i really don't recommend borrowing against your bitcoin and paying interest just spend/sell coins as needed yes i understand the numbers but consider the human psychology element of it, and the track record of fiat system which you put your coins in to get these margin loans. debt is slavery and debt based systems got us into this mess to begin with

Replies (27)

bnc-sound's avatar
bnc-sound 1 month ago
If weren’t for giving up custody, borrowing against BTC in cases where you *could* pay in full makes clear financial sense. 1. If your ability to service the debt were to falter, you’d just pay off the loan. 2. If the interest on the loan is less than the rate of monetization of BTC, you’re going to come out ahead. (That is, you’ll have more Bitcoin remaining.) It is the giving up of custody that makes it a non-starter for me.
Jose Sammut's avatar
Jose Sammut 1 month ago
What if there's a business interest? Worst case you get liquidated and you don't have to pay back the loan. Just the same as if you sold. I understand what you mean, I don't think it's wise to use future roi to cope on overconsumption.
While I'd probably never engage in this behavior, I support is wholeheartedly. Getting a Fiat loan with BTC collateral means that Fiat inflation (money supply) has increased. This promotes BTC's price, which pays off the loan. The more people do this, the more Fiat is degraded and BTC is pumped... I.e. this is exactly the speculative attack scenario:
Empka's avatar
Empka 1 month ago
Liquidation might be a taxable event, depending on tax laws where you live.
First there is no borrowing involved, as one is giving away something of a higher value, second of you do that you are paying interest on your own stash, third you are often paying higher interest than just getting a bank credit. Yes don't do that it is stupid and people are being played.
The_Crin's avatar
The_Crin 1 month ago
borrow sats, only for the value of bitcoin to rise overnight, causing the debt to grow exponentially? no thanks
While I agree in principle about not participating in fiat games I have realized two things about this that changed my mind. 1. If my loan is fully backed I'm never in debt. I can be liquidated, which is the worst case scenario, but I keep the capital from the loan and don't owe anything if that happens. 2. By doing this it accelerates the end of fiat.
BTC_P2P's avatar
BTC_P2P 1 month ago
I borrowed against some of my stack for a venture at 50k. Had I sold instead of borrowing cash against my 2.5x over collateralized multi sig fiat loan I would have way less bitcoin right now. I was able to do something productive, write off interest payments on my taxes, and keep my stack in tact. Win.
bnc-sound's avatar
bnc-sound 1 month ago
For sure. It wasn’t clear to me if @utxo the webmaster 🧑‍💻 was taking issue with leverage, or with debit service. I think borrowing is smart under the right circumstances: - could pay it all back at any point - can afford to service the debt - the thing you’re *not* selling will appreciate faster than the debt service cost
Junghwan's avatar
Junghwan 1 month ago
exactly. Save in Bitcoin self-custody and use it when necessary
BTC_P2P's avatar
BTC_P2P 1 month ago
I knew that was a risk and was prepared to add collateral if necessary. The lending service I used wouldn’t auto liquidate, they give loanee’s the chance to add collateral if necessary. Bitcoin tends to go up more than it goes down, historically, so the odds are like 3/4 that it’s the right call to borrow against your stack based on historic price action. Results never guaranteed though.
It is not that they do not like it, it is that they are not aware that it can happen, especially on price spikes. The fake borrowing scheme hides the fact that what you are actually doing is marging trading. When NGU you are good, when NGD you will loose more then simply selling what you had when you needed the money.