Bankless 联创 Ryan 给儿子的信:别把钱存银行,放进加密货币里

深潮Publicado a 2025-08-26Actualizado a 2025-08-27

银行看似安全,实则是个三重「骗局」。

撰文:Ryan Adams,Bankless 联合创始人

编译:Luffy,Foresight News

编者按:本文是 Bankless 联合创始人 Ryan Adams 写给儿子的一封信。信中 Ryan 给出了一些财富管理的建议,核心观点是 「别把钱存在银行」,银行实际上是三重「骗局」。Ryan 最后给出的替代方案是:保留部分美元应对日常开支,然后把财富放在比特币、黄金和股票等能跨时间储存价值的资产组合里。以下为全文翻译:

亲爱的儿子:

别把钱存在银行里,银行看似安全,实则是个三重「骗局」。

「骗局」一:他们偷走了你的收益

任何时候,美元其实都有一个无风险收益,就是国债。国债说白了就是 「穿了短期政府债券外衣的美元」,能给你带来 4.2% 的固定收益。

毫无额外风险,相当于白给的钱,简直是为你量身定制的。

但银行在储蓄账户里根本不会把这笔钱给你,而是自己私吞了。他们不告诉你有这笔收益,也不帮你把美元换成国债,甚至还积极游说美国政府,阻止储户拿到这份收益。

银行拿着 4.19% 的收益,只分给你 0.01%

有钱人根本不把钱存入银行,他们把现金存进国债,而非储蓄账户。但中产阶级和金融知识匮乏的人,每天都被隔壁那家 「友善」 的银行偷走收益,自己却毫不知情。

银行游说团体还盯着加密货币稳定币那点收益,不让你碰。他们散布恐慌言论,说要是没了储蓄账户这门 「吸血」 的生意,整个金融市场都会崩盘!

收益率会变,所以你得盯着美联储主席的表态,但只要收益率还是正的,就把美元放进短期国债和货币市场,别存银行账户。

「骗局」二:所谓的收益并非真实收益

现在你该知道下一个秘密了:收益率是假的。

你以为现在拿到的 4.2% 收益,能弥补购买力损失?其实那只是 「名义收益率」。因为美元的购买力每年都在缩水,这就是所谓的通胀,就算光景好,通胀也是意料之中的事,光景差的时候只会更严重。

过去四年,你的实际收益大概是这样的:

账户的收益率减去每年的 CPI,结果实在不怎么样

所以过去四年里,有两年你亏的比赚的多得多。

但实际情况更糟:你拿到的那些 「假收益」,还要被当成收入征税。

假设你的所得税率是 20%,你得先按 20% 对那些 「假收益」 缴税。所以实际收益其实是这样的:

通胀 「税」 之前,你先缴了所得税,美元相当于在双重征税

真实收益率 = 名义收益率 - 通胀。

他们想让你觉得通胀是像重力或物理定律一样的自然力量,根本不是,这是现代政府和央行体系的刻意设计。

通胀就是一种税,和其他税种没区别,只是被他们藏起来了。

我知道你不介意缴自己该缴的税。公共服务很重要,你也认同共同利益。但这种隐藏的税呢?专门盯着想为未来存钱的中产储户下手,这公平吗?

学学有钱人:他们通过持有大量资产而非美元来逃避 「储蓄税」。这就说到了第三个,也是最阴险的一层嵌套「骗局」。

「骗局」三:钱本身不是 「真的」

好吧,我这话有点夸张。美元是真实存在的,但只是 「暂时的东西」。适合短期支付,不适合跨时间储存财富,不适合留给未来。它是交易媒介,不是价值储存工具。

基础货币供应量叫 M0,就是现金和银行准备金。你看危机时它涨得多猛,整体趋势就是一路向上

美元没有长期的稀缺性约束,供应量一直在增加。你持有的美元在总供应量里的占比,缩水速度比收益弥补的速度快得多,因为他们一直在印钱。

美元的发行量几乎从未被提及。经济学家只盯着通胀和购买力,但长期来看,货币供应量增加会让美元相对于资产贬值。印的美元越多,你手里的钱就越不值钱。

M2(M1 加短期储蓄)也是一样,危机时猛涨,趋势是一路飙升

别陷进经济学家的争论里,自己看图表就好。不管谁掌权,政府都会把印美元当成经济和政治的 「润滑剂」。美元本来就是干这个的,不是用来储蓄的。

看这张图里的蓝线:

标普 500 以美元计算,1971 年以来涨了 6339%;但以黄金计价,标普 500 反而跌了 21%

过去 54 年,把财富存在黄金里,都比存在美国 500 家最大、表现最好的公司里强。

这张图不是让你买黄金,是想告诉你:他们称之为 「钱」 的东西,我们用来衡量一切的东西,你银行账户里的美元,根本不算真正的 「钱」。它不能储存价值,一直以来都不能,未来也不会能。

他们说的 「钱」,不是价值储存工具。所以这就是三层嵌套「骗局」:

  • 「骗局」一:偷走你的收益;

  • 「骗局」二:所谓收益并非真实收益;

  • 「骗局」三:钱本身不是 「真的」。

那该怎么办?

留着部分美元应付短期需求,比如日常开销、缴税、应急资金。用国债的形式赚取收益。

把所有长期财富放进能跨时间储存价值的资产组合里:股票和房地产也行,但比特币、以太坊和黄金也不错。后三者供应稀缺,不会被通胀稀释。这些资产看起来风险高,是因为波动大,但波动不等于风险。

中期财富也可以放点在国债里,等长期价值储存资产跌价时,就把现金投进去。这就是投资的门道,巴菲特说得好,别人恐惧时我贪婪,别人贪婪时我恐惧。不用急着出手,等大跌的时候,用年、甚至十年的维度去思考。

尽量用加密货币工具和交易所来操作这些。别碰最前沿的风险,这样既能站在前沿,又能避开加密货币颠覆传统金融时的雷。

学校不会教你这些。但你得学,得接着往下钻研,保护好自己的未来。

别把钱存在银行里了。把钱变成资产,放进加密货币里。

Lecturas Relacionadas

Samsung Leverages Technology Cycles, SK Hynix Relies on HBM, What Enabled Micron to Win a Trillion-Dollar Market Cap?

Micron Technology, the Idaho-based memory chip maker, recently saw its market cap surpass $1 trillion, securing its position as one of the top three DRAM manufacturers alongside Samsung and SK Hynix. Its survival and growth story is marked by a unique combination of political maneuvering and hard-won manufacturing efficiency, but also strategic missteps that now challenge its future. Founded in 1978 in Boise without significant government or capital backing, Micron repeatedly turned to Washington for survival during critical junctures. In the 1980s, it filed anti-dumping complaints against Japanese firms, leading to the U.S.-Japan Semiconductor Agreement. Ironically, this created an opening for Samsung, which Micron had earlier licensed its 64K DRAM technology to. In 2002, Micron avoided heavy fines in a price-fixing investigation by acting as a whistleblower against its competitors, cementing its reputation as a "political opportunist." A major strategic error occurred in 2013 with its $2.5 billion acquisition of bankrupt Japanese firm Elpida. This deal burdened Micron with integrating incompatible manufacturing processes just as the industry was pivoting toward HBM (High Bandwidth Memory), a critical technology for AI. SK Hynix had launched its first HBM chip that same year. By the time AI demand exploded with ChatGPT in 2022, SK Hynix commanded about 85% of the HBM3 market, while Micron, playing catch-up, held only around 3%. In 2017, Micron employed similar tactics against a new competitor, Chinese startup Fujian Jinhua, by alleging intellectual property theft, which led to U.S. sanctions effectively crippling the firm. However, this strategy backfired in 2023 when China banned Micron's products from its critical infrastructure, causing its revenue share from China to plummet from 14% in FY2023 to just 7.1% by FY2025. Today, Micron faces a triple squeeze: it lags in the high-margin HBM race, faces pricing pressure in low-end DRAM from Chinese manufacturers like CXMT, and has lost crucial access to the booming Chinese AI server market. Despite its political strategies, Micron's core strength is its exceptional manufacturing cost control, achieved through decades of engineering. Its DRAM chips have a smaller cell area than its rivals, yielding more chips per wafer. This efficiency has been vital for weathering industry downturns. However, this advantage cannot compensate for the decade lost in HBM development. Micron is now racing to ramp up production of its HBM3E, certified by NVIDIA, and develop HBM4. Its future hinges on whether it can close this technological "time debt" through relentless R&D and execution, in a marathon where its competitors, having started earlier, are not slowing down.

marsbitHace 3 min(s)

Samsung Leverages Technology Cycles, SK Hynix Relies on HBM, What Enabled Micron to Win a Trillion-Dollar Market Cap?

marsbitHace 3 min(s)

Deconstructing Mysterious Researcher Serenity's Chokepoint Algorithm and the Global Revaluation of Equity Assets

Unmasking Serenity's "Chokepoint Theory": A Framework for AI-Era Investment This article deconstructs the investment methodology of the pseudonymous online researcher Serenity (formerly AleaBito on Reddit), who claims extraordinary returns by identifying critical bottlenecks in AI and robotics supply chains. Rejecting Wall Street's typical top-down analysis, Serenity employs a bottom-up, reverse-engineering approach. Starting with an end product like an Nvidia GPU cluster, he meticulously maps the global supply chain down to its most essential, irreplaceable physical components—the "choke points." These are low-profile, often monopolized sub-sectors where a disruption could paralyze entire downstream industries, analogous to a strategic strait controlling global oil flow. His primary focus is the physical evolution of AI data centers, specifically the shift from copper interconnects to silicon photonics and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO). He identifies five critical, monopolized technical barriers within CPO: high-precision fiber alignment components (e.g., FOCI), external light sources and high-power lasers (e.g., SIVE), molecular beam epitaxy equipment (ALRIB/Riber), ultra-high-purity red phosphorus raw materials, and Silicon-on-Insulator (SOI) wafers (Soitec). Serenity extends this framework to humanoid robotics, arguing that while the AI "brain" resides in the US, the physical "body" hardware (actuators, gears, motors) is dominated by Asian manufacturers. He highlights a looming "demand tsunami" for specific rare earth elements essential for robot motors, presenting a severe future supply chain and geopolitical challenge. The article cites several of his investment targets (RPI, SIVE, Soitec, VLN, NBIS) where identifying such choke points, coupled with correcting market mispricings (e.g., ticker code confusion for VLN), allegedly led to significant re-ratings. Ultimately, the article posits that Serenity's core value is not in providing stock picks, but in demonstrating a paradigm: using deep technical analysis to find the silent, indispensable "physical switches" within complex systems, thereby exploiting institutional research blind spots. However, it warns of major risks, including illiquidity in micro-cap stocks, potential "pump-and-dump" accusations, and the foundational gamble that his identified technological paths (like CPO) are the correct and inevitable ones.

marsbitHace 5 min(s)

Deconstructing Mysterious Researcher Serenity's Chokepoint Algorithm and the Global Revaluation of Equity Assets

marsbitHace 5 min(s)

Cross-strait Regulators Jointly Block Hong Kong Stock Account Openings: Where Can Your Money Go Now?

**Summary:** On May 22, 2026, financial regulators in mainland China and Hong Kong launched a synchronized crackdown targeting informal channels used by mainland investors to trade in Hong Kong and US stocks via Hong Kong-based securities firms. The Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) issued a stringent circular to licensed brokers, mandating stricter onboarding procedures for mainland clients. New requirements include a mandatory written declaration stating that all investment funds originate from *outside* mainland China and are from legal sources. The SFC also demanded the closure of accounts opened with suspicious documents and dormant accounts. Simultaneously, China's securities regulator, along with seven other ministries, initiated a two-year rectification plan, penalizing firms like Futu and Tiger Brokers for illegal cross-border operations. This effectively ends the previously common grey-area practice for mainlanders. Immediate impacts are evident. Social media reports show mainland investors traveling to Hong Kong for in-person account openings are now frequently denied after signing the new declaration, even at firms like uSMART that still accept applications. The declaration acts as both a compliance shield for brokers and a filter for clients. While major internet brokers have halted new mainland accounts, limited options remain. A few Hong Kong-licensed firms like uSMART, Fosun Wealth, and Cheerful still offer avenues, but approval is not guaranteed and hinges on proving offshore fund sources. Crucially, funding accounts must now be in the investor's own name at qualified Hong Kong or international banks, blocking previous informal methods like third-party transfers. For compliant access, official channels like Stock Connect, QDII, and the Cross-boundary Wealth Management Connect remain open. Individuals with verifiable overseas residency or status have better prospects. The crackdown signals the definitive end of the loosely regulated expansion period, forcing mainland investors toward stricter, fully compliant pathways for overseas asset allocation.

marsbitHace 10 min(s)

Cross-strait Regulators Jointly Block Hong Kong Stock Account Openings: Where Can Your Money Go Now?

marsbitHace 10 min(s)

Iran and the Fed -- Three Scenarios That Will Impact Global Markets Next

"Three Scenarios for Iran and the Fed Shaping Global Markets" Iranian geopolitics and the Fed's monetary policy path are two dominant themes for markets. Deutsche Bank Research outlines three scenarios linking Iran ceasefire outcomes to Fed policy, with oil prices as the key transmission channel. **Scenario 1: Peace Deal.** A breakthrough leading to the Strait of Hormuz reopening would ease near-term Fed tightening pressure. Recent inflation would be viewed as a temporary energy shock. However, medium-term risks remain; rate hikes could resurface in 2027 if inflation persists. **Scenario 2: Stalemate.** A breakdown in talks and a prolonged Strait closure, but no major escalation, is deemed the scenario with the *highest* Fed hike risk. Sustained high oil prices would feed into core inflation and threaten inflation expectations, while not severely damaging demand enough to give the Fed a reason to pause. This environment could necessitate multiple Fed rate hikes in 2026. **Scenario 3: Conflict Escalation.** Renewed conflict and sharply higher oil prices create a two-way risk for Fed policy. On one hand, it would risk severe inflation expectations de-anchoring, forcing a hawkish response. On the other, extreme oil prices could severely damage demand and the labor market, potentially shifting the Fed's focus toward easing. The ultimate policy decision would depend on which risk materializes first. Overall, Deutsche Bank's framework emphasizes that the path for oil prices, dictated by Iran, will define the nature of inflation pressures and ultimately determine the Fed's policy space. Key signals to watch include ceasefire progress, whether Brent crude stabilizes below $100, and any shift in Fed officials' rhetoric from discussing cuts to potential hikes.

marsbitHace 19 min(s)

Iran and the Fed -- Three Scenarios That Will Impact Global Markets Next

marsbitHace 19 min(s)

Hash Global Founder: Why I Also Choose to Liquidate All My ETH Holdings?

Hash Global founder explains his decision to sell all ETH holdings, despite recognizing the potential regulatory clarity from the US CLARITY Act as a positive development. He argues against the narrative that such clarity would automatically grant ETH a "monetary premium" comparable to Bitcoin or gold. The core of his critique is that market valuation for ETH remains tied to fundamental network metrics—like mainnet revenue, DeFi activity, staking yield, and competition—rather than a pure store-of-value narrative. He contends that legal classification solves compliance issues for institutions but does not inherently create the deep, historical consensus required for monetary status. Furthermore, Ethereum's complexity and role as a multi-functional infrastructure asset (gas, collateral, settlement layer) work against the simple narrative needed for such a premium. Looking forward, he suggests that the rise of DeFi and tokenized real-world assets (RWA) will mean ETH is not the only yield-bearing asset; tokenized gold, treasuries, and others will also offer programmable yield. Thus, ETH's "yielding" advantage diminishes. He believes monetary premium will likely remain with Bitcoin, physical gold, and potentially tokenized gold, while ETH's value is more accurately framed as a crucial infrastructure asset. Ultimately, he views CLARITY's benefit as reducing a "regulatory discount" on ETH, not unlocking trillions in monetary re-rating. ETH's long-term value is significant but stems from its network effects, developer ecosystem, and role in on-chain finance—not from being a direct substitute for gold.

marsbitHace 21 min(s)

Hash Global Founder: Why I Also Choose to Liquidate All My ETH Holdings?

marsbitHace 21 min(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片