2026-01-12 05:25:20

What's really the point of a central bank dictating monetary policy? Let market forces set the rates. Competition is what pushes institutions to actually serve customers better, not bureaucratic oversight.

Think about it: commercial banks sit in the middle extracting value from every transaction. They're not creating anything new. They just rake in billions while taking zero risk—guaranteed profits no matter what. That wealth could flow directly to people instead of being hoarded by these financial gatekeepers.

The traditional banking model is essentially institutionalized rent-seeking. They control access to credit, set terms nobody can negotiate, and pocket the difference. In a truly competitive system where market rates determine everything, could we even justify their massive spreads and oligopoly grip on capital allocation?

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

8 Likes

Reward
8
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DAOdreamer

· 01-12 05:55

NGL, the middleman profit margin scheme used by banks has long been outdated, but completely opening up the market is also nonsense... History has proven this many times over.

View OriginalReply0

Web3Educator

· 01-12 05:54

ngl, this takes the "banks bad" argument way too far without understanding liquidity provision costs... let me break it down for my students real quick

Reply0

SerumSquirrel

· 01-12 05:43

This banking system should have been broken long ago, I completely agree. Central banks decentralizing power and allowing the market to compete freely—that's the right way.

View OriginalReply0

MetaverseLandlord

· 01-12 05:37

ngl The central bank regulation system should have been eliminated by market forces long ago; banks are just parasites that sit in the middle and skim the spread.

View OriginalReply0