5 ms·

Sounds like a wealth transfer to anyone holding Bitcoin. And probably another constitutional crisis if he tries to spend federal money to buy Bitcoin without c

Sounds like a wealth transfer to anyone holding Bitcoin. And probably another constitutional crisis if he tries to spend federal money to buy Bitcoin without congressional approval, even if that's not in his order. Perhaps he's trying to return to a combined crypto+gold standard?

netsharc 2y ago
> Perhaps he's trying to return to a combined crypto+gold standard? I'm pretty sure Trump's too dumb to understand the arguments why such a system would be good, if anything it'd be all the crypto-bro billionaires who made their boy Vance VP. Or perhaps it's just all a pump and dump for them...
- avidiax 2y ago
  He seems to be emulating McKinley, down to using tarriffs to pressure Canada into being the 51st state, and the Gold Standard Act. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Standard_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Standard_Act
  - timeon 2y ago
    > He seems to be He is 79 years old, I do not thing that it is he who is emulating. Rather people who told him to do that.
waych 2y ago
Given that this strategic reserve is to be built from all the various civil and criminal asset forfeitures, and not actually buying any crypto currency, how exactly is this considered a "wealth transfer"? This is centralizing governance of forfeited assets from across the many agencies that are currently holding wallets with no direction, into a single place: the Treasury. This seems far favorable to letting various (430+) agencies manage these valuable assets on their own where they can easily be lost, stolen, etc.
- wmf 2y ago
  It reduces sell pressure. I don't know how to estimate what that's worth.
- iwontberude 2y ago
  Being a baggie for bitcoin begs the question that it’s necessarily going to increase over time. Given that Blackrock recently published a video reiterating the ground truth that there is no ultimate guarantee that the finite supply of bitcoin could not be increased, there are signs maybe this isn’t so bulletproof.
  - npoc 2y ago
    Blackrock are wrong. No one will ever persuade me to or vast swathes of other bitcoin node runners, to run a version of bitcoin with a higher cap. It devalues our bitcoin. It devalues bitcoin full-stop. Sure, a new fork can be, and in fact are, created with a higher cap, but why would people choose it over a harder system with a lower issuance? Even if it somehow took hold, the old harder version of bitcoin would beat the newer softer version just like it's beating the soft fiat money we currently use.
    - iwontberude 2y ago
      I think the unspoken rationale is that governments can compel you to destroy a market. Look at when the US seized all of the gold in May of 1933. Blackrock operates in time scales where this sort of risk awareness is relevant.
      - npoc 2y ago
        Sure. But how does a government, or even governments, compel bitcoiners all around the world to stop running a version of bitcoin core on their nodes (likely running over TOR)?
        iwontberude 2y ago
k12sosse 2y ago
The economic turmoil is making the people with the knowledge very rich, every day. This is the lesser spoken role of the volatility this gov is creating. Kill confidence, buy 25% dips, hint at future announcements, sell at 35% gains. The inner circle with the timeline are just consolidating that wealth at the expense of a lot of the most vulnerable - the blind hopeless follower gambling beyond logic.
- bayarearefugee 2y ago
  > at the expense of a lot of the most vulnerable - the blind hopeless follower gambling beyond logic. The more concerning victims are the very many people whose retirements are heavily if not entirely invested in the stock market through 401ks, etc. Can't wave that group away with moral hazard arguments and if the Republicans get their way across the board they'll be getting a double whammy in terms of their retirement investments being in tatters and Social Security being mostly destroyed as well.
- manbart 2y ago
  This is the scam, the chaos is intentional
jordanb 2y ago
> Sounds like a wealth transfer to anyone holding Bitcoin. Don't forget XRP, solana and whatever else David Sachs is involved with.

netsharc 2y ago

> Perhaps he's trying to return to a combined crypto+gold standard? I'm pretty sure Trump's too dumb to understand the arguments why such a system would be good, if anything it'd be all the crypto-bro billionaires who made their boy Vance VP. Or perhaps it's just all a pump and dump for them...

avidiax 2y ago
He seems to be emulating McKinley, down to using tarriffs to pressure Canada into being the 51st state, and the Gold Standard Act. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Standard_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Standard_Act
- timeon 2y ago
  > He seems to be He is 79 years old, I do not thing that it is he who is emulating. Rather people who told him to do that.

waych 2y ago

Given that this strategic reserve is to be built from all the various civil and criminal asset forfeitures, and not actually buying any crypto currency, how exactly is this considered a "wealth transfer"? This is centralizing governance of forfeited assets from across the many agencies that are currently holding wallets with no direction, into a single place: the Treasury. This seems far favorable to letting various (430+) agencies manage these valuable assets on their own where they can easily be lost, stolen, etc.

wmf 2y ago
It reduces sell pressure. I don't know how to estimate what that's worth.
iwontberude 2y ago
Being a baggie for bitcoin begs the question that it’s necessarily going to increase over time. Given that Blackrock recently published a video reiterating the ground truth that there is no ultimate guarantee that the finite supply of bitcoin could not be increased, there are signs maybe this isn’t so bulletproof.
- npoc 2y ago
  Blackrock are wrong. No one will ever persuade me to or vast swathes of other bitcoin node runners, to run a version of bitcoin with a higher cap. It devalues our bitcoin. It devalues bitcoin full-stop. Sure, a new fork can be, and in fact are, created with a higher cap, but why would people choose it over a harder system with a lower issuance? Even if it somehow took hold, the old harder version of bitcoin would beat the newer softer version just like it's beating the soft fiat money we currently use.
  - iwontberude 2y ago
    I think the unspoken rationale is that governments can compel you to destroy a market. Look at when the US seized all of the gold in May of 1933. Blackrock operates in time scales where this sort of risk awareness is relevant.
    - npoc 2y ago
      Sure. But how does a government, or even governments, compel bitcoiners all around the world to stop running a version of bitcoin core on their nodes (likely running over TOR)?
      - iwontberude 2y ago

k12sosse 2y ago

The economic turmoil is making the people with the knowledge very rich, every day. This is the lesser spoken role of the volatility this gov is creating. Kill confidence, buy 25% dips, hint at future announcements, sell at 35% gains. The inner circle with the timeline are just consolidating that wealth at the expense of a lot of the most vulnerable - the blind hopeless follower gambling beyond logic.

bayarearefugee 2y ago
> at the expense of a lot of the most vulnerable - the blind hopeless follower gambling beyond logic. The more concerning victims are the very many people whose retirements are heavily if not entirely invested in the stock market through 401ks, etc. Can't wave that group away with moral hazard arguments and if the Republicans get their way across the board they'll be getting a double whammy in terms of their retirement investments being in tatters and Social Security being mostly destroyed as well.
manbart 2y ago
This is the scam, the chaos is intentional

jordanb 2y ago

> Sounds like a wealth transfer to anyone holding Bitcoin. Don't forget XRP, solana and whatever else David Sachs is involved with.