Bitcoin Could End ‘Like A Monopoly Game,’ Claims Wall Street Cassandra Michael Green

by

Ah, dear reader! Brace yourself, for what we have here is none other than the sage words of Michael Green, that elusive creature, a macro investor who has made a name for himself as the Cassandra of Passive Investing! His words drip with the wisdom of the ages as he sharpens his critique of the ever-mystical Bitcoin. It is, he insists, economically brittle and socially corrosive, setting the stage for an outcome where one glorious winner takes all – much like a game of Monopoly, or perhaps a twisted version of it. 😏

In an interview with Phil Rosen, the ever-curious journalist, Green reveals, with a tone almost of exasperation, that “the most important thing to understand is that Bitcoin has marketed itself as multiple different things to try to appeal to investors at various points in time.” Alas, the original dream of Bitcoin has slipped through the cracks like sand through the fingers of a medieval peasant. According to Green, under the sacred Satoshi white paper, BTC was supposed to be “a peer-to-peer payment system” – one that would set us free from the clutches of the banking establishment. “By moving to a distributed ledger and a peer-to-peer system,” Green says, “we’d get banks out of the system!” Oh, how sweet the thought of it all!

But, dear reader, alas, “That’s been a total failure,” Green declares, as he surveys the scene with a philosopher’s frown. He points out, with the air of someone who has seen through the ruse, that while Bitcoin is traded aplenty in speculative markets, the actual quantity of retail transactions or peer-to-peer payments is as rare as a unicorn in the wilds of Mordor.

And then, Green continues his unrelenting diatribe. He distinguishes between “money printing” by governments and the benign act of lending by banks. The former, he claims, is a sort of “do-over” for governments, smoothing over past mistakes by simply printing more money. But the latter, banks granting loans, creates new money without the need for such violent upheavals. “When a bank grants a $1,000 loan,” he says, “they simply create a new account called your checking account.” How quaint, how very civilized!

Now, Bitcoin, with its whimsical dreams of bypassing banks entirely, is not so charitable. “Bitcoin destroys the ability to do that,” Green asserts, with the cool, detached air of a man who has long since given up hope on this grand experiment. “It is effectively just a monetary system where Bitcoin is really a token paid to the accounting firms keeping the blockchain in order. Every Bitcoin out there is essentially a payment to Deloitte & Touche.” Imagine that! A world where accountants are the true masters of currency. What a delightful thought! 😂

Why Bitcoin Is Supposedly A ‘Monopoly Game’

“But wait!” cries Green, “There’s more!” Because Bitcoin’s supply is as fixed as the number of grains of rice in an ancient temple’s offering, no new money can ever be created. “No capacity for mistake forgiveness in that type of framework,” he notes, perhaps with the air of a man who’s watched too many Monopoly games end in tears. Without the ability to forgive mistakes, Green argues, the system is hopelessly “limiting” and utterly unfit for the real economy.

Then, with the heart of a true cynic, Green delivers his harshest criticism: the distribution of Bitcoin is as uneven as a medieval serf’s life. “Because we have a finite quantity,” he laments, “everyone born after the Bitcoin has been released is in deficit.” It’s like owning land in the 14th century that never belongs to you, forever under the control of some distant lord. And with no land to claim, dear reader, one can only imagine the bitter taste of inequality. 😩

Once a fervent believer, Green now looks upon Bitcoin with the weary eyes of a man who’s seen through the farce. “If you run through the simulation,” he claims, “Bitcoin plays like a Monopoly game.” And in this game, no new players can join, for they will be swiftly crushed under the weight of a broken system. How does Monopoly end? Oh, you know the answer-one single winner. And in Bitcoin’s case, that winner might just be the same as in Monopoly: someone who has bought up all the properties while you were too busy trying to trade your $100 bills for a utility company. 😅

Mike Green (@profplum99) embraced bitcoin early but now he doesn’t see it as an asset that democratizes wealth.

He shared his latest thoughts on $BTC, and why it could end like a winner-take-all Monopoly game.

– Phil Rosen (@philrosenn) November 24, 2025

As Green points out, this “increased concentration” of Bitcoin wealth leads to a “Gini coefficient beyond anything we’ve ever seen in the real world.” In other words, Bitcoin has done the opposite of democratizing wealth – it’s locked the door behind it. A cruel irony, indeed. Perhaps one day, we shall look back on Bitcoin and say, “Well, that was a game we should never have played.” 😂

At press time, Bitcoin was trading at a dazzling $87,589. Who could have guessed?

Read More

2025-11-26 06:15