“The US govt does NOT own or control the US Federal Reserve, which is a cartel of private banks. The US President can't just tell this cartel what to do with their reserves. The US dollar is the sacred cow of this cartel, and it's how they rob the entire planet. They're not about to give up this racket because some politician made a promise whose implications he doesn't understand. They're not going to buy a million bitcoins, because a commitment to purchase bitcoin will just encourage everyone to dump their dollars and buy bitcoin, and destroy the value of the dollar and their ability to rob the world with it”
355 sats \ 4 replies \ @tomlaies 30 Jul
I think this guy is fundamentally misunderstanding something. The plans for Bitcoin reserves were not made such that the Fed would buy them. The US government would. Just like the strategic petroleum reserve.
reply
42 sats \ 3 replies \ @TNStacker 30 Jul
I think the opposite is true. How does the government buy it without the Fed? Where did the currency come from for the petroleum reserve purchases?
reply
42 sats \ 2 replies \ @petertodd 30 Jul
You realize the US government has income and borrowing power, right? They can pay for it with taxes and borrowing, just like any other expenditure.
Re: the petroleum reserve, it has very roughly $50 billion worth of oil in it; the US government collects something like $5 trillion a year in tax revenue.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @TNStacker 30 Jul
They aren't spending tax revenues like that. The tax revenues are the cash flows that back up the borrowing. How does the borrowing work? Through the Fed! Even when the Treasury sells bonds directly to you or me, who sets the rate? It starts at the Fed Discount "Window." Also, show me any piece of U.S. currency you desire. Every single one says Federal Reserve Note. When bonds are cashed in fro. where does the currency come?
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Arceris 30 Jul
Wait for the bill. I believe the mechanism they use is very interesting.
reply
166 sats \ 12 replies \ @kepford 30 Jul
I pretty much agree with Saifdean. The president does appoint the chairman but does not directly control the board. I don't think every board member would oppose it though. Seems like there are some more open minded members IIRC.
Also, these clowns that run for president say a lot of crap before they take office. Remember Obama getting the US out of Iraq on day 1? You all probably don't.
reply
86 sats \ 10 replies \ @Undisciplined 30 Jul
Couldn't the Treasury buy and hold bitcoin?
They'd essentially be borrowing dollars from the Fed to buy Bitcoin, much like the Micro Strategy approach.
reply
69 sats \ 8 replies \ @kepford 30 Jul
For sure they could. Honestly, it isn't even a question of if or can they. It is a question of when will they. This has been my point since before Trump spoke in Nashville. All this stuff is going to happen.
Why?
The dollar has been weaponized by the US. More countries are going to lose confidence in it as a non-political money. So they will either create a new fiat, use another fiat, or use bitcoin. Many small governments will adopt bitcoin first. The dollar will get weaker and weaker.
Eventually the US will either adopt bitcoin or collapse financially. My guess is that the citizens will move first. They will start jumping into bitcoin as a safe haven from inflationary dollars. The political pressure due to this will lead to either a crack down or acceptance. Crack down will just make it worse for the state so eventually they will concede. They will adopt or die basically.
In my view it is more of a force of nature. Nearly unstoppable at this point. Not 100% unstoppable but getting closer the more people adopt it. Things are moving faster than I thought they would a few years ago.
A smart FED would read the writing on the wall and buy and hold bitcoin as an asset to prolong the strength of the US in prep for moving to BTC as their main asset and currency.
That said, I don't think they are that smart. I think Trump is just making promises he never intends to keep or at best he doesn't understand.
reply
55 sats \ 7 replies \ @Undisciplined 30 Jul
I can more or less confirm that they aren't that smart.
reply
42 sats \ 6 replies \ @kepford 30 Jul
That's what I have seen as well.
They aren't sending their best. Its like living in a Rand novel.
reply
66 sats \ 5 replies \ @Undisciplined 30 Jul
The thing is, the Fed does attract a lot of the top econ talent. It's considered on par with a position at a top tier research university. The issue is that virtually no one in my profession understands money, in general, much less some weird fringe internet money.
I don't think I can adequately convey how much better the average pleb/stacker understands money and bitcoin than professional monetary economists.
reply
76 sats \ 2 replies \ @cristaiji OP 30 Jul
It’s a funny old world. I work in mental health. The psychiatrists who are the highest paid professionals literally don’t understand mental health. And many of them don’t care much either.
reply
42 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 30 Jul
That's interesting and something I've heard from people in health care. It seems to me that during the pandemic we learned that many if not most are following protocols and there is a strong culture of follow the leaders. Very little don't trust, verify. Those types probably exist but they will be more likely to be ostracized. Those humans that just have to know for themselves and do not care if it is popular or accepted are rare. They are the ones we read about in history.
reply on another page
55 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 30 Jul
Most of our doctors don't seem to understand physical health at all, so I'm not surprised that it holds for practitioners of the mental arts.
reply on another page
42 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 30 Jul
I was mostly referring to the political class. Not the bankers. I don't think bankers and the fin people are dumb. Ignorant is what you describe and that much is apparent. Really, its prejudice at the root.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @037aef6755 30 Jul
Bravo!🤣
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 30 Jul
Yes it can.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @orthwyrm 30 Jul
deleted by author
reply
116 sats \ 1 reply \ @TNStacker 30 Jul
Anyone who understands economics, money and banking, and Bitcoin understands this. It is why Bitcoin is peer-to-peer. We don't need the Fed. In fact, we need everyone to stop using their fiat.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @DiedOnTitan 30 Jul
💯
reply
115 sats \ 2 replies \ @cristaiji OP 30 Jul
What do you guys think?
reply
22 sats \ 0 replies \ @Arceris 30 Jul
Saifedean is correct... if the Fed is the entity doing the buying. However I believe that won't be the case. According to Caitlin Long, Lummis was mistaken when she said "Excess reserves" which is a technical banking term, and I believe the bill itself will make it quite clear that what is being proposed is quite different, and will not implicate the Fed's discretion in the purchase.
reply
76 sats \ 0 replies \ @DiedOnTitan 30 Jul
Saifedean's signal dense quote is insightful on many levels.
https://m.stacker.news/42533
reply
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @bc52210b20 30 Jul
What if the US T-Bills are backed-up buy sound money like Gold and Bitcoins?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Enemy_of_the_state 30 Jul
Basically no reason to own something that has such counterparty risk. Just like there is no reason to own non-dollar fiat currency. It has the risk of the dollar in addition to the risk of whatever country.
reply
32 sats \ 3 replies \ @freetx 30 Jul
I disagree with Saifdean's underlying premise (his unspoken premise is that the Fed would be against this).
Look its just a question of balance-sheet accounting. If you were the Fed what does your balance sheet look like? There are assets (Gov Bonds and now things like mortgages) and there are liabilities (Federal Reserve Notes).
Why wouldn't the Fed want a non-debt asset that inflates forever directly against its liabilities?
The problem with the Feds current Assets (Gov Bonds) is that they are debt, thus one must be wary of the credit worthiness when valuing the balance sheet. Bitcoin is a sort of magic fix for the balance sheet of the Fed in that there is no "credit risk" component its free from counter-party risk.
Gold should perform this role, however due to shortsighted law by Congress, the Fed is forced to value the gold it holds at $42.2222 per ounce (imagine if Congress passed a law mandating that the Fed had to value its bitcoin at $1000 in perpetuity!). Thus, the Fed has little interest in owning Gold....however it may get a second bite at the apple now that Bitcoin is here....
reply
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 30 Jul
I have a stupid question: shouldn't the value of gold reflect its market price?
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @freetx 30 Jul
Yes, but thats the insanity.
https://m.stacker.news/42577
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 30 Jul
excellent sourcing!
You can write for the Babylon Bee!
reply
32 sats \ 0 replies \ @riberet19 30 Jul
I think what this gentleman says is quite right, anyway what Trump is doing right now is vote buying, I think that is clear to all of us who have the neurons in place, that later he does what he says is something else...
reply
98 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 30 Jul
Does it matter? Bitcoin would be good for governments, but would having force monopolies hoarding Bitcoin be good for Bitcoin? I guess we'd see less state sponsored anti-bitcoin propaganda, but I can't figure out why I should care. It might help the country in some geopolitical sense, but I have no expectation that governments will stop behaving as they do, bitcoin or no. Maybe if they got the boot off our necks, and were some fantasy government, I'd want this fantasy government to have bitcoin.
reply
31 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 30 Jul
Practically I think you are right.
reply
23 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 30 Jul
The Fed and treasury are two different things.
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @TNStacker 30 Jul
Few
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @02d769cb73 30 Jul
the second paragraph of saifedean's tweet would seem to answer most of the arguments on this thread
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 31 Jul
You gotta agree with this man for he is making some real argument on this. For a win, Trump may talk about anything. He knows that talking is important for him to win. He is known and praised for this. He knows that after he wins the elections, he can refuse to anything or everything
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 31 Jul
And why would the US Federal Reserve want to limit their power?
It makes no sense.
Even if a president tries to push btc onto the reserve, after he is gone it could change.
Or he might not even have enough power to make that change.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Chronicsats 30 Jul
While the Federal Reserve operates with a significant degree of independence, it is still subject to oversight and influence by the US government. The strategic deployment of the US's oil reserves, for instance, demonstrates that the government does possess tools to exert economic influence independently of the Fed. Additionally, the rise of decentralized financial technologies and alternative currencies like Bitcoin presents new avenues for bypassing traditional banking systems. While it would be complex and potentially destabilizing, it is not entirely outside the realm of possibility for the government to leverage these alternatives in a manner that could challenge the status quo maintained by the Federal Reserve.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Octopus 30 Jul outlawed
stackers have outlawed this. turn on wild west mode in your /settings to see outlawed content.
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satoshi__Nakamoto 30 Jul outlawed
stackers have outlawed this. turn on wild west mode in your /settings to see outlawed content.