← Coin Stories with Natalie Brunell
Coin Stories with Natalie Brunell
Joe Carlasare: The 'Silent Depression' and Growing Wealth Gap, Bitcoin, Stablecoins & Dollar Dominance
00:54:16
In this episode with Commercial Litigator Joe Carlasare, we discuss: Why there are two economic realities at the same time in America Wealth gap widening and the strain on young people Trump's Executive Order on Crypto and SBR Stablecoins and demand...
Loading summary
Transcript199 lines
- [00:02]
A
And in the K shaped economy. Right. You're going to have people that are doing fantastic, that feel like there's sky's the limit when it comes to asset prices, when it comes to growth. Then you talk to regular people.
- [00:10]
B
Yeah.
- [00:10]
A
Who are struggling with the basement and really just getting run over by the high costs of everything.
- [00:17]
B
Hey everyone, welcome back to the show. Joining me this week is Joe Carlisari. He is a commercial litigator in the bitcoin space. A very popular bitcoin voice on Twitter, sometimes very contrarian. And he brought, he came packing charts. So I think we're going to talk about some of this. Joe, how's it going?
- [00:34]
A
It's going great. Thanks Natalie for having me on. I am excited because you're in Chicago.
- [00:38]
B
Right.
- [00:38]
A
This is actually, I think the, the first live podcast I've ever done.
- [00:42]
B
Really?
- [00:42]
A
It's really cool. Yeah, I've done a ton of podcasts obviously, but it's cool to be live.
- [00:46]
B
I'm so excited to be doing more in person. It's just a totally different dynamic and it's great to meet all these amazing people in person. So let's get right into it. First of all, let's just zoom out. Give me your macro outlook. We just had a Fed meeting. You were very complimentary of Fed Powell. So I want to dig into that. But just macro outlook.
- [01:03]
A
Yeah, I mean, to be honest, it's like par for the course. I mean, I think you, the biggest discussion that we have to talk about is what's going to happen on the fiscal side. And like what I'm laser focused on is not really as much the Fed, because I think in a lot of ways, and we talk about this a lot. I know Sam's talked about the fiscal dominance issue and all that. I'm really focused on issuance because Scott Besant coming in, the new Treasury Secretary, he has to decide are, are we going to follow the path of Yellen where we continually rely on front end issuance, you know, short term bills and to the detriment of longer term issuance, which that's going to be the most interesting discussion. So it's like the administration is at the front of my mind, the Fed, you know, I mean, the Fed has pretty much told you where they're at. They think that they're on their long run glide path towards 2%, perhaps taking longer than they think it's going to get to. But you know, really, I think we've seen the data. The data shows that the fiscal deficits which are running, you Know, depending on how you measure it, 6 to 7% of debt, GDP deficit, GDP, that is the predominant force in the marketplace that is affecting all the asset classes. So, you know, my macro outlook is that the economy among certain cohorts which make up the majority of the demand continues to remain robust. But as we'll get into some of the charts, like the weakness is all under the surface. It's under young people. I mean, I've got some great graphs we can go through that are fascinating about like credit card debt stress and where that is concentrated, really that, you know, 20, 30 something cohort that's really struggling. So like you have this K shaped economy and in a K shaped economy, right. You're going to have people that are doing fantastic, that feel like there's sky's the limit when it comes to asset prices, when it comes to growth. Some of my clients, like, they, they're so bullish on the economy. Then you talk to regular people who are struggling with the basement and really just getting run over by the high costs of everything.
- [02:45]
B
Right. Well, so how do we close that gap? How do we mean really?
- [02:50]
A
I mean, to me that's the thing. I mean if you, if we'll talk about doge. But I mean the idea is that if you are in a dynamic where you are subsidizing, effectively subsidizing a lot of the older cohorts that have had and people get upset and I'm not, I'm not against boomers. I have parents that are elderly and everything. But they've gone through a gen, a whole deck series of decades where they have kicked cans down the road where they have not paid into entitlement programs as much as should be paid into.
- [03:19]
C
Right.
- [03:19]
A
And then you have these massive deficits that are accruing mostly because of mandatory spending.
- [03:25]
B
Yep.
- [03:25]
A
It's not discretionary. It's not like we can just go and cut some people, I mean, the bulk of the money, Social Security, Medicare, interest on the debt, which your audience knows. But the key thing for me is like, okay, to fix that issue, to give opportunity for younger people, to give opportunity for the next generation. Something's got to give. You have to either reform those programs, which, which is not going to be good from the standpoint of the economy.
- [03:44]
C
Right.
- [03:44]
A
Because that's going to pull off that strong consumer demand demographic that is really holding up restaurants and vacations and prices, or you have to spend more, which that is also going to be problematic running in greater deficits because you have to open up more opportunities for younger people. So I don't see a way it gets much better. In fact, my base case is this continuing widening of divide, this continuing widening economic inequality. And, and you know, to me, what I always look at with Bitcoin to tie this back, I look at bitcoin as sort of an implicit understanding from the marketplace that it's not, the collapse isn't coming. I don't see the big, you know, debt bubble bursting. I think more of the same. My bet on bitcoin is that bitcoin will increasingly be status quo, that it's going to get worse. And if you want to get out of that system, if you want to get to something that's a hard asset in this dynamic with ever increasing fiscal spending, Bitcoin's the way.
- [04:36]
D
Coin Stories is brought to you by Genius Group, a bitcoin treasury company listed on NYSE American ticker GNS. Genius is on its way to hodling 1000 Bitcoin in its treasury while educating the world on a bitcoin first future. Genius is also launching the Bitcoin Academy with courses from the likes of Saifuddin Amus, author of the Bitcoin Standard. Join the launch waitlist via the QR code on the screen or the link in my show notes and receive the weekly Bitcoin treasury newsletter or plus a chance to win a Whale Pass to Bitcoin 2025 in Vegas this May. Genius Group Genius isn't measured in iq, it's measured in bitcoin.
- [05:13]
B
Yeah, it's the life raft. And it's really the most easily accessible asset because you can't just go out and necessarily buy a house, especially in this market.
- [05:21]
C
Right.
- [05:21]
B
The valuations of stocks seem really high and all of a sudden the darling child could crash. Like we saw Nvidia recently. Sure. So, so then let's at look. So let's dig into something that you've kind of touched on. And if people follow your Twitter, which I'm sure they do, they see that you, you kind of, you are, you're not as bearish as some of the analysts out there who are predicting a recession, that this is all going to crash. We're going to have a deflationary bus. They're going to have to come in with the money printer bazooka. You don't see that happening. So what do you forecast?
- [05:53]
A
We're living through a period with extreme stress, being visited upon the weakest and most vulnerable in our society. That is the reality. And the problem for that is that when you look at macroeconomic data which Influences Fed policy, which influences the, you know, Jerome Powell, when he goes out and gives his, his pressers, it's aggregate data. It's, it's like we're looking at the whole.
- [06:15]
C
Right.
- [06:15]
A
And what you don't see is you don't see the fact that last year more people died of opioid overdoses than car accidents, which is unbelievably crazy statistic if you think about how many car accidents there are nationwide. The reason I focus on that is because if you are trying to understand our economy and trying to understand the path that we're going towards, the real understanding you need to come to terms with is the societal unrest that is brewing under the surface that is propelling people to say, look, I don't care about these institutions. I don't care in many respects about the rule of law. I want a change maker like Donald Trump to go in there and shake things up and Elon Musk. And that is festering and brewing and, and we're living through that right now. Emil Kalinowski, I don't know if you've ever had him on, he talks about the silent depression that we've been in basically since the global financial crisis that you've had more and more of the halves be able to understand that the government, for a variety of structural reasons, cannot let asset prices to fall. Because if they let asset prices to fall, you get the depression right. There's a chart in here that maybe we could pull up, but you could throw this up. Number four says the history of US debt reductions and economic depressions and anytime you, you've had a debt reduction in greater than 20%, and this is in the entirety of the nation's history, we've actually tried to get control of the fiscal house and make sure it has a more balanced approach. You tend to have depressions that occur and when you have so much tax receipts that are, they require asset prices to rise, it's sort of, they're tied, right? You can't. From a public policy standpoint, they say, look, we are not prepared to have a 1920s type event. So because of that we're going to promote asset prices. Well, there's a cost, right? In economics, they say there's no free lunch. The cost to propelling asset prices higher and making rich people richer and poor people relative to the rich people much poorer is you put stress on those people. You make them force into patterns of, you know, addiction. You give them less economic opportunity. And that has such a pernicious effect on society that it ultimately results in a socio and political turmoil, which is my base case. You know, the fourth turning type stuff.
- [08:21]
C
Right.
- [08:21]
A
Like, I view that as being one where people will increasingly be stressed on a going forward basis and the big collapse that people keep predicting is not coming. I think it's actually, it's actually just an erosion of certain demographics.
- [08:33]
B
But I mean, something has to give at some point because to your point, there's such growing despair, especially at that, at that core level of the most productive elements of society, the working class, that feels so disenfranchised. And I, I don't want to do too much, you know, correlation versus causation. But I, I do believe that people are turning to things like drugs and alcohol and distraction. Distractions of any kind in general, because they're so. Yeah, because they're so frustrated and they don't know what to do. And there's this immense pressure put on them. There's immense pressure put on every single person in the household to provide in a way that did not exist several generations ago. And so, yes, populism increases and anyone that says that they're going to get, you know, blame or, or take, take from the people that are causing you harm. Yeah, those are very attractive candidates or potential public officials. Right. That's kind of what we see.
- [09:28]
C
Right.
- [09:29]
B
But also those policies never work. They end up just harming the working class.
- [09:33]
A
It's absolutely true. And you know, what I try to think back is like, okay, so now we have sort of a new administration and there's tons of hope and optimism because it's a change agent.
- [09:42]
C
Right.
- [09:42]
A
And people are desperate for something different. They, they literally say, just burn the thing down. Give me something different. I think there's a lot of that out there on both sides, by the way. It's definitely present among a lot of younger groups with the Bernie Sanders movement and all that stuff, which is still there. The thing that is fascinating to me about that is you have to pick, right. Are you going to go towards the right wing populace? You're going to go towards the left wing populace. And for me, what's interesting to me, I think, is that right now there's this sort of strange alliance that is formed between like the tech billionaires and the, the, I mean, Democrats and the liberals are calling it like the oligarchs, the tech oligarchs. And then the working class people, the, the people from Appalachia and the people from, you know, very poor areas, they, they all rally around President Trump.
- [10:29]
C
Right.
- [10:30]
A
And the inch, the, the, there's a tension there.
- [10:33]
C
Right.
- [10:33]
A
There's a tension between those who have a vested interest in keeping the status quo and those that want it blown up. And something's got to give in this administration. I'm interested to see how he deals with it. Obviously, it's something where he's got to keep that coalition together.
- [10:47]
B
Yeah.
- [10:47]
D
Let's talk a little bit about the Treasury.
- [10:49]
B
We have Scott Besant who was confirmed and he's very pro Bitcoin. But let's talk about treasury notes, bills, bonds first, because Janet Yellen essentially dropped a bomb and then left. She issued everything on the short end. Can you talk about why that's kind of a problem for the incoming treasury secretary?
- [11:08]
A
Yeah, I mean, I definitely think it's a problem mostly because he's on record criticizing Janet Yellen repeatedly over this strategy.
- [11:17]
C
Right.
- [11:17]
A
He says that this was a concerted effort to goose the markets in an election year. And for your viewers that want to understand this dynamic, people look at like the treasury market as a holistic thing. Right? Oh, it's just Treasuries, like it's just buying Bitcoin or buying Apple stock.
- [11:32]
C
Right.
- [11:32]
A
It's very different. There's actually a lot of different tenors of Treasuries. Right. There's on the run, there's off the run, and the liquidity is not in the same for all the different tenors. So when you think about treasury issuance, you have to think about not just, you know, it's a US treasury and who's going to buy it, but who's going to buy what. Because there's clearly more demand for short dated paper than long dated paper. And the basic reason for that is if you're sitting on a 10 year or 20 year that you need to put on your books and house it, right. That's going to suck up a lot of balance sheet capacity. Or when you have near cash, like, you know, cash equivalents like three month bills or one month bills, those just roll off, you get the cash back, you get the, you know, the interest rate. It's not a big deal. From a balance sheet perspective, you can market just as effectively cash, right. When you have a 10 year, it's different, very different. So it requires a lot more balance sheet capacity, requires a lot more liquidity to hold those instruments. So what Yellen did, right, is they said, okay, well I'm not going to flood the market with these longer data paper because if I do, I wonder where yields are going to go. Honestly, yields probably should have gone higher. The reason the Best evidence for this is like if you look at agency backed mortgage securities, which have the full faith and credit of the U.S. treasury, like those are several hundred basis points higher than the 10 year or the 20 year. That tells me, okay, the actual real market rate for those Treasuries should be probably north of 5%.
- [12:48]
C
Right?
- [12:48]
A
But because supply and demand, because we didn't issue that, you didn't get that supply catalyst that drove those rates up. So where we stand right now, okay, he has to decide, am I going to continue that strategy in the face of an administration who, I mean, we all know on Twitter, Donald Trump, people call him the pumper in chief, right? He wants asset prices to go up. He posted charts all the time as president of the Dow. If it meant a 10 to 20% stock market correction to bring an issuance schedule that is more in line with historical norms, would Donald Trump do that and or more, more appropriately, would Scott Besant do that? And how much can he do that before he gets a call on his phone saying what the heck are you doing? Why are markets crashing? Because I'm flooding the zone with paper. So he has to pick. It's the age old question of public policy. Am I going to be prudent or am I going to kick the can down the road? And our system is so screwed up because basically you've got 12 months as the president before you start thinking about midterms. 12 months like that. That's why the hundred days thing, if you've heard, is such a big deal because the window for really enacting change is, is like microscopic. You get such a narrow path to do anything.
- [13:56]
B
Well, he's come in there like a bull in a china shop and he's passed all these executive orders. I want to talk to you about the, the crypto one because you tweeted about it. But first, just in terms of what can be done and doge these efforts to cut government spending, you're sort of alluding to the fact that there's not much they can do. That's what I talked to Sam about about earlier as well. I mean nothing stops this train. There are so many things baked in the cake, so many entitlements. So everything's going to continue to barrel higher, right?
- [14:23]
A
Well, they can do things right. We have had bipartisan conservatives think tanks put out reforms, Right. The problem is they all come at a cost.
- [14:32]
C
Right?
- [14:33]
A
So you know, Social Security, when it's first enacted, you had relatively to the relative, the population, you had very few people drawing on consistent Benefits. They certainly didn't draw on it for decades.
- [14:42]
C
Right.
- [14:42]
A
They didn't. His life expectancy was lower.
- [14:44]
C
Right.
- [14:45]
A
So we move into a modern era, we have this vestige of an entitlement program that can't get reformed. But I just reject that sort of the comment that, well, we can't do anything. We absolutely can. Whether there's political appetite to do it is. Is the real concern. That's the issue. Like, will you, you know, means test Social Security? They talk about that all the time. Will you do that right now? I guess for political reasons, they don't want to do anything like that, which is where the money's at. That's where the real outlays are at.
- [15:10]
B
Well, if you were in charge, what would you do?
- [15:12]
A
I. I think you have to recognize that although every demographic has struggled and every demographic, you know, depending on where you fall in the socioeconomic ladder, has different challenges, I think you have to understand that countries succeed when they give opportunities to younger people.
- [15:28]
C
Okay.
- [15:29]
A
And you cannot. I mean, this goes to some of the credit card data and under the hood demographic data we see, but there's tremendous stress on younger people. And I would argue that relative to some of the older cohorts, cohorts that have really pretty good over the last 10, 20 years, you kind of have to have them give a little bit. Now, that's not popular.
- [15:49]
C
Right.
- [15:49]
A
Because everybody's like, oh, we can't raise taxes on them. You can't cut their benefits. So I paid for Social Security, I paid for Medicare. I want all these things. But who. Who can give other than those that have. I mean, it doesn't make sense to make that visited on the weakest of society. So for me, I'm all about promoting, like, younger people to have a better shot. That's one of the reasons why I like Bitcoin, because I think it's not a saturated asset class. Well, whereas many others are.
- [16:13]
D
Yeah.
- [16:13]
A
So to me, I think you got to figure out a way to rein in some of the entitlement spendings, which is not popular, but it is what it is.
- [16:20]
B
Let's talk about your personal savings chart. Where are we at with that?
- [16:23]
A
So. So that, that one is one of my favorites because I think that shows you the inflation impulse. So the biggest mistake, which will live in infamy from the Federal Reserve and is this issue where they came out from a communication standpoint and they told people that inflation was transitory.
- [16:38]
C
Okay.
- [16:39]
A
Colossal failure.
- [16:40]
C
Right.
- [16:41]
A
Because Fed, who. You know, ultimately my view of the Fed is that they're basically a communications tool and that that's their power, most powerful weapon is to talk, right. It's not actually them doing QE and knowing the Fed funds rate and these things. I think in the grand scheme of things, those are dwarfed by the actual fiscal spending that comes. But as a communications tool, they're supposed to be on the game to explain this. And what they sort of said is that post pandemic, for a variety of reasons, the lockdown which disrupted global supply chains and the trillions spent by Congress, who bears the majority of this responsibility, whether that was even warranted is a whole nother discussion. But the trillion spent on the PPP and all the stimulus checks that caused an inflationary impulse, which is what you see on that chart that shows this massive spike, right? So why is that relevant? Well, we had 40 year highs in the government version of stats for inflation, right? And you could argue that the real stats are even higher. But those 40 year highs are driven by disruptions of the supply chain and massive amounts of the fiscal spending. That's the biggest thing. And I think more people are recognizing that fact. But what they're not recognizing is the fact that on a going forward basis, we have actually seen inflation, both in the government stats and some of the private stacks decline. Now what the Fed gave the impression to people when they said inflation was transitory, that the price level jumps would go roll back down. That's the biggest issue. Okay, so like I get why people are, are pounding the table saying, see, you're a bunch of liars. You said that inflation was transitory. What they meant, when they're in their caves at the Fed, you know, research facilities, right, or they're at the, the Eccles Building, they meant to say that although the absolute price level of things, goods and services, houses, gas, it will never come back down. They're saying that rate of change that we saw, that burst, right, is a burst. And that's, you know, that goes to the first chart, if you pull that one up, that's, you know, the, the PC, the chain PC type, which is the real basis for what they look at, at the Fed for. You see it, I mean, you see it in the data, right? That personal savings rate where people were locked in their homes and you had supply chains disrupted the, that caused everything to rise. The question is, where do they go from here? And what you can see here is that you see it stickier and higher than the baseline level previously for again, structural reasons, labor market issues, but you don't see the hyperinflation 15%. I don't, I don't believe that that's coming. And I think that last chart, that 10, the savings rate that showed it, it showed that people had a burst of cash. They got, everybody had money to spend. Right. So everything went up. Rare watches, collectibles, every me meme, coin, every altcoin, everything under the sun bursted forward. But the question is, where do we go from here? And absent a ton more fiscal spending, I think you get back to this norm.
- [19:22]
B
Well, you said that there's this structural weakness, though, in the economy, especially with young people. The credit card debt is going up, all of that. So how do we, how do we avoid a recession when, I mean, don't, don't these banks have a problem with the fact that people aren't paying their auto loans or their credit card bills?
- [19:41]
A
Yeah. So look at, look at chart number eight. Okay. This is serious delinquencies. And this is true for almost. There's another one for credit cards in here. I think it's seven or eight. You can put both of these up, but they both tell the same story.
- [19:53]
C
Right?
- [19:53]
A
The, the blue line at the top for the, the viewers, it, it shows that the big spike among the delinquencies is primarily the 18 to 29 cohort. Second beneath them, the younger demographic, 30 to 39, those are the two. Whereas the 50 to 59, 40, 49, 60, they're all basically in the baseline.
- [20:12]
C
Right?
- [20:12]
A
They're all basically back going back to 2009, 2008, 2007, similar rates to defaults. So you see weaker people, weakness in that younger demographic, which obvious reasons they don't have as many assets. They, they don't have, as they don't have as much entitlement spending spent on them. So, so how does it end? To your point, the problem we have, okay, from again, aggregate economic data, is that the upper income, that top 20%, they're doing the bulk of the spending. So you can look at this and say, okay, we're not in recession. That means everything's rosy. No, it doesn't. It means real people are struggling. But for the doomers out there, which I always take issue with, you can't put up a chart of credit card delinquency skyrocketing among the demographic that has some of the weakest spending as a percentage of demand and say that that is going to somehow forecast a recession. It doesn't make sense.
- [21:04]
C
Right.
- [21:05]
A
You have to look at what is driving the main impulse, and that is the upper income individuals who have a lot of cash to spend and they want to spend it.
- [21:12]
B
Yeah, well, I can see that reflected in like airline tickets and hotel costs and all of that.
- [21:17]
A
I hear people go, just one final thing. I always hear this. Like I remember, okay, in financial crisis, I remember going to restaurants and I remember going to. And it was pretty thin. Like there weren't a lot of people. There was kind of business was slow, was difficult.
- [21:32]
C
Right.
- [21:32]
A
I don't see that at all. Now I go out and like my wife and I go to the Mexican restaurant by us. It's packed every single weekend and they jack up the prices, it seems like almost every quarter and they still have tons of traffic. Somebody's spending that money and I, to me, I think it's those older cohorts.
- [21:49]
D
This episode is brought to you by casa, the leader in Bitcoin self custody solutions. Helping people like me secure their wealth with simple passengers powerful multi key vaults. And now CASA is here to help businesses and governments do the same. Introducing CASA business, a secure, easy to use three key vault designed specifically for small businesses with team signing capabilities and a web dashboard. Regardless of the size of your business, start your Bitcoin treasury the secure way. Take control and protect your assets. Get 10% off your CASA plan at Casa IO. Natalie next up, Speed the fish. Fastest growing lightning wallet in the world and my preferred way to Send and receive SATs. You can use speed to buy bitcoin, swap with stablecoins like tether and snag gift cards to earn rewards all in seconds. Download speed via the QR code or the link in my show notes. Use code COINSTORIES10 for 5,000 free SATs. Next up, Coin Kite. The One Stop Shop for all your bitcoin self custody needs. Their flagship cold card wallet is the go to for cold storage. It's ultra secure, open source and beginner friendly. Protect your bitcoin like a pro. Visit their site and grab 5% off with promo code coinstories. And finally, are you ready to take control of your wealth, your bitcoin and your online privacy? The Bitcoin Way is here to empower you. Learn to take full self custody and eliminate all counterparty risk. Learn how to set up and run your own node and upgrade your cybersecurity and build a fortress of privacy around your online activities and your bitcoin. The Bitcoin way specializes in personalized one on one training scale. Schedule your free consultation@thebitcoinway.com Natalie all right, back to the show.
- [23:30]
B
Okay, I want to turn to the crypto executive order. First of all, I want to get your reaction because there's obviously been a lot of talk on X about how, Wait, a digital asset stockpile as opposed to bitcoin. What's, what's happening? But what you said in your tweet is that the crypto EO does not ban CBDCs, protect self custody or mining, provide regulatory clarity or provide the stockpile. It forms a working group to study these things, but does not impose legally binding rules. So break that down for us.
- [23:59]
A
Okay, so first off, very positive. You have to start with the positive, which perhaps not positive enough on Twitter, but, but, but the reality is like, okay, you've got a president that campaigned on being pro digital asset, pro bitcoin, right? He wanted to come in and get, you know, some sensible legislation through. So he wants to show action. So he puts forward an executive order. He has a crypto czar that's going to come in, look at all these issues, and ultimately what will come of all that is, I think, proposals both to the sec, proposals to Congress.
- [24:32]
C
Right.
- [24:33]
A
But there are limited things you can do from a regulatory standpoint without the legislative framework from Congress. So when I say it's not. Executive orders aren't laws, right? Executive orders, when they're, when they're administering the government, they have to have some constitutional authority behind what they're doing, or legislative authority, right. To direct the agency in a certain way. Increasingly, presidents have become a lot more reliant on executive orders for the simple reason they can't get anything through the Congress. So right now, okay, when I say it doesn't ban in cbdc, let's just hypothetically say the Congress, you know, let's just say the Congress says, you know, we don't really care what the President says. We are going to pass a bill, we're going to pass a law, we're going to enact a cbdc, a central bank digital, digital currency. They send it to the President. Well, I would expect the president to then veto it, right? Because that's how our system works. But if the Congress had an overwhelming majority of Republicans and Democrats, they could get an override and they could make it law anyway. So when I say the executive order does not ban, a CBDC is basically saying that the political position of the Trump administration for now, until it's replaced by a subsequent administration, is no cbdc. But he already kind of said that on the campaign trail, that we'll never have a US cbdc. I don't know if he said it in Nashville or Not. But he said it other times. I remember him saying it. So kind of all it is is basically saying, my view is this, I'm not going to allow this. But we know in our system of government that the Congress can override vetoes. The Congress can do things in spite of the President. That's the way it's set up. Same thing with the judiciary. The judiciary can strike down things, he says. So while it's meaningful in terms of its signaling that the administration is pro crypto, to solve this industry we need something from the Congress. Both a market structure bill. I hope we get a stablecoin bill. I hope we get the digital stockpile, which we can talk about that if you want.
- [26:21]
B
Yeah, no, I'd love to hear your thoughts on that. Because obviously a lot of people in the space really want the Bitcoin act to pass. Many I've heard are not very bullish on the fact that the United States will be buying bitcoin this year and that it will actually pass. But what do you think?
- [26:36]
A
Well, I think if it goes to Congress, I think it's probably dead on arrival. That's my view. I could be wrong.
- [26:42]
B
Why?
- [26:44]
A
Just because I think that the way our system of Congress is set up is that it's almost designed at this point through rules like the filibuster, for example, where, you know, just a handful of senators can block pretty much any piece of legislation. So I think you'll get the Elizabeth Warrens and you get the holdouts from the anti crypto army to say they're going to raise their hand and say, no, we're not letting this through. Which is really unfortunate right now. Bitcoin Policy Institute did some good work and credit to them. You can go read it. Why? There is a basis for the President to act via executive order to establish this and he has a basis for doing so. I would encourage him to do that. I think that's the way forward to do the stockpile. My fear is that for a politician it's very easy to say I'm following through my campaign promise, I want to support this bill, but then it just dies in Congress, which is the easiest sort of punt.
- [27:34]
C
Right.
- [27:34]
A
It's just like I don't have to actually do it myself. I can just blame the other guy for, for not doing his job. So that's a big hang up. Now all the proposals, from what I've heard, because of some of the folks that the President has surrounded himself, it's going to be two things. Number one, they really want to Avoid the moniker of strategic reserve. Okay. Which is interesting.
- [27:55]
B
Stockpile. They want stockpile. Right.
- [27:57]
A
They want digital assets stockpile or something. For a couple different reasons. Number one, they didn't want any suggestion by anyone anywhere that it was a strategic priority to have Bitcoin, which I think it is. I think it would be great for them to have Bitcoin on their balance sheet. But they wanted that suggestion from a PR standpoint to be removed.
- [28:17]
C
Right.
- [28:17]
A
You just call a stockpile. There are other things that I was clued into by a colleague where he says there are certain reporting requirements and other obligations to Congress. When you call something a strategic reserve, which I was unaware of, it's apparently in the code of federal regulations. So that's fascinating.
- [28:32]
C
Right?
- [28:32]
A
Like they may have maybe, maybe it wasn't just pr, but it was also a combination of they wanted to in. They want to have more discretion. So if the President wanted to do this by executive order, he could not have to do reporting requirements to Congress and just keep confiscated digital assets. But the one thing I've heard consistently across the board, every single person, that's the quote unquote crypto go tos in the administration is they want it to be multi asset, which, which from my standpoint, it's really unfortunate we've been fighting so hard and programs like yours and others. Myself, I've tried to explain to even judges why there's Bitcoin and everything else and why there's a significant difference in all these other things. The fact that you would have an asset being held on the balance sheet of the United States government where we know who the issuer is, we can identify them by name. Makes no sense to me. Okay, why not buy Apple stock? Why don't they buy Microsoft?
- [29:27]
B
I was literally just about ask you this because I think you're the perfect person to break this down. There's still so much confusion, especially with people that just aren't in Bitcoin or crypto at all of what is a security. I would love, I would love your take on this because. Exactly. Even though Apple stock has done tremendously well over the last two decades and Nvidia stock, we're not going to have an Nvidia or Apple reserve.
- [29:49]
A
Why not?
- [29:49]
B
I mean, right, we don't want our, our money to have a CEO. Can you, can you break that down? What is your, your, your case for why this should be Bitcoin reserve, not digital assets?
- [30:00]
A
Well, I mean, that's just it. Like I don't. And people that, you know, I'm not naming any particular tokens, okay, Because I don't want to get attacked. But, but people will say like, oh, well, there's validators and there's different things. Then it can all be, you know, it's sufficiently decentralized. That's the famous, like Hinman line, sufficiently decentralized. To me, I think a lot of that's just smoke and mirrors. I think when you have like 15 validators or something that control a whole ledger, how can you honestly say that is sufficiently decentralized? How can you honestly say that is robust enough compared to something where there's, you know, I don't know, the 10,000 plus nodes, whatever the current count of bitcoin nodes there are, it's completely different. And the other thing that I think is absolutely critical in distinguishing all this is that unlike the vast majority of all these tokens assets, you know, other than bitcoin, Bitcoin has the real world component as that real world proof of work, which I always try to stress that to whenever I'm describing this to judges or policymakers. The real world component is how you prevent the just. This is just a few clicks and more copying, right? Copy and paste. Copy and paste. The real world component is critical. And none of these really have that. There's very few that have some similar proof of work, but they're at the margins, right? Like the bigger competitors to Bitcoin are, are all, you know, either proof of stake systems or other centralized systems. So that's a big deal. Now what I would say is just about the securities front, okay? And this is helpful for all bitcoiners, right? All bitcoiners. We need to improve our language on this. And I'll just, I've had conversations about this. A token itself, lines of code, right, are not a security. Okay? We've heard that from multiple courts time and time again, even in the XRP case, right? All the XRP folks, they always point to this language that said xrp, the token in itself is not a security. That's not really the point. The way the securities laws are designed is that it talks about transactions. So it's like when I sell something to you, okay, when I try to sell you this token or this piece of paper or whatever, the question is, what are the economic realities of that transaction? What are we actually doing? And what they found in the Judge Torres did In the SEC vs Ripple case, they found that, that the institutional sales, the ones that were first sold, okay, those were in fact investment contracts. Those institutional buyers, the privileged players that Got access to buy that. Those were investment contracts. Even Judge Taurus. Okay, found that. Then you move to, well, what if I just go buy on Coinbase? What if I just go buy on an exchange? That issue, what does that mean? What is that transaction? Well, Judge Torres found that, that secondary market sale, that. That was not an investment contract. Because you don't know who you're buying from. I don't know if I'm buying from Natalie or if I'm buying from Sam or I'm buying from somebody else. The separation there, now, that's being appealed, right?
- [32:42]
B
Because it's putting a barrier of where the original XRP or any token came from.
- [32:47]
A
That's the. That. That was the order. That's how the order came down. It's being appealed. I will tell you, there are other judges who have rejected that theory. They're saying no. Even though there's a barrier, there's a blind bid, ask, and you don't know who you're purchasing from. The market participants are really buying that with some expectation of profit. They're buying it relying on the managerial and entrepreneurial work of, of the company that launched it. So. So that's a debated issue, and the courts are going to deal with that. You know, interestingly enough, you know, we've had the Trump administration come in now and I've been waiting and monitoring. They've. They appealed, the former sec. They appealed on the way at the door, the Ripple Labs decision to Judge Taurus. So the question is, will the Trump administration persist in that appeal or will it be dismissed? And the other thing that's fascinating, just for your viewers, is that even to this day, the official position of the United States government is that the coinbase. The coinbase, the biggest custodian of all the Bitcoin ETFs, right? They're not a property clearinghouse, broker, dealer, proper registered exchange. That is the position right now in court. It still has not been modified.
- [33:51]
B
It's so fascinating. And yet it's like, you know, helping with all the ETFs that have been issued and it's custodying so many.
- [33:58]
A
It's crazy.
- [33:59]
B
Bitcoin. Can we just kind of break down a little bit more? When we think about 1933 securities laws, there was that case of the orange grove, right, Howie. And it's. Yes, the Howie test. And is there an investment contract and expectation of profit and all that? Okay, so if we compared this token analogy to the orange grove. So this is like if, if the original oranges were sold to these institutions, that Part is a security was an investment contract, but then the growth. Those companies then sold the oranges to the public. That's the question.
- [34:31]
A
That's the question. Yeah. Like, what if those companies resold the oranges but they weren't actually taking position. So. So in how it's a little different because they were effectively selling an ownership interest in the groves.
- [34:43]
B
Oh, okay.
- [34:44]
A
We're actually taking the. The groves. They weren't getting the raw. Or in that case, the trees, whatever. So. So it's a little bit different. They just were selling an ownership interest where that by. They would be paid. They would be compensated as a portion of that interest. So here it's a little, little bit distinct, right? You've got these. And this is part of the problem, right? Like, I think it's. Even though we in the Bitcoin space, we don't like scams and we don't like, you know, fraud and all that, part of the issue here with this and getting a hold of this is that you're. You're tying in, you know, almost 100-year-old securities laws and you're trying to force them on a space that is moving so fast. I mean, I was reading Coinbase is having. I was looking into, like, there's a million tokens launching every week or something now. Yeah, it's.
- [35:28]
B
How do you evaluate all those?
- [35:29]
A
How do you evaluate that? And then now. Now what I think is awesome, actually, I really like it, is that a lot of the. The fastest moving, highest return coins and tokens. They basically just said, like, we're nothing. We don't pretend to be Bitcoin. We don't pretend to have any value. We're just a joke or a meme.
- [35:44]
C
Right?
- [35:44]
A
Like, to me, I think it's great. Like, I honestly would prefer that. Not that I, you know, investing or buying any of these things, but I prefer that over, you know, the false promises of the ICO era and all these other tokens, which they say, oh, we're a better bitcoin, we're faster, we do this, we cure cancer. Like, I don't want that. That's, to me, was way worse on a moral and ethical basis, selling false promises and snake oil, right? Then, like, oh, yeah, you want to buy, you know, fart coin.
- [36:09]
B
Like, I mean, right?
- [36:10]
A
Nobody, nobody's buying that, knowing that, like, it has value or, you know, it's anything, anything but a joke, right?
- [36:17]
C
So.
- [36:17]
B
Well, so the future, I think we'll have digital securities, but the industry wants more clarity. I love what Michael Saylor's put out as far as a framework. It makes it so simple. It's like, is there an issuer? Is there, is this a commodity? Is this a stable coin? Do you think that we will see something like that?
- [36:33]
A
I hope so. I really, I mean, the problem is, and again, as President Trump can be as positive and his administration can be as positive as possible, but this fix really requires Congress. And one of the things that is so frustrating, sitting back, just pulling back from the macro, pulling back from crypto. Just as a US Citizen and somebody who wants to see the country succeed, I'm so frustrated at our Congress. I wish, you know, we've, we voted, devoted so much time to the presidential race and I bet you 90, actually. I know, because there's data on this. 90% of people can't even name their congressman. They don't even have a clue who it is. They go in there and they check RD and there's a lot of really bad ones on both sides that just sit there and don't do anything. So my hope is if I, if I could get in, President Trump's here. I want him to figure out a way to reform Congress, figure out how to reform the way we do elections, the way, you know, we have these districts that are gerrymandered, where, you know, congressmen that are barely alive can just win year after year because they don't have any competition. It's, it's sad and it's the, it's the biggest problem. If we could figure out how to fix our Congress, I think that would go a long way in tackling, like, you know, all the issues we're talking about.
- [37:42]
B
I mean, if people have been watching the hearings, the confirmation hearings, I'm sure they're very frustrated right now. Okay, let's talk about SAB121 and how important the residence is. But it's not clear sailing. It's not like these banks are suddenly going to be custodying Bitcoin on behalf of clients. So can you talk?
- [37:57]
A
Exactly right. No. Great question. So. So before previously to SAB 121 being in place, right, There was prohibitions and outright, you know, approvals that were required in. When you're working in banking or advising banks, there's a. Numerous different regulators sometimes that you have to look at. You know, depending on if you're an FDIC bank or an OCC bank, depending on if you're a public bank or a private bank, there's so many. There's a morass of different issues. You got to Sort through. But there was an impediment that was in place and I think again, incredibly frustrating that we got a bill through a law passed bipartisan, bipartisan, and then the president vetoed it for some reason. That's beyond me. I don't even understand that one. I can't even explain it. But it got vetoed.
- [38:45]
C
Right.
- [38:46]
A
And that was a legitimate effort to try to open the door and remove one of the impediments. So that's a massively big thing.
- [38:52]
C
Right.
- [38:52]
A
Getting the SEC out of the way when they really shouldn't have been in the way to begin with. In my, my view, that's huge.
- [38:58]
C
Right.
- [38:58]
A
But the next step has to be both internally and externally with other regulators. They need to open the door. For example, the fdic. This is the current state of affairs. If you engage, if you're a banking institution, your FDIC bank, they put out a notification back in April of 22 that said you have to approach them and get permission to engage in any crypto related activities. Which on its face is not the worst thing.
- [39:19]
C
Right.
- [39:19]
A
Like okay, we'll approach you. But if you talk to clients that have done it right, they are, they give very limited guidance as to what they want you to do.
- [39:28]
C
Right.
- [39:28]
A
And sometimes they sit on your applications to do certain things for months, if not years. I have clients that have been personally affected by this. In particular, they have this requirement that we want to make sure if you're engaging in crypto related activities that there is sufficient safety, soundness, liquidity. What does that mean? Like give us guidance as to what we need to do to hold stablecoins, to hold Bitcoin, to hold other assets. Because if you give us guidance like the free market's going to get in there and it's going to do what it needs to do. But they have resisted and dragged your feet on that. And I think that comes to an end this administration. I'm very optimistic about that. And that's probably one of the biggest bullish catalysts I see going forward the next year.
- [40:06]
B
I think you're also bullish on stable coins. Why is that?
- [40:10]
A
I'm just bullish on the fact that there's clear demand for the dollar abroad. You know, I'm not a dollar doomer either. I think actually the path forward is dollar proliferation and dollar increasing its share of global transactions. I'm a big believer in Brent Johnson. I don't know if dollar milkshake, milkshake theory. I think the dollar, to me I see bitcoin and the dollar complimenting each other very much because bitcoin at least is going to be the store of value, the pristine collateral, like as they say. And then I think that you need a transaction layer. You need, as Bitcoin goes through its. Once in its existence, I think valuation surge, where it gets to its store of value component that we think it's all going to be, you're going to need for the next several decades a medium of exchange that is liquid, that's deep, that has some underlying collateral to it. So, you know, I envision a world where these things, they enhance one another. And you know, there are a lot of people that are shut out of the banking system and I think bitcoin for them is interesting.
- [41:06]
C
Right.
- [41:07]
A
But they, they from their standpoint, like they, they would want stability more than anything else. Like they don't have a lot of disposable income, just sit on in bitcoin for long periods of time. So to me, like the stable coins I think are going to be massively bullish for the US dollar. It's going to be massively bullish for a lot of different attributes. I was going back and forth a couple months ago with Matt Pines about like, let's assume the stablecoin market, 10x's okay. That's going to be, you know, well over a trillion dollars annually of demand for Treasuries annually because. Right. Those things get flipped.
- [41:37]
B
Yes.
- [41:37]
A
That's going to lead to annualized recurring trillion dollars of demand for Treasuries globally. Which is, which is meaningful.
- [41:45]
C
Right.
- [41:45]
A
It's not going to solve any of our debt problems, but it's meaningful.
- [41:49]
B
Well, that's why it's such a priority for Congress to actually get the stablecoin legislation through net will impact companies like Tether that are overseas. I think you've tweeted about how generally they want us based issuers of stablecoins. Right. Is that going to be the big banks?
- [42:04]
A
Absolutely. So, so, you know, my view, and I don't represent Tether, of course, or Bitfinex, but I would just tell you, like, I would bet money heavily that if they get a stablecoin piece of legislation through, I think other players in the stablecoin market are going to love that it will accrue to their benefit. They will gain more market share because of that bill being passed. And I would bet heavily that the regulations that are put in place to get compliance are not going to be favorable to Tether. People may disagree with me on that, but I would be surprised if they made it in such A way unless tether were to move to the US to fully port in the United States.
- [42:41]
B
They just moved to El Salvador.
- [42:43]
A
Yeah, so.
- [42:43]
B
And launched on bitcoin lightning.
- [42:46]
A
Yeah. So that's my view now. Now do I think, just to be clear, I'm not a tether truther or one of these people like that. I don't, I don't have an issue with tether. Um, I think a lot of people use it and it's clearly market demand.
- [42:56]
C
Right.
- [42:57]
A
But what I will say is I wouldn't be surprised if you have an increasingly segregated stablecoin market where you have the US based stable coins. Then you have Tether continuing to do what it does abroad.
- [43:09]
C
Right.
- [43:09]
A
You're going to see that bifurcation and it's not going to be homogeneous. You'll have some tether exchanges, some non tether exchanges, patchwork systems. It's the only way you're going to be able to do it because you know, the marketplace is global.
- [43:20]
B
This is a random question, but I mean isn't like the best business to just issue a stablecoin? I mean it's like a cash cow. It sounds like we should have all gone into that business.
- [43:32]
A
Well, I think a lot of banks are going to go into that business in the near future. Right. So without giving anything away on a proprietary basis, I'll just tell you, like there are a lot of banks interested in this space.
- [43:43]
C
Right.
- [43:43]
A
Because you're exactly right. I mean you have the ability to get people to give you their cash and put them in bills and, or put them at the Fed.
- [43:52]
C
Right.
- [43:53]
A
That yield and it encourages activity. But again for us Westerners, right, we're in a very different dynamic because you know, in our view, like okay, 4%, 5% maybe if you're a senior or somebody that needs a very stable income source, that's attractive. But a lot of younger people, like I can, you know, I can go to the corporate bond market and get better yields or I can go into the stock market and get better returns. So I think it really depends on where you sit to see what your priorities are for that. I mean I, I don't have any usdc. I don't plan on acquiring any rather old bitcoin.
- [44:25]
C
Right.
- [44:25]
A
But I'm in a different position. Right. So it's a big question.
- [44:28]
B
And we have easy access to the dollar. Yeah. Okay. As we start to wrap up, just to tie a bow on this talk of the bitcoin and the dollar, do you believe that there's a place plan to back the dollar with Bitcoin or to have dollar take the place of essentially what we've been doing with oil.
- [44:46]
A
No, I don't, I don't think that's the plan at all. So you have to look at from the US perspective, what they really care about in financial markets. Their chief concern, right at the top of the list is a liquid treasury market.
- [45:03]
C
Right.
- [45:04]
A
If they're, if the treasury market stays liquid, okay, Meaning that it's not seizing up. You don't have rates skyrocketing, you don't have repo failures there, they can kick the can down the road almost inevitably. I mean, we didn't, we're wrapping up. We didn't get to some of the debt discussions, right? Like, the debt discussions drive me crazy. I just cannot understand the doom and gloom over the debt. And if you may.
- [45:26]
B
Yeah, no, we can talk about it. Yeah.
- [45:28]
A
Okay. So like this thing is just, I see this chart out there and the debt's a huge problem. Like we'll start with that, right? We should, we should bring it into balance, right? But there is no absolute level you will ever find. No economists will be able to identify it. Where if you cross x amount of percentage of debt to gdp, the wheels come off or things fall apart. We know there have been countries, right, that have had huge 200% nearly debt to GDP, right. The problem becomes, I think, when you have inflation, right? So if inflation is persistent and the, what I always post about is like you have to look at your, your nominal growth and your nominal growth has to exceed your nominal interest rates. If you keep that path, that, that status quo in place, like growth where it normally trend nominal growth above nominal interest rates, what you're effectively doing, you're not really accruing any more debt, right? You're just on a real basis because your economy's growing faster than the rates of interest. Like you're kind of on the glide path, right? It becomes more pernicious when the nominal interest rate starts to overtake the growth rate. That's where it really becomes difficult. And there's a chart in here you can throw up really quickly. It's, it's one of my favorites. It's, it's number two.
- [46:39]
C
Right.
- [46:39]
A
Okay. There is no, People will say, oh, that's going to get out of control. You're going to have a sovereign debt crisis and it's all going to blow up. And there are many prominent bitcoiners who argue this. And I, I'm just telling you there's no data to support this. What Chart 2 shows, if your viewers can watch the screen, it basically shows that there is no correlation between high levels of debt to GDP and debt crises or sovereign debts, right? We cannot tell with any sort of certainty or predictability where this debt becomes a problem. Where you get the nominal interest rates to be rising over the nominal growth, we don't know. And in a dollar based system, right, where there is unique reasons why the dollar, like Brent's theory, right, has significant demand, from a FX standpoint, it appreciates it's even more likely that this can continue. So I don't know what, when, when people talk about this hand wringing about the debt, the debt's out of control. I know the CBO projections where it says it's going to go to like 100 trillion. Yeah, he's going to go to 50 trillion. But what you also have to understand is what, that's only one side of the equation, right? That's the debt. Like just the absolute number of debt, right? What is economic growth going to look like? You know, I was, I really enjoyed Sam and Lynn's recent piece about this and to me, like the, the big thing I want to focus on is what does economic growth look like? What does output look like? When we are entering in an era where you're going to be able to automate so much, there's going to be an explosion of productivity. And you, all these models, right, we're all just guessing all the forecast about CBO projections, right? They're all, they're all assuming growth of like 2%. And to me, like 2% real, right? To me, what's fascinating is like what is, what is, what if real growth is like 5? What if it's 6? People think that's crazy, but like the era we're entering into with AI, I think is going to be, it's going to be shock and awe. It's going to be massive change at every level and with massive increases in growth. Okay? You have to factor that in on a budget standpoint. The analogy just for regular people that are trying to understand this is like imagine if I told you that your debt was going up, you know, 50, 40, 60% year over year and it's just getting bigger and bigger, bigger. You'd say, oh my God, that's so bad, that's awful. What if I told you that your income on the productivity side, that's GDP, right? Your income is surging year over year, surging 40, 50, 60%. You'd be like, oh well, the debt's not that big of A problem. So, so whenever you see these charts, I just cringe when I see the charts. Like, look at the debt going like parabolic. What does that tell you about growth? What's growth going to look like?
- [49:10]
B
I mean, this makes me think of Jeff Booth's book, because we do. We have this ever increasing debt and that's what our system's built on. But then we have the deflationary forces of the tech sector. We want that productivity to flow to us. It really hasn't. It hasn't been. I talked about this with, with Sam about his report as well. We need like a productivity miracle. We need that to flow so that our purchasing power actually matters. But the, these two forces are really inherently contradictory. Cause for every $4 of debt we take on, we produce like $1 of real growth and the real growth hasn't been there.
- [49:44]
A
Yeah. So question for you. Just get your take on it. If, let's just assume growth explodes, let's say productivity far beyond our calculations, it explodes.
- [49:53]
C
Okay.
- [49:54]
A
But going back to our earlier discussion, it's concentrated among those that have the AI models and those that have the AWS servers and those that have all the big tech concentrations. That's where all the growth, that's where all the real gains go. What does society look like there? What. What should the government do?
- [50:11]
C
Right?
- [50:11]
A
And this is something that we have to, we have to think about and actually come to terms with. What if we have a productivity burst like we've seen?
- [50:17]
C
Right?
- [50:17]
A
Because all those 1971 charts that show productivity decoupling from wages.
- [50:22]
C
Right.
- [50:22]
A
Like I'm sure you've seen those.
- [50:23]
B
Yes.
- [50:24]
A
The question for me is like, okay, productivity goes through the roof because of Jeff Booth's thesis, but it doesn't go to the regular person, the average worker.
- [50:32]
B
Right. And this is why they're crying out for things like ubi.
- [50:35]
A
Yeah.
- [50:35]
B
And government has to try to decide and allocate capital when it's.
- [50:39]
A
I think that's worse, Alligator. I mean, my personal view is I think that's inevitable. I think it is inevitable as. As negative it as it is. And I think it has real repercussions to society because there's dignity and being employed and having something to do.
- [50:53]
C
Right.
- [50:54]
A
Like we have to deal with that as a society. And to me that is way scarier and it's more complex and there's so many facets to it than the debt. The debt, you know, it's problematic. But the real problem, again is inflation. That's the real. Even the MMT folks.
- [51:09]
C
Right, Right.
- [51:09]
A
Which I disagree with all those folks. I don't know if you dive into.
- [51:12]
B
Those people, but even we owe it to ourselves, right?
- [51:17]
A
Even the, even the MMT folks, they'll tell you, well, the real problem becomes inflation. That's the. So absent inflation, okay, what is the problem? That's, that's the concern. So to me, like you got to figure that puzzle out.
- [51:30]
B
All this is very complicated, but I still think it just screams why we need bitcoin. We need something that helps the average person increase their purchasing power over time. It obviously will not suddenly replace the dollar, but it can eventually serve as this base layer for global capital, which I think would even out the playing field when it comes to having more competition. True capitalism, reemerging, all of that.
- [51:52]
A
Yeah, I mean I think that the most exciting thing I always say about Bitcoin to me is that it brings more consequence to bad action. So the biggest thing that always when I started first studying, started deeply studying economics after I graduated university is like with the financial crisis, like a lot of us came of age in the financial crisis. And when I remember thinking like okay, people do really bad stupid things and hurt people by their actions, by their, you know, over leverage and decisions and then they say we're too big to fail and we need to bail out. Right. That's process, that's problematic. So when you have a situation where you know, you have a disincentive, which is bitcoin. Bitcoin is disincentive to you know, as they say, f around and find out. Yeah, like have the government, the government can just come in printed and that's the problem. What I believe in a world like we will demand banking institutions that hold as their reserves bitcoin. And when those banks get over levered or they take chances, they have to bear a consequence, they go out of business because there's no bailout to print more bitcoin. Right, right. So that to me that alone has profound positive societal implications. And that's why I believe bitcoin is a, is a path to a better system.
- [53:00]
B
I completely agree with you. I could talk to you for hours. Joe, we'll have to do another session. Where can people find you?
- [53:06]
A
You can oecarlasari on X. Alternatively if you google my name, my firm website pops up. If you have a litigated matter. We didn't talk about any of the fund lit that I'm involved in. Mostly because I don't want my clients to fire me and get upset about.
- [53:19]
C
Right.
- [53:19]
A
Like, but if you have a litigated matter, anything bitcoin related, the larger crypto space or I do a lot of representing a lot of miners, a lot of bitcoin miners and various commercial transactions. Please reach out if I can help you. I know many of the litigators in the space who can so appreciate you having me on.
- [53:36]
B
Yeah, my best friends in the same line of work. So awesome. Yeah. Thank you so much. Joe Carlos are everyone thank you so.
- [53:43]
D
Much for checking out this episode of Coin Stories. Make sure you're subscribed to the show. Also, check out our weekly free newsletter@thenewsblock.substack.com this show is for entertainment and educational purposes only.
- [53:55]
B
Nothing should constitute as investment advice and.
- [53:58]
D
You should always do your own research. I'm always open to feedback and guest suggestions, so please feel free to reach.
- [54:03]
B
Out@Infoalkingbitcoin.Com I'll see you next time. Sam.