I did not argue against that, did I?
But the thing there is that the liquidity provider side benefitted from this situation as well, with being paid high interest rates.
So the situation is that debtors had no opportunity to either withdraw their collateral (because they had locked in debt positions) nor could they repay their debt position while paying high interest rates.
Pure liquidity providers on the other hand could simply not withdraw their provided liquidity while being paid higher than average interest rates.
So everyone should see that one side has it way worse than the other site.
I would also argue that “lost opportunities” are very hard to quantify.