The Breakdown - Gov't Stimulus Goes BIG and Why Bitcoin Is the Only Truly Free Market, Feat. Dan Tapiero

Episode Date: March 17, 2020

President Trump and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin announced a significant slate of upcoming stimulus measures, including deferred taxes and direct payments to Americans (although those details remain to be seen).  On this episode of The Breakdown, 10T holdings CEO Dan Tapiero joins to discuss: How this forthcoming stimulus might impact the bitcoin narrative Why some traditional safe havens like bonds might not fair well in the coming markets while others like gold are poised to thrive  Why markets could be positioning for a major bounce back Why the Fed has more tools in its toolkit than popular media and opinion are suggesting  Why the dollar’s global strength is a major concern  Why bitcoin is the only truly free market in the world

Welcome back to The Breakdown, an everyday analysis breaking down the most important stories in Bitcoin, crypto, and beyond, with your host, NLW. The Breakdown is distributed by CoinDesk. Welcome back to The Breakdown. It is Tuesday, March 17th, St. Patrick's Day, and we're all inside, because the bars and restaurants are closed, which is a good thing. We are, as a country, finally taking this coronavirus seriously. yesterday was the day. It seems that we acknowledge that from a medical perspective today was a big markets day. Just before we recorded this special interview episode with Dan Tapiero, President Trump and Steve Mnuchin got on TV to discuss a raft of different stimulus. And

this includes a delay on IRS payments that are going to come do. This includes an attempt to get direct stimulus into the hands of Americans within the next two weeks, according to Mnuchin. The summary of this all was Trump saying they want this to go big. They don't want to have the same conversation every couple days. They want to go big. So big time stimulus in coming, which sets up a pretty perfect segue for my guest. My guest today is Dan Tapiero.

He is the CEO and managing partner of 10T Holdings, which is a new fund designed to own private equity in companies operating in the digital asset ecosystem. He's a managing partner at DTAP Capital Advisors, which is a global macro investment fund that he launched in 2004. And he's also the co-founder and board member of Gold Bullion International. So he's been around this ecosystem for a while. He's been around the macro ecosystem for much longer. And interestingly, Dan's perspective is as someone who has had a number of different encounters with Bitcoin, but really over the last year has come to be a stalwart supporter of its long-term potential. So in our conversation, we talk about his reaction to the most recent announcements from the administration around coronavirus.

We talk about the long-term potential of bond markets and how they might be seeding some of their safe haven role and what that could mean for both gold and Bitcoin. And we talk a lot about just what has and hasn't changed in the context of this crisis. And if I had to sum it up, I would say that Dan thinks in a lot of ways that the things that he was scared about before in terms of the long-term health of the economy haven't gone away. They're just being kicked down the road a little bit to potentially after the election and after a massive wave of stimulus. In the same way, the things that get him excited about Bitcoin as a differentiated new monetary system for the world haven't changed at all either. And in fact, a lot of his mantra is that Bitcoin remains the only true

free market in the world. It's a really interesting interview that I hope you enjoy as much as I had fun recording it. Now, a couple notes. One, the quality isn't the best on this one. We had some issues with the recording software. So just know that going into it. I apologize. I always try to have a little bit higher quality, but hopefully you can deal with it. And like I said, my apologies. second, as always with interviews, these are minimally edited to better capture the flow and cadence of our conversation. And third and finally, as always, nothing that we discuss should be taken as any sort of financial advice. But if all that said, let's dive into this conversation. All right, we are here with Dan Tapiero. Dan, thank you so much for joining today.

My pleasure. We were going to do this conversation and kick it off basically to talk about what we've seen over the last couple weeks, you know, in the markets, particularly in the context of this safe haven narrative around Bitcoin, which was obviously a speculative narrative around gold. But, you know, sitting from where you sit, what has surprised you or not surprised you about the last couple weeks as the market have finally really responded to the threat of coronavirus? Well, I mean, as we were just talking about before a little bit, I would have preferred, of course, Bitcoin not to have gone down to where it is. I don't think it's violated anything in having done so. And I would say the same thing about gold, you know, at 1530 right now.

Again, it touched up at 1700. But within the context of things, okay, it's down from the high, but it's still, if you've been long as a hedge in your portfolio, So if you're, let's just say, a traditional, you have a traditional institutional allocation and you have equities and you have bonds and you have some gold in there as well. I think that the gold from a few months ago is held up quite well. I think it might even still be up on the year or close to it. And Bitcoin, you know, Bitcoin, I think Bitcoin is an early, it's an early asset or an immature asset or a developing asset. But I don't really believe that it trades closely in a tick-for-tick way. That's something like golds or bond would, bonds would with the stock market.

There are so many different developing narratives. And sometimes people think that they're developed. And, you know, they're not. Bitcoin, yes, there's one aspect to Bitcoin that it, acts as a hedge, but it's a hedge to, you know, a complete breakdown of the existing system led by a debasement of the currency. You know, if we entered a period where the dollar, for instance, had started to lose, people had started to lose faith in the dollar, you know, maybe then you'd have some sort of knock-on effect. But I don't think, you know, I don't, and then there's that, that

digital gold narrative as well. You know, I don't think Bitcoin trades tightly with any of those things. It's its own thing in its own world. And, you know, it develops over time on its own pace, its own rhythm. And if those are just two of the narratives, and I've said this before about Bitcoin, you know, there are probably 18 others that are supportive of Bitcoin that people are not focusing on right now. Look, this was clearly a margin, you know, a liquidation, and we've seen this, and I've seen this many times before, 97, 98, 01, 02, you know, 07, 08, 11, you know, where it's, you know, risk off everybody, you know, someone, some of the big hedge funds get margin calls, they're overexposed, they're leverage, they're trying to make money for their investors

on a week-by-week, month-by-month basis, and, you know, they get stopped out, and sometimes these stopouts are severe. And in this case, you know, I think it probably impacted Bitcoin a little bit. But I don't, you know, I think it's just temporary that these are not, you know, these These are not the dominant narratives that drive and have driven Bitcoin over time. So it's just that there are periods where, you know, the panic and liquidity and the lack of liquidity and the VIX up at 90, where people will say, you know, I'm nervous about all my exposure and indiscriminately sell. So it's your question about hedges, et cetera. I think the bonds obviously worked well, but I think we're entering a new period where bonds probably are not going to act as a hedge for your portfolio in a period where you have a protracted slowdown. And that is because I do believe that the bonds, and I mean five years and 10 years and 30 years, will have a problem getting below zero if we ever get down to lower levels, even 30, 40, 50 basis.

points, I think is strong resistance for bonds. Getting yields below there just becomes, it becomes a non-economic, I would call it, it's not a business proposition to buy, you know, 10 years at 30 basis points. The risk reward is dramatically skewed against you. And I think that that's one of the things over the next few years that we will have to grapple with us, you know, investors, in the marketplace, especially people who have more traditional portfolios where they have a 70% let's say equity rating, a waiting and a 30% bond waiting. You know, in a protracted slowdown where equities do not return what they have for the last 10 years, your bonds will not act as the hedge that they have.

Because when we get close to that zero yield, they will have a hard time going up anymore. And I think that plays into a new narrative that's developing around gold, which is to say that once we recover from this, you know, this, the virus spike down, which I think will be sooner than most sink, in terms of a knee jerk back up, I think you start to have this discussion about, well, if things slow over a longer period and the fact that you're going to be a continues to pump and we continue to get fiscal spending, what can act as the hedge in my portfolio? And I think gold, in theory, has an unlimited upside. And bonds do not. The upside for bonds from here is capped. And so I think that's an interesting new narrative. Bitcoin probably benefits a little bit from that too. But, you know, we're both on Twitter. You read a lot about, you know, people complaining about why isn't, you know, Bitcoin acting as a better head. This is a – it was supposed to perform now, and it's not performing, so it's failed.

I mean, all of that is just total nonsense. Bitcoin, as I said, it's getting impacted by this stuff. But what's happened, what's transpired by no means, frankly to me, changes anything about the much bigger. picture thesis, that Bitcoin is part of an emerging new value protocol, value layer for the internet, that the ecosystem that's been building up around Bitcoin will continue to grow. It's a very vibrant space. I don't think anything's changed. you know, I mean, I could go on more about that.

But I think that's to your answers, your question about the hedge aspect. Yeah, I agree. I mean, I think that a couple interesting things that I want to tease out from what you said. First is when we have these conversations about safe havens, we kind of use this term as though it had a single specific meaning that we all knew, understood, and agreed upon. rather than having inherently both a context, right, safe haven against what, and two, a time scale, right, on what time scale? And I think this is a lot of what the, a lot of the frustrated conversation has been, I thought that this narrative meant that stocks go down, you know, orange coin number go up. And, you know, in fact, the only thing I think in some ways that has slowed that, that narrative rebound or relash and ask people to take a deeper look has been the fact that other things like gold as well have gone down, although clearly not as much as Bitcoin. And obviously, that's opened up a conversation about, you know, just the dynamics of this particular crash and what it means when everyone has to go to liquidity.

I think another point that some have made is that, you know, a lot of folks have been out there for the last couple years evangelizing the idea that big institutions and big holders should have, you know, they should get off zero, right, to use the mortgage-preak phrase, to get that 1% allocation. Well, guess what? In a difficult time, if that worked and those people got bought in, even if, and this is, I think, a really important piece, too, even if they have incredible conviction, you know, sometimes your conviction doesn't matter, and you just have to be able to cover your obligation, right? Obligation outweighs conviction in the short term. And so I feel like in the one narrative upshot is that in the same way that this may be shaking out kind of some short-termism in the market of Bitcoin holders, it's also just allowing us

to get to a slightly more sophisticated conversation about. what these narratives actually mean, which I think is important for the long-term development of this asset. So, but then the question comes, and this, I guess, is the other piece of what you were discussing is what happens on the other side of this, right? Because that's really what you're talking about when you talk about a new narrative emerging around gold or other safe havens when bonds can't act in that way any further. You know, so just before we recorded this, President Trump and Steve Mnuchin came on to and did a press conference about their, you know, they literally used the phrase over and over and over again. We want to go big on the stimulus, right? We don't want to have the same conversation every couple of days. We want to go big. It seems to me that that's sort of what you're discussing when you're saying there's going to be, there is going to be this other side. And on the other side, there's going to be a new set of narratives emerging that potentially position these assets in a pretty different way. Yeah, look, I will say one thing about your comment about short term. I think that attempting to trade Bitcoin in the short term is impossible. And, you know, people who do it well, that's wonderful, and I'm happy for them.

I've traded hundreds of assets over the last 30 years on every time frame you can imagine. and I just think Bitcoin at this point is, you know, as the narratives are still developing, it's not clear what it trades off of on a short-term basis. And so I think it's just hard to know. I think most people will end up losing. I think the only strategy is to get off zero, make your allocation, you know, in the case of that, you know, that narrative, of get off zero to go to 1%. You know, I think institutions should be doing that now.

I think 5,000 is a fine price. I think looking at this and trying to figure out why it moves moment to moment and, you know, who's pushing it or this guy who runs this exchange is driving this or that, I think that's pointless. So having that stepping back and having that medium-term perspective, that to me is the only way that you can have a successful allocation here. In terms of going forward, look, the one thing that's very clear to me is that, you know, Trump does not want to lose this election.

I thought even a month or two ago, and on Real Vision, September, October, I did a short little interview for Raul, not the Bitcoin one, but another one on macro, where I said, look, you know, the market may have some bumps early in the year, but I think going to the election, Trump will throw everything at it. So now that's what's going on. And they have a lot of levers to pull. People who say, oh, the Fed's out of bullets. That's complete nonsense.

They went to zero. But there are many things that they could do. One helpful thing would be if they, for instance, were able to pull. peg the mortgage rate, let's say the 30-year mortgage rate down at one and a half or two percent. The spreads of mortgage mortgages to treasuries have blown out back to the levels of 08. That's clearly inappropriate. I think, you know, a one and a half or two percent pegged mortgage rate would do wonders for the population. You know, there's so many things they could do. As you said, they just came out and they say they're going big with all sorts of, you know,

fiscal, pulling all sorts of fiscal levers. I just, I think it's bad now. You know, things are shut. I'm here in Greenwich, Connecticut. And, you know, I was in the city recently, and it is closed. And there's a curfew in New Jersey, which seems crazy to me. But, you know, activity is really stopping. On the other hand, my friends in Hong Kong are all back to work.

and the same thing on the mainland, more or less. And we've gotten through this virus in China with, let me just say, only 3,000 deaths. That's out of 80,000 cases in a population of 1.3 billion. People say, oh, well, they were very quick to handle things. Well, regardless, a month ago, everyone was thinking there would be hundreds of thousands of Chinese who were going to die. Well, the number ended up being 3,000, and the cases now are very small. So I understand we're still sort of in the early part of this, but there are a lot of things that Trump will do to hit the system in the short to medium term. So I would not be surprised if the markets were to stabilize and do significantly better, maybe not as of today, but potentially, you know, there's a chance that the low is in for Bitcoin at 3, 300, for the S&P.

I don't really, I don't think there's much value for me in, you know, making a call. I don't get anything out of it. You know, I manage my own. And, you know, I don't need to do that. But certainly over the next few weeks, I think there will be enough pipeline stimulus monitoring fiscal that things could stabilize. And Trump will have, I think will have as good a. a backdrop into the election as he's going to need and want. Look, he's the first president that I know of, that I remember,

who, you know, actually knows where the S&P 500 is, who has an actual view on interest rate settings. You know, people hate this guy. I get they don't like his character. I get all that. But, you know, put that to the side. And if you look at his comments about, you know, the Fed, he's been right on.

Powell has been asleep at the wheel. I think he's been one of the weaker Fed chairman that we've had, not really that sensitive to the markets on a live real-time basis. He doesn't really, he didn't really have a strong macro markets background. I mean, people can argue about that. And you see Trump pressuring him. In most cases, he's been right on. He may not like his delivery, but he's been right on.

So I think that, you know, my bet is he's going to make sure things are humming into the election. I'm more worried about after the election and next year, and I have been. Remember, a lot of the market action was happening before the virus hit, right? And I think what made this doubly bad was the oil. oil shock. And, you know, it may not have been as bad as it was. I mean, to have the second worst day in the history of the Dow, right, that down 13 percent day, VIX at 90, that's, you know, that's destruction of wealth. That's destruction in liquidity. The credit market's more or less seized up. Things were not trading. That's bad. It might not have been as bad without,

without that one, two whammy. And then, as we know, from last year, you know, things were already starting to slow down. China was slowing down as a result of the, you know, the trade games being played back and forth. Europe was slowing. It's just this was a catalyst to really create a panic. And so I think, you know, we will be through this more quickly. And you know what? If they've overdone the stimulus in the next few weeks, that's just fine, right?

You need short-term measures to offset what will be a massive contraction in GDP. The central bank, you know, should be doing. And I think right now more or less is doing what it should be doing. It can be more aggressive. But I think it is – the central banks really – This is one of the main reasons that a central bank was invented, which is to lean against, you know, exogenous, non-economic bolts out of the blue. And this is one.

So I'm a little more positive, you know, on like a three-and-six-month view. I think, you know, potentially a little more turbulence here. And if things, if I'm wrong in the short term and things get a lot worse, you know, there's still levers that we can pull. And I floated something yesterday on Twitter that I always think that the officials have in their back pocket. And Trump has mentioned this, and he mentioned it last year, is that, you know, they could make an explicit policy change on the dollar. The dollar has been too strong. It's been overvalued for a while based on any metric.

And, you know, I think if you, if Trump and he's mentioned this before, I tweeted this article that came out last year that went into, you know, his view about this and how it would work. But, you know, not that difficult, not that long ago, well, maybe I guess it is long ago now, but in the 90s and 2000s, there used to be intervention in the currency markets all the time. You know, if it's really bad and, you know, the strong dollar is, you know, is a reflection of deflationary pressure. And if it's really continuing to go up, I think they could reverse and make a strong statement and even intervene in the dollar and sell dollars and they could sterilize them or unsterilize them. I only mention that just to say that there are a lot of tools out there and they weren't on it, let's say, a month or two ago, and they are on it now. So I think that changes the risk-reward dynamic of owning assets generally. So for those who haven't kind of gamed this way out the way you have,

tell me just a little bit more about why your worry is, it sounds like more fundamental. right after the election when this has passed or at least, you know, mostly passed or has become contained. What makes you nervous in that longer term horizon? Well, I think that because I have, I've had a strong belief and I still do that Trump pulls forward a lot of stimulus into the election and we sort of have a hangover afterwards. Like, you know, it's, and look, you see it with the Fed too. The Fed is doing a lot, and I think the pressure will be on for them to continue doing it.

Let me just say one thing about the dollar again. I mean, a year ago, if you'd said to me, okay, the Fed is going to cut to zero. And again, in that interview, I suggested that two years could probably get down to 40, 50 basis points. This is in October, okay, October, November. And, you know, I was sort of on a similar scene, but not as cataclysmic as Raoul. but, you know, still pretty, pretty focused on the slowdown. You know, I would have said the dollar would have started to weaken with a zero-fed funds rate. I think the fact that it hasn't weakened just tells you that there isn't enough liquidity out there.

So for me, like, I will know that policy is working. week and that liquidity is plentiful and that dollars are plentiful when the price starts to go down of the dollar. And so I'm still kind of nervous about that, that that's how we'll know that stimulus is hitting the system. Do you follow what I'm saying there, vis-a-vis the dollar? Yeah, yeah, but play it out the little bit. I want to make sure one of the things that I'm trying really hard to do with this podcast is, you know, one of the things I love about Bitcoin is that the audience comes from every different background, right? And so there's a lot of folks who are not from a financial or a market's background. So I don't think you can over-explain

for our purposes. Okay. You know, what would that mean vis-a-vis Bitcoin? I mean, look, it should be generally positive, but, you know, I hate to try to link macro, macro, uh, action or activity or event or price action directly with Bitcoin. Bitcoin is good for many, many different reasons that have nothing to do with any of this stuff. And trying to trade Bitcoin off of Fed easing or, you know, the dollar or all this stuff on a shorter term basis, I just don't think works. I do think that there is some connection with gold in a way and I think gold is entering the next phase of a big bull run

and part of it will be that I think bonds again in a way in the next year or two I think cease to become an acid class in the way that we've known it that they're losing their, you know, their function as a hedge, but also, you know, the asset class will become unproductive, right? Like, no one is buying bun's tenure buns at minus 50 basis points expecting to make money. So, you know, at 30 basis points, I just don't know who's going to be buying bonds, It's government bonds at those yields.

And I think, you know, that's a place where Bitcoin potentially, I don't think, you know, look, gold is a $10 trillion asset class. You have, you know, almost $16, $17 trillion of negative yielding debt. You know, if gold prices were to double, you have a $20 trillion asset class. Bitcoin is just too small right now to matter. in that framework, in that world. But look, I think, you know, I think we can get to a price of $200,000 on Bitcoin in, you know, 10 years from now.

Long term, I'm super bullish. And, you know, sometimes it will trade off of these macro things, and sometimes it'll trade off of other things. You know, look, I think, for instance, Bitcoin has tremendous value as a security network. You know, and I talked about this in that interview, a truth machine. You know, there's nothing like this that has ever existed before. How do you put a value on that, you know, vis-a-vis bonds or gold or these are traditional

assets that, you know, where cash is deposited. Bitcoin is the future. It's, you know, I mean, as I said, I think there are probably 20 different things that go into, that could go into valuing or in trying to come up with what Bitcoin is worth. I think there are 20 things you could add up to equal that value. And those 20 things have nothing to do with all the other assets. Right? So, you know, the first really, truly global asset, you know, with rails across the entire world, the ability for it to replace Swift, which is a free internet, you know, payment system.

I mean, it's a joke that we still use Swift, ACH, all that stuff. You know, the Bitcoin network, I think, eventually replaces all of that. That's worth trillions of dollars. I mean, imagining building something from scratch that is going to replace the existing payment system. I mean, it would cost trillions of dollars. So that kind of proposition has nothing to do with the macro. It's just that it's early, right? And it just at some point, Bitcoin trades off of certain things.

And other times it trades off of other things. and I think trying to figure out what that is in the very short term is nearly impossible. It sounds like if I had to sum up your feelings almost kind of across the board about the different things that we've talked about today, a lot of it has to do with this. The fundamental things that you had been worried about before this coronavirus crash are still in place, just as incorporating more of a stimulus hangover. And the fundamentals of what gets you excited about, the assets that you're excited about,

including Bitcoin, are also still in place, even if they're now have to wade through this from a narrative and a real perspective as well. Yeah, I think that's exactly right. And, you know, if we hadn't had the virus, we still would have had the oil shock. And I'll tell you, I mean, I don't know, you don't hear more about,

this, but the combination of it, I mean, that oil basically haveed in a matter of weeks. And, you know, we might have had maybe not quite as much destruction, but we would have had a wipeout regardless. I mean, if there had been no virus, just on that. I mean, it was a direct attack by Russia and Saudi to put our frackers out of business. I mean, it's, you know, and look, if there hadn't been the virus to focus on, we would have been hearing a lot more about that. The fact of the matter is the two together was certainly enough to create this wipeout. But I think there are offsets, right?

We are doing things now. The Fed was delayed. The U.S., the Treasury and Trump were a little delayed with stimulus measures. But again, in the short and medium term, policy action can really work. So, you know, maybe all of this was just pulled forward. You know, we were slowing. Things would have corrected. It just became more severe.

And our response will become more severe. And so I think that we're right in the teeth of the most panicky, most panic-y, most panicked moment. And look, the VIX at 90 says that. I'm not, you know, I'm not, that's as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, as, you know, it's as, as, is, you know, they're on that. You know, it could go a little higher. You know, in that, uh, in that, uh, in that press conference just now. He was itching to get off to go do his work. And I'm sure he's on the phone with all the relevant players on Wall Street, you know, all the relevant players at the Fed and around the world. And they get it. This is this is this is the time when a centralized government response is needed and is actually valid. You know, I'm

I'm a small government guy. You know, I'm a less is better. And but this is, you know, if there ever were a valid reason for big government, this is it. Right. So I think we're going to be all right. All right. Now, one final question that I had for you or one final point that I wanted to discuss. You had a tweet the other day that absolutely popped off that was about why,

Bitcoin is so different in the fact that it was going to just continue on, regardless of, you know, it didn't need government intervention continue. Could you share a little bit about what inspired that tweet and maybe just a little bit more on it? Yeah. I mean, look, I think, again, I've been involved in the markets for 30 years. And I remember when markets more or less traded freely or as much as they could, certainly in the 90s, when there wasn't as much intervention, I think there's tremendous government intervention in the traditional markets all the time, all over the place, whether it's directly or whether it's stealthily. And Bitcoin, to me, and I said, is only truly free, you know, a free market, the only asset class that trades freely without

government intervention. And, you know, some people said, oh, well, you know, so-and-so, you know, manipulates Bitcoin, and there's a whole group of people out there that, you know, the whales, they manipulated. That's not the point. There are always bigger players in markets that can move markets. What I was saying was that you have something like Bitcoin goes down 50% in two days, okay and it's stabilized and i think that was probably it the fact that it could stabilize um and still

be what 30 percent above below from last year i mean where did it trade last year 3 000 you've got down to 3 400 or something it's it's still what 40 50 percent above where it was um without any government intervention it just shows you how powerful it is um And it is, I think, the only truly free trading market. I think that's important. If the markets were to close, the other markets, now I don't see this now, but if things got really bad and they decided to shut the markets for a few days, Bitcoin would not close. You know, Bitcoin will be 24-7. I think that would be a very powerful indicator to people around the world to show its strength.

So anyway, I just, you know, a lot of people, especially the short-term people complaining that Bitcoin had failed, that it hadn't, you know, it hadn't achieved its function, which was to act as a hedge. All of that, I think, is nonsense. It's a free trading asset. It will trade to the price that it wants to trade based on what players in the market want to do. And there just aren't, there aren't markets like that. debt in the world anymore. So people should be aware that, you know, its stability and its recovery, even at this price, are a positive sign. So that was my son. I couldn't agree more. I think it's another really powerful reminder of the same theme that we discussed before of fundamentals, right? and what short-term shifts make you think about fundamentals. And fundamentals are different than narratives, right? It's not a narrative that Bitcoin changes all the time. It's just the truth.

And in fact, the fact of it itself in some way provides resiliency against narratives, right? I saw a bunch of people pop up right away and said, hey, maybe crypto needs circuit breakers the other day. And it's a terrible idea. Let me tell you. That is a terrible idea. And I saw the guy who suggested that he probably had a horrible moment. mark to market and it is fun. But you know what?

That's the old world. That's the old legacy fiat, mark to market week to week nonsense. This is a much bigger structural once in a generation, if more, type of asset and type of development. So I think that would be a horrible idea to start imposing, you know,

limitations. on Bitcoin from the legacy world. I tend to agree, and I think a lot of folks do as well. Well, Dan, thanks again so much for your time. It's been a really great conversation, tons of food for thought for our listeners. Where can people find you online if they want to hear more about your thoughts on all this? Twitter, where the Bitcoin crypto world lives, right? I mean, that's where it is.

It's all on Twitter. And this man is at DTAPCAP, and we'll share this in the post as well. So thanks again, Dan. I really appreciate the time. Great chatting. As I mentioned in the beginning, I think Dan has a very different perspective than many of the commentators I see watching the markets right now, not least of which in the fact that it's a much longer duration sort of opinion.

I think it's informed by a longer longitudinal look at things than just what's happening right now. The same time, I think that we might find that depending on how markets react to this raft of stimulus, he might end up looking more like a leading indicator of some of the narratives we're about to see. So in any case, really interesting stuff, and I really appreciate Dan's time and him taking the time to be here. That's it for today's episode of The Breakdown, guys. I'm going to continue to be breaking down what I see as the larger context in which not just crypto and not just Bitcoin, but everything is operating.

So until tomorrow, I hope that you are having a great time social distancing. Happy St. Paddies. Catch you soon.