Boston University Economists Clash in Epic Cryptocurrency Debate: Risks vs. Revolutionary Potential
By Staff Reporter | December 20, 2025
In a riveting intellectual showdown at Boston University, two star economists squared off over the merits and pitfalls of cryptocurrency, sparking a debate that cuts to the heart of modern finance. Hosted by fellow BU professor Martin Fiszbein, the discussion pits Tarek Hassan, a macro-finance expert, against David Lagakos, a specialist in development economics, in what Larry Kotlikoff, another BU economics heavyweight, has dubbed “The Great Boston University Cryptocurrency Debate.”[1]
Two Perspectives on Crypto’s Future
Kotlikoff, known for his sharp critiques of virtual currencies, sets the stage in his Substack post. He views cryptocurrencies as “dominated assets,” likening them to lottery tickets rather than sound investments. With over 20,000 such “assets” flooding the market, Kotlikoff warns of rampant speculation and inherent risks, a stance he has reiterated in prior writings.[1]
On one side, Hassan argues that crypto perpetuates an “obvious con job,” echoing Kotlikoff’s concerns about volatility, scams, and lack of intrinsic value. Commenters on Kotlikoff’s post have praised this view, with one reader expressing deep worry over crypto’s risks and calling for alternatives like a national real-time payment system for the U.S. dollar, superior to volatile stablecoins.[1]
Lagakos, however, champions cryptocurrency as a transformative force, particularly for people in developing countries. He sees it as a financial revolution offering unprecedented access to banking, remittances, and wealth storage in regions plagued by unstable fiat currencies and limited infrastructure. This optimistic outlook highlights crypto’s potential to democratize finance on a global scale.[1]
The Debaters: Titans of Economics
Tarek Hassan, whose research spans international finance, macro-finance, and the social drivers of economic growth, brings rigorous data to his skepticism. David Lagakos counters with expertise in macroeconomics and development economics, emphasizing real-world applications in emerging markets. Moderator Martin Fiszbein, another BU standout, ensures a balanced and dynamic exchange.[1]
Kotlikoff, a prolific economist and BU professor, praises all three as “brilliant” exceptions to the stereotype of economists lacking personality. His endorsement underscores the debate’s quality, making it must-listen content for anyone navigating the crypto landscape.[1]
Broader Context: Crypto as Doomsday Hedge?
The debate arrives amid ongoing crypto volatility. In a related Substack piece, Jonathan Treussard explores Bitcoin as a potential “doomsday hedge.” He posits that in a global financial meltdown—say, a U.S. dollar collapse amid nuclear crisis or systemic failure—Bitcoin’s decentralized structure could shine. Without trusted institutions, crypto might enable resource pooling and transactions when traditional systems fail, though Treussard warns of dystopian risks like unchecked power in decentralized networks.[2]
This perspective adds nuance to Lagakos’s developmental arguments, suggesting crypto’s value extends beyond everyday use to extreme scenarios. Yet, skeptics like Kotlikoff and Hassan counter that such hedges are speculative gambles, prone to manipulation and collapse.[1][2]
Kotlikoff’s Influence in Economic Discourse
Larry Kotlikoff’s platform amplifies the debate. A frequent commentator on fiscal policy, inflation, and personal finance, he has warned of America’s dire fiscal shape—worse than Italy’s—and critiqued intergenerational wealth transfers as a “Ponzi scheme.”[3][5] His podcasts and columns, from AI’s economic impact to energy futures, position him as a thought leader blending academia with public discourse.[4][6]
In one interview, Kotlikoff dissected inflation dynamics post-2008, noting the Federal Reserve’s money supply explosion could fuel hyperinflation if velocity rebounds. He urges caution for younger generations facing rising taxes and shrinking benefits.[5]
Implications for Investors and Policymakers
The BU debate transcends academia, influencing investors torn between crypto hype and caution. For developing nations, Lagakos’s points resonate: crypto bypasses corrupt banks, enabling fast, low-cost transfers. Yet Hassan’s risk assessment—fraud, regulatory voids, environmental costs—looms large amid scandals like FTX.[1]
Listeners praise the podcast for its depth, with one suggesting U.S. innovations like real-time payments could outpace crypto without the dangers.[1] As Bitcoin flirts with new highs and regulators tighten grips, this clash underscores a pivotal question: Is cryptocurrency a scam, a savior, or something in between?
Access the Debate
The full debate is available via Kotlikoff’s Substack, offering an unfiltered dive into these clashing worldviews. In an era of financial uncertainty, from U.S. debt woes to global instability, such discourse is invaluable.[1]
Boston University’s Economics Department continues to lead on pressing issues, with Kotlikoff’s stable of experts driving conversations that matter. Whether you’re a crypto bull, bear, or bystander, this debate demands attention.