Not saying the guy is right about everything, but this quote loses a lot out of context. They are arguing he is wrong about the part he is right about and missing a couple paragraphs over where he is actually wrong.
Saifedean's argument is if I give a loan for interest it limits my upside to the interest rate. My downside risk is always 100%, I could get nothing back. It makes more sense to demand equity and get the much higher return potential of all growth from your venture. If someone didn't think they could do better than the interest rate they were willing to pay me, they wouldn't take out the loan.
The problem with the whole passage isn't that argument about an imbalance being wrong. It is that this imbalance of loan VS equity also exists with fiat, but it is worse. I pay you money. You build value creating business or assets. With bitcoin I get hard money back. With fiat I get money of unknown but definitely lower value back.
This is why you buy stocks instead of CDs.
