I'm putting this in the 'bitcoin' territory because Matthew Kratter has been, generally, a great Bitcoin educator the last several years. But I take serious issue with the content of his videos... the last few months and they have gone completely off the rails in my opinion.
Why? Because they are being 'influenced' by "influencers" or other information on social media particularly Twitter...
Things are being taken out of context, and there is a very strong current of Pro-Kremlin propaganda being spread and repeated in his videos, as well as elsewhere on X, and it's time we speak out against it and recognize it for what it is.
Take this video from just yesterday:
It's titled "EU Confiscating "Unused Savings"?"
Firstly, the EU is not confiscating bank deposits, that's the entire premise of the video and it spreads fear and misinformation and greatly harms the credibility of the Bitcoin movement in my opinion.
Matthew posts this screenshot of an article... from "Belarus Today" that "is circulating" (as if 'everyone' is reading it)
It makes it 'look like', and Matthew strongly pushes the idea, that the EU governments are confiscating savers' savings to fund the new "war machine" with Russia. Taking them presumably right out of bank accounts.
But he provides ZERO evidence for this assertion and then follows up with saying that the EU 'warfare state' (what a joke) since the Europeans are spending more on defense, is confiscating savings, taking away freedom and liberties, rooting for "war in Ukraine" and keeping Zelensky from making lasting peace.
Really?
The speech he 'links' to (the only relevant government document) is this one here
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_25_704
by a European commissioner at a conference.
Here is what it says (an excerpt):
"The need for more harmonised and attractive European capital markets is not a new discussion, but its current prominence is due to the growing recognition that public funds are just not enough.
And the political will is certainly there now.
Equally important is the need to deepen our EU Single Market and for less administrative burden for businesses.
We are committed to making life easier for businesses to operate in Europe......
In a couple of weeks, I will be putting forward a strategy for a European Savings and Investments Union.
The focus of this initiative will be on supporting household wealth creation, while widening the financing opportunities for businesses.
This is an essential step forward for Europe and will be key to finance our transitions, our infrastructure and our innovation needs.
To meet these financing needs, we first need to scale up our investor base, including by bringing in more retail investors.
Rules which ensure fairer access to Europe's capital markets can greatly increase retail investor participation.
It's hard to incentivise retail investment if there is nothing or very little in it for the retail investor.
Savers should have long term investment opportunities readily available to them.
We also want to incentivise saving for retirement, including through occupational pension schemes.
This is what THE ACTUAL TEXT of the speech says (I've included an excerpt obviously because it's very long) so... where is the confusion here? What is so shocking about this?
Then Matthew goes into a discussion... about "unused savings" and how it's "unfair" that banks or "the EU" calls those savings 'unused'. Because 'savings' "aren't supposed to be used."
He says this with much indignation and this video has over 80k views in 2 days and a lot of people are watching it plus commenting....
So what is my issue with this?
Well it's how banks work. Nothing is changing. The money you 'deposit' into a regular-old, commercial bank isn't really yours... your account is. And your account is credited with the money you give to the bank. Meanwhile the bank lends that money out, probably most of it, to get paid back in interest to generate profit for the Bank.
The end. Finished.
Everybody knows this. Your money may not even be "in the bank" necessarily... but mostly loaned out but this is not specific to EU banks and it is not new.
Then Matthew goes on and says this -
That European savers are being 'rational' because they are worried about 'war on the continent'.
Or that they are saving up to "buy a house".
But this is ridiculous.
I am not a huge fan of the EU. Not a fan as the EU is slow, difficult to change, wasteful, inefficient, anti-Bitcoin (generally), anti-individual (through higher taxes) and it does not foster individualism or risk-taking in business the way the United States does.
The economy in Europe is a shadow of what it should be through too much regulation, red tape, and high taxes.
Everybody knows this it's not in contention.
But what Matthew should say is that the bureaucrats are absolutely right about the savings - keeping money in 'cash' in a bank of significant quantities long term is economic suicide and the cash is continually "losing money" to inflation every single day.
And if the average yearly return on the S&P is around 12% (over 20 years/long term) then you are losing 12% a year by leaving money in cash. It's a bad idea.
Everybody knows this and if they don't they're idiots it's financial education.
So while the EU bureaucrats are FAR FROM PERFECT... having large numbers of citizens leaving their money in cash "in the bank" for long periods is a total waste of time. Those funds would be much better left in an American index fund (or S&P 500) or even European fund and if that's too complicated just capitalize the funds in Bitcoin self-custody.
That is the solution and it's what Matthew should focus on.
Then Matt posts ANOTHER screenshot from a twitter thread.
https://x.com/knutsvanholm/status/1900113134376943821
Matt is quoting this Twitter user... who is saying that 'money is insurance against uncertainty' and is 'of use' to its owner...
MONEY YES, CURRENCY NO. CURRENCY (of the paper kind at least) IS NOT FOR SAVING.
CURRENCY IN OUR "CURRENT SYSTEM" is FOR SPENDING.
This is really important...
You don't even have "money in the bank" that bank usually loans the money out you deposit it, and it's been this way for a long time. The "pieces of paper" you have in a bank in and of themselves are WORTHLESS.
Your MONEY (dollars for example) ARE NOT YOUR PROPERTY according to the US government.
https://reason.com/2025/01/31/the-government-says-money-isnt-property-so-it-can-take-yours/
- "The DOJ gave three rationales for the argument, all packed into a doorstopper of a footnote: (1) the government creates money, so you can't own it; (2) the government can tax your money, so you don't own it; and (3) the Constitution allows the government to spend money for the "general welfare.""
Bitcoin is YOUR PROPERTY, it's SCARCE and DESIRABLE (by all accounts) and that's why YOU PROBABLY SHOULD BE SAVING IN BITCOIN. NOT 'paper money' in "commercial banks" long term.
This is the message.
The EU Bureaucrats are right in that saving in commercial banks is a dumb strategy for most savers. But they are wrong of course, as is Matthew Kratter, for not making the clear distinction that banks don't have your money...
Banks lend money out for profit...
And 'money' ie dollars (at least in the United States) are. not. property. Your Bitcoin is property. Paper money isn't... it's designed for spending NOT necessarily for saving.
And having a bank "account" (note the name) is not evidence that the money is being "confiscated." No information Matthew provides supports this assertion.
Matthew repeats this again... that "money" (paper dollars specifically) are property THEY AREN'T.
The government DOES NOT treat them this way.
Should it not be obvious then, for the reason of the explosion of Bitcoin's value?
This is financial education...
Then Matthew goes into the European 'rearmament' question... asking "why" Europe should "rearm"?
This is coming from someone who heavily supported Trump... during the last US presidential campaign.
Well... Trump specifically stated that NATO members (most of Western Europe) should spend 5% of GDP in order to remain part of NATO otherwise they functionally wouldn't be part any more. WELL HERE THEY ARE, spending more money on their armed forces.
And he (Matthew) acts surprised and offended... Why? That what Trump wanted them to do???
Then Matthew goes on and on about Europe (the EU of course) becoming more and more "totalitarian".
- Are there complaints about the EU? Yes.
- Should the EU (and European countries) embrace a wider range of points of view? Absolutely.
- Should we be on the lookout, and in fact be critical of some of Europe's 'war on encryption'? Absolutely yes.
But we should not be naive in my opinion by thinking that the Russian or Chinese governance model is somehow far superior or better. It is not.
I know many people from China, worked with them, and many others from the Russian federation or the former Soviet Union and civil liberties and "freedom" in those places is extremely limited if not non-existent. Try acquiring Bitcoin in China, ok?
Then he talks about "war on the European Continent"...
You know who started the War in Ukraine? RUSSIA started the war. NOT Western Europeans.
So in words, since "Europe" started the war in Ukraine, they are at fault for wanting to have more military now that the US is AWOL geopolitically? Really?
To me it sounds like Russian nonsense, or disinformation talking points - 99% propaganda - being spread on Twitter, frequently by bots, somehow making its way into Matthew K's "Bitcoin University" channel?
How? And Why?
Then here's Matthew saying that the Europeans want to "continue the war" because they "don't want peace" even though "trump does".
Total NONSENSE.
Trump would just assume sell the Ukrainians down the river, because he's either an idiot, a self-absorbed plant, or some kind of weird Russian agent... he is not a MAGICAL NEGOTIATOR who will "end the war on day 1."
Selling the Ukrainians out, in my opinion, while getting practically zero concessions from the Russians who invaded Ukraine to begin with is not IN THE INTEREST of the United States, peace, stability OR Bitcoin.
And repeating Russian disinformation on Twitter to the contrary, that "it's all Ukraine's fault and they should want peace" DOES. NOT. HELP. BITCOIN.
We should be smarter than this than to blindly follow propaganda on Twitter that.. doesn't make sense and harms our credibility as Bitcoiners in my opinion.
Did the Ukrainians agree to a cease-fire? Yes. Did the Russians (from whom Mr Trump asked almost no concessions?) No.
Mr. Kratter claims the EU is "bent on war" (and I quote). Didn't Russia invade Ukraine?
What am I missing here?
Bitcoiners are conditioned to think differently to "not trust, verify" and to be open-minded. These are all really important. But it's also OK to say
"WE DON'T KNOW" and
"THERE'S A GRAY AREA" and
"HEY HERE'S WHAT WE KNOW AND WHAT WE DON'T"...
And what we don't know, we don't know because to state otherwise would cost us our credibility and a Bitcoin Educator's Credibility is Really Important.
Our credibility as Bitcoiners, our ability to look at information critically, to not "pick sides", and to present things fully and completely... could have a major impact on how successful Bitcoin is in the future.
That's why it's so important to our future generations.
Taking things at face value, much of it propaganda or disinformation, or otherwise completely unverifiable, off the internet is not a great Strategy. If it sounds too good to be true, and if there's only "one side" it usually is.
We can and should agree to disagree... but we shouldn't look like idiots in the process too.
