxie myself (btc as store of value) but i couldnt figure out if the problem i stated can be resolved.
I really appreciate your objective and informative videos! Thanks
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless" -Thomas Jefferson
This video triggered an interesting conundrum in my mind:
Let’s say you earn in bitcoin, and want to take a loan in bitcoin to purchase a property.
If the purchasing power of bitcoin is always increasing, your salary and value of the property would always be decreasing in bitcoin terms. Imagine a 30 year mortgage, this means you would eventually default on the loan as your salary in bitcoin terms would continually reduce failing to keep up with the minimum repayments. After the bank inevitably liquidates the property, there is still a significant outstanding balance on the mortgage in bitcoin terms. Which I suppose banks would be less likely to issue large loans? Maybe lending is just too risky in a depreciating currency?
The problem with Saylor's argument is that if the fiat system stays in place, why would anyone choose to borrow in Bitcoin when they can borrow in USD (where they can pay it back with a deflated currency). Given that both option exist and Bitcoin is appreciating in value, there will be no demand for Bitcoin based loans - who would choose these? I can see the demand to lend at 5% with JP Morgan, but where is the demand to borrow. In your example in the video, you added the constraint that the car loan "required Bitcoin to purchase the car". In practice, this would never happen as the buyer would borrow dollars and convert it directly into Bitcoin at point of sale. As long as fiat remains in existence and is created into existence via debt instruments, the demand to borrow Bitcoin will approach 0. Is there a flaw here?
I distrust Saylor not because of his economic views but because of his technological/sociological views of the network. He takes a "postmodernist" stance that Bitcoin is whatever people want it to be, when it is clearly money. It was designed that way and works best that way. He's also a blockchain spammer with his stupid identity token thing. Any use of the network outside of money makes the system a worse money.
BTC is the new Real Estate with less risk. Deriving yield by borrowing against cash flowing real estate has created more wealth in the US than anything in history. Those who don't understand this, are Idiots. BTC is the NEW asset to use in this manner. Less risk and expense to hold and greater yield.
You are a fool if you ever lend out your Bitcoin to a bank or centralized 3rd party. It will be taken, lost, or confiscated by the government.
I’d rather spend it or lend using decentralized protocols like thorchain.
Lending anything is perfectly fine if done voluntarily. Figure out the risk and price it in. If you don't want to lend, you shouldn't have to and then you benefit from a different set of risks (in some ways safer). It's pretty simple. This is a principle that bitcoin does not change. It simply fits within it in a very customizable way. It is very easy to lend and very easy to not allow lending, depending on the owner's choice.
Great, great video. Saylor clearly isn’t an idiot. I wouldn’t want to own mstr, because I want to hold my own btc. If I want to borrow against it, it would be in a smart contract, with paying yield on the loan. And I will keep the first claim on that btc as long as I pay that yield. And after paying back the principal, I would ALWAYS get back my btc. I would then use that fiat to invest. The fiat will diminish in value against my investment.
I honestly can't see people actually earning salaries in BTC...that's always gonna be the realm of regional currencies. The rest of that list is plausible though.
We can see what would happen with a bitcoin standard and lending it if we look what happened on the gold standard in Middle Ages throughout the old world. Gold was used as the international medium of exchange. On a sound money standard prices don’t usually go up.For example the price for a one gallon of milk remained the same in the US for 100 years when the US was on the gold standard.
The key thing will be how to do trade with other countries which are using bitcoin and have different banking standards and beliefs ( in a lot of Islamic countries interest is forbidden)
This was the first time I've seen Saylor a little out of control. It was just annoying how he kept repeating that Saif doesn't "want" credit to be allowed. Saif had said about 5 times is not the case. He's just saying with a long enough time preference interest rates will trend down. So that was weird, like he was just trolling Saif. I have a feeling Saylor got sensitive about it because he was able to borrow money to buy bitcoin in a way that may not have been possible if not for fiat currency. And he might have felt like Saif was alluding to that.
Off topic but do you think there will be a point where BTC has received enough adoption that it would make sense to buy stocks instead of more BTC?
Just another rich man’s toy in a rich man’s world. Viva Marx!
Bitcoin is good, you can just hold it and not chase yield to be completely ok, and not worry about US government making or not making JPMorgan whole in one case or another.
Another great video. I look forward to your new content and always appreciate how you present your arguments.
So how Bitcoin would be different that fiat money if you have to give back more than you borrow and as we might eventually going to a deflation system where you'll own nothing make me wonder if Bitcoin decentralization is just another new elite system (Bitcoin owner) vs others ( slaves ) I have difficulty to understand where we are heading
Hi Matthew, can you talk about what are the potential implication now that IBIT option trading are approved?
Guy hating on Saylor is an idealist. You are right, credit and debt are not going away any time soon, and really we shouldn’t want them to. Just make sure you are on the right boat I guess 🤷🏼♂️
This is gold (or should i say Bitcoin), the amount lf information is unprecedented, if i go out of focus even for a couple of seconds, i need to rewind. Thank you for this valuble information.
While nothing is as safe as cold-storage, for ordinary people who have saved up BTC, it may make sense to get a return on it in retirement to avoid just spending it away for maintenance income. It is one option. So a good video would be an evaluation template for picking the right partner, how to weigh risks vs returns of different offers and offerers, looking to borrow your capital in exchange for a bit of interest cash flow.
Interesting take on Michael Saylor and Bitcoin yield! It’s hard to tell if there’s more to the story than meets the eye. Could there really be something being kept from the public?
Saylor has found the infinite money glitch….borrow melting fiat, at low interest, and buy bitcoin with it.
Thanks Matt 🇮🇪
Or maybe your income isn't enough to live off, it gets continually degraded relative to asset prices, and you have no savings to speak of, in which case old guys debating on what's the best way to store their wealth so that it grows by itself is completely irrelevant.
Please comment on the Christine Lagarde interview with Jon Stewart.
Wouldn’t there be a high status company that would do this and make it less risk?
Fantastic analysis that saved a lazy guy like me more than 2 hours of listening to the debate. You are a skilled reviewer and analyst and I appreciate your work.
im hoping saylor inspires the next gen finance bro. i personally like saylor and i think the world would be better off with more people like him, and less like the jamie dimons of the world. im good with saylors future as i think its more realistic than the economic doomers that think the USD is just going to go up in a puff of smoke. not only do i not find that to be unrealistic, i find it to be quite scary. i mean honestly, think how bad tomorrow would be if the dollar failed. no one is prepared enough for that, no one.
Hi, thanks for the video. There is one piece missing from this, what if we want to borrow against our btc, in the same way the rich borrow against their wealth for tax reasons? Will this be possible and what will it look like?
Great video! I’ve been pondering this since the podcast came out.
Great video! I’ve been pondering this since the podcast came out.
Like and comment
As long as fiat remains in existence and is created into existence via debt instruments, the demand to borrow Bitcoin will approach 0. Is there a flaw here?
Saylor as usual is the adult in the room! Great analysis Matthew. Thanks yet again.
If a house was valued against btc it would cause massive inflation, but its against u.s. $ 's which btc hedges the dollar against the loss of value.
My understanding is that your savings in a bank allows them to loan many multiples of that amount. Is that not true?
What happened to “not your keys not your coins?” 👀
5.5 years compounded actually.
In modern Banking, a Bank with good ratings, no longer want or need our saving accounts…
Do you have a recommendation on what the best cold storage device is?
"People projecting their own uses for Bitcoin onto other people" 💯
At this point, I think it's too risky to loan my BTC for a yield. If I got my interest in BTC instead of fiat, then it may be worth it. But we are far away from that point.