<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>Ava wrote</title><author_name>Ava (npub1f6…azcka)</author_name><author_url>https://yabu.me/npub1f6ugxyxkknket3kkdgu4k0fu74vmshawermkj8d06sz6jts9t4kslazcka</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://yabu.me</provider_url><html>I don&#39;t see it that way. The Bailey Building &amp; Loan is actually closer to Bitcoin ideals—it&#39;s decentralized (family-owned), transparent about where money goes, and serves the community instead of extracting wealth upward.&#xA;&#xA;Potter&#39;s the real villain representing what Bitcoiners hate: centralized control and rent-seeking. He&#39;s crony capitalism meets central banking.&#xA;&#xA;George&#39;s speech about money staying in the community vs going to Potter? That&#39;s anti-fractional reserve. He&#39;s saying their deposits go into real assets (homes and loans) that support the community, not speculation. &#xA;&#xA;When people can&#39;t pay their loans, George doesn&#39;t kick them out—he believes in them, and even uses his own honeymoon money to keep the community afloat—and out of the hands of Potter.&#xA;&#xA;The movie isn&#39;t banking propaganda—it shows productive community lending vs parasitic wealth extraction. George&#39;s model is much closer to peer-to-peer than Potter&#39;s centralized empire.</html></oembed>