“Fake Money!” Kiyosaki Slams Buffett and Wall Street Assets

‘Rich Dad Poor Dad’ author Robert Kiyosaki has issued a lengthy response to billionaire investor Warren Buffett’s reiteration of a long-standing stance that Bitcoin (BTC) is not an investment but a speculative gamble that could end in a blow-off top collapse.

Specifically, Kiyosaki acknowledged that Warren Buffett could be correct from a traditional value-investing viewpoint, but emphasized that he fundamentally disagrees based on his own risk assumptions, asset philosophy, and trust in institutions, per his X post on November 17.

Indeed, Kiyosaki contrasted Buffett’s preference for stocks, bonds, and conventional market instruments with his own holdings, which include gold mining companies, physical gold and silver, and cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum (ETH).

As it happens, his central argument is built around distrust of central banking, government monetary policy, and the Wall Street-based financial system.

“Real vs. Fake Assets”

Within his explanation, Kiyosaki classified different types of money and assets using three labels. The first is “God’s money,” referring to naturally scarce, physical assets like gold and silver. The second is “people’s money” or digitally scarce, decentralized assets like BTC and ETH. 

Finally, the third is “fake money,” by which he means central bank-issued or paper-based claims like USD, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), bonds, and real estate investment trusts (REITs).

He emphasized that physically owning assets, not paper or ETF claims, aligns with his long-standing teachings in ‘Rich Dad Poor Dad.’ He also argued that printed financial instruments, derivatives, and pooled products are disconnected from tangible value, while no one can artificially increase the supply of crypto and metals.

Additionally, Kiyosaki reiterated his belief that unlimited U.S. money creation leads to currency debasement, citing global debt levels and macro forces that may pressure governments to issue more bonds. This, he claims, is why assets with programmed scarcity, particularly BTC with its 21 million supply cap, offer asymmetric protection.

Moreover, he argued that he based his investment thesis not on guaranteed growth but in hedging against systemic trust failure, stating that individuals do not need elite academic credentials to recognize sustainability limits in government spending and monetary issuance.

More Must-Reads:

• Kiyosaki Calls Crash and Predicts Moonshot for BTC and ETH
• Magnificent Short Squeeze Incoming? Analyst Says Bitcoin Could Explode
• Bitcoin Corrects to $97,000 – Is the Bottom In?