Bankless 联创 Ryan 给儿子的信:别把钱存银行,放进加密货币里

深潮Published on 2025-08-26Last updated on 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。

Related Reads

Base MCP, The Next Step for x402

Base has officially launched Base MCP, allowing users to connect their Base Account to AI Agents to perform actions like swaps, transfers, portfolio tracking, and transaction history queries through conversational commands. This move aligns with Base's strategic focus on AI, driven by the broader competition in the emerging Agent-to-Agent payment sector. The evolution of Agent payments has accelerated. In late 2024, the primary method involved insecure browser automation. By 2025, solutions like Coinbase's x402 (providing crypto wallets for Agents), Google's AP2, and Visa's token-based system emerged. x402 has since processed 176 million transactions totaling over $70 million, with a median value between $0.01 and $0.10. Stablecoins, particularly USDC, dominate these settlements due to their negligible transaction costs compared to traditional payment fees, which are prohibitive for micro-payments. Coinbase faces competition from Stripe, which has built a comparable infrastructure for Agent payments with its Tempo blockchain, Privy wallets, Bridge routing (acquired for $1.1B), and the recently launched MPP protocol. Both companies are now competing at the application layer. The core reason AI is central to Base's strategy is to expand the scenarios for Agent payments, ensuring more transactions occur on its network. By securing a dominant position and scale advantage in this nascent field, Coinbase aims to capture the future commercial potential of Agent-driven payments. The launch of Base MCP is thus a strategic step in this larger ambition.

marsbit1m ago

Base MCP, The Next Step for x402

marsbit1m ago

Reframing Ethereum's Valuation: Why the Fee Model is Wrong, and the 'Treasury Logic' is the Future?

"Rethinking Ethereum's Value: The 'Vault Logic' Framework" Traditional valuation models incorrectly treat Ethereum as a company, valuing ETH based on transaction fees ("revenue"). This is flawed. Fees are network friction; a successful network aims to reduce them to zero. Ethereum's average fee has dropped from over $50 in 2021 to around $0.20 today, while transaction volume has tripled. Instead, view Ethereum as a digital vault securing ~$250 billion in on-chain assets (stablecoins, RWAs, L2 bridged funds, wBTC, etc.). Post-merge, Ethereum's security is directly purchased with its own asset: ETH. To attack the network, an attacker must acquire and control staked ETH. Therefore, the vault's security level is intrinsically tied to ETH's market value. Currently, the value of all staked ETH is only ~$72B, protecting ~$250B in assets—a dangerous imbalance. For robust security, the staked ETH securing the network should be valued significantly *higher* than the total value it protects. Applying a conservative security multiplier suggests ETH's fair value should be closer to ~$6,900 (vs. ~$2,070 currently). As on-chain asset value grows into the trillions, ETH's price must rise proportionally to maintain this security budget. Comparisons to free infrastructure like Linux or low-margin utilities like the DTCC are misguided. Their security is provided externally (community, law, banks). Ethereum's security is internal and must be purchased in the open market using ETH. ETH is not the clearinghouse; it is the collateral backing it. The model is not a short-term price predictor but a structural framework. The economic force for ETH appreciation grows monotonically with the adoption of Ethereum for settling value. The narrative that high fees are good is backwards; low fees enable more activity, which increases the value needing protection, thus demanding a more valuable ETH.

marsbit8m ago

Reframing Ethereum's Valuation: Why the Fee Model is Wrong, and the 'Treasury Logic' is the Future?

marsbit8m ago

Justin Sun’s Interview with Hurun Report: A New Order and Certainty for Value Flow in the Era of Transformation

In an interview with *Hurun Report*, Justin Sun, founder of TRON, discussed the evolution of the Web3 industry as it moves from initial exploration to large-scale adoption. He emphasized that the core value of blockchain lies in building an open and inclusive internet of value, enabling anyone globally to transfer and use funds efficiently and at low cost, regardless of location or access to banking. Sun highlighted that projects with lasting impact are those built on genuine demand and real-world usage. He pointed to the stablecoin payment ecosystem as the most mature and scalable application currently, noting that TRON has rapidly become one of the world's largest stablecoin networks. The circulation of USDT on TRON has surpassed $86.3 billion, driven by actual use cases such as cross-border transfers and daily payments, demonstrating strong network effects. Regarding strategy, Sun outlined a methodology combining data-driven iteration, rapid execution, and user-centric focus. He cited the decision to partner with Tether to launch TRC-20 USDT as a key strategic move, based on an assessment of market trends and long-term potential, which has become a significant growth engine for the TRON ecosystem. On globalization, Sun stressed the importance of local compliance and cultural adaptation, noting that success in different markets depends on deep understanding and local partnerships. He also addressed the convergence of AI and blockchain, describing it as a transformative direction where blockchain provides decentralized infrastructure for AI, while AI enhances the intelligence and user experience of blockchain systems. For industry participants and young entrepreneurs, Sun advised continuous learning and adaptability in a fast-changing environment, focusing on building irreplaceable core strengths rather than spreading resources too thinly. Through infrastructure development, global strategy, and technological foresight, TRON aims to advance the practical implementation and evolution of the value internet.

marsbit40m ago

Justin Sun’s Interview with Hurun Report: A New Order and Certainty for Value Flow in the Era of Transformation

marsbit40m ago

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.

marsbit59m ago

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

marsbit59m ago

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.

marsbit1h ago

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

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片