Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Ponzi scheme” is a specific type of financial fraud and isn’t a synonym for overexposure, excessive leverage, poor management, or even fraud in general. I do not think labeling things as Ponzi schemes which are not Ponzi schemes is helpful. Nor do I understand how that would help with effecting “real consequences.” The consequences faced by company personnel should be consequent to any wrongdoing.
In the legal sense, a 'Ponzi Scheme' has a specific meaning. In conversation, the definition is a bit looser. Sorta like how expressive has a different definition when you say 'that is an expressive programming language' and 'that is an expressive face'. Crypto, as a whole, is about early adopters trying to convince newcomers that crypto has value. If the early adopters can't convince anyone that crypto has value, it…
Land, Homes, Gold, Stocks are all Ponzi. It's just that the duration of the scheme is longer. If an asteroid hits and kill all humans tomorrow except 100 people, those 100 people can get all the above 'assets' for $0.
E.g The Gold Scheme has lasted over 5,000 years. Who is to say that BTC will not last at least 50. As an investor, it's not whether something is a ponzi or not, but how long the scheme will last.
For something like land, it could well be till the population peaks or Metaverse makes land less valuable or we find another amazing planet where we can all instantly migrate to. But eventually the land that you own will have no value. When is the question, till then you'll keep buying land in the hope of selling it to someone else for a higher value