“Lightning is Rug-Pull-as-a-Service” - #[0]

trust me, I know how banks work. the point being made there is about language.

well then they are very silly, aren’t they?

who thinks this?

I don’t think you read what I said.

drink.

I’m gonna need another shirt …

I think it’s even more insidious than that because the money (which is everybody else’s credit) is created out of nothing. loans come before deposits. so what banks are doing is writing themselves themselves claims on real assets that it is somebody else’s responsibility to pay off.

the whole “but access to credit is important to start and grow businesses” line is complete and utter bullshit because, as you say, you need assets to be claimed against to get the loans. If you don’t have them already, you get extra pwned because you stand to lose more than you put up if you can’t pay back the loan. so you take on inordinate risk, *in an environment of dramatic capital misallocation and some or other level of price inflation* and the bank gets nearly all the benefits.

none of this would be true with equity finance. literally none of it: no collateral, no undercollateralized loan exposure, no systemic capital misallocation, no mismatched risk, no circulation credit, no inflation, and arguably no “bank” as such: just an investment intermediary that has to manage its risks with no possibility of a bailout rather than literally assigning itself other people’s wealth.

okay so basically money is ecash, all N banks are guardians in a 1 of N multisig fedimint, and the fedimint has no actual reserves except some of its own tokens 🤣

hahaha amazing

I just realised something fascinating in arguing with normies on the bird app. “credit creation” is talked about like it’s totally normal but it literally makes no sense. you can’t “create credit”. you either have credit or you do not. you can extend your own credit to others, but you cannot “create” it. you have to build it yourself and then transfer it. there is quite literally an element of proof of work involved. people only trust you because you have demonstrated your trustworthiness. it’s a fiat fantasy that you can just whip up (i.e. “print”) credit.

what “create credit” has to be taken to mean is just seigniorage. it’s fascinating to me that this is true by mapping to how fractional reserve and central banking actually works in the real world, but also in the linguistic scheme of the euphemism. by failing to extend *your own* credit, you are necessarily extending that of absolutely everybody else - without their consent, of course. it is blatantly fraud when framed this way (it’s blatantly fraud anyway, but I like how this framing forces the issue).

I realise this is just semantics but it’s fun when you catch them in these little traps that reveal they are just repeating things they’ve never actually thought about. next time somebody says “credit creation,” make sure you snap at them and explain what credit really is 😉

Andreessen blocked me for this 🤣

https://allenfarrington.medium.com/its-time-to-reflect-21673608f5a1

almost feels like I’m there with HODL almost feeling like we are both there with you guys.

drink.

Credit Suisse CDS?

this is absolutely nuts:

OH YEAH?!? WANNA BET?!?

exactly

lmao, I’m watching this on YouTube and you are in the shot, on your phone, nostring it all 🤣

#[1]​ ​is only “real” on nostr. “in person” he’s basically just an avatar.