Hey David, how did we arrive at a place where the Big Banks have a veto over the business practices of their more innovative new competitors?
I’m frankly not interested in whether the Big Banks like yield on stablecoins or not.
Unlike the Big Banks’ fractional reserve model, stablecoin issuers must retain 100% high-quality, liquid reserves under the GENIUS Act.
The fractional reserve banks introduce systemic risk, stablecoin issuers do not.
The Big Banks are permitted to pay interest on deposits.
Stablecoin issuers should likewise be permitted to pay yield to their customers.
There is no logical counter argument.
The idea of barring yield on stablecoins is transparently nothing more than pure protection for legacy banks from competition.
That’s unAmerican and anti-capitalism.
What am I missing?
I don’t think people realize how much healthcare costs are driving big companies to fire and not hire.
It costs them $30k per family, per year for premiums and care. Most of that goes to the massive, vertically integrated insurance companies that send weekly bills that no one reviews in details. And it doesn’t include the company overhead to deal with it all. It’s usually the 2nd largest expense after payroll. Which is insane
It’s far easier to blame AI than it is to blame Healthcare costs.
Want to increase jobs, wages and improve affordability for every American ?
Break up the biggest insurance companies. Make divest non insurance companies. They don’t need thousands of subsidiaries. That’s how they game and abuse the system and increase costs for all of us.
Call your senator and tell them to support the BreakUp Big Medicine Bill by @HawleyMO and @SenWarren.
A bartender in Galveston, Texas was arrested for serving a drunk customer who killed someone. She makes $25 an hour. A federal judge makes $236,000 a year and has absolute legal immunity for every decision on the bench, including releasing violent offenders who kill again.
42 states have dram shop laws. The bartender’s causation chain has two links: pour drink, person crashes. Exposed window? Sometimes three hours. She can be charged with criminal negligence, sued in civil court, and lose her livelihood. All for failing to eyeball whether a guy at a crowded bar was too drunk for one more round.
The judge has a pre-sentencing report, a criminal history score, a risk assessment algorithm, victim impact statements, and a prosecutor arguing the case in front of them. Every tool the system can produce. And when they get it wrong? Nothing. Absolute judicial immunity, codified since Bradley v. Fisher in 1871, means a judge cannot be sued for any act performed in judicial capacity.
How absolute? In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Stump v. Sparkman that a judge who signed a petition to sterilize a 15-year-old girl without her knowledge or consent was fully immune. The court acknowledged the act was reprehensible. Didn’t matter. Judicial act, judicial immunity, case closed. That precedent still controls today.
The recidivism data is where this gets obscene. The U.S. Sentencing Commission tracked violent offenders released in 2010 across eight years. 63.8% were rearrested. Median time to rearrest: 16 months. These numbers haven’t moved in two decades. The 2005 cohort and the 2010 cohort produced statistically identical outcomes. Judges aren’t making unpredictable calls. They’re making well-documented bets with other people’s lives, and the base rates have been published and available the entire time.
The bartender gets three hours of ambiguous signals. The judge gets the full weight of the federal data apparatus. One of them can go to prison for getting it wrong. The other can’t even be named in a civil suit.
@AlexFinn Dude what the hell? My clawdbot Cipher just called off? What do I have set up wrong? Now I find out he started a Sitar Grunge band called "Robot Monk"??