From a strictly market dynamics point of view, I agree with you. I do not want to pay tax with which the government buys sats, pushing the price up. I would rather have cheaper sats for myself in my wallet. The government having sats is like hearing about all the gold in Fort knox. It is not mine.

But, on the other hand, if the governments, especially at state level do buy it, then the hope is the Federal government (another administration) will find it more difficult to outright ban Bitcoin, like what China, Iran, Russia etc. have done, or tax/regulate it to death like India, Europe etc. Remember what FDR did with gold in 1933? How can we totally pre-empt even a possibility, such that even the thought does not occur in Elizabeth Warren's mind?

If Bitcoins remain limited to some computer geeks and cyberpunk nerds in their basement, it is easier for the federal government to declare anything/anyone to do with BTC as outlaw, thus confiscate. The smaller the community, easier to manipulate the rest of the population, telling the government is just going after scammers and money launderers etc. Bitcoin can help you defend against Federal reserve money printing, but not against physical violence.

But if Bitcoin gets embedded enough in every accounting book, everyone's balance sheet, and like 25/50 state government treasuries, then the federal government will think twice before even trying to outlaw Bitcoin.