Trump Signs Order To Establish Strategic Bitcoin Reserve 115
President Trump has signed an executive order to establish a strategic reserve of cryptocurrencies by using tokens already owned by the government. Reuters reports: A "Strategic Bitcoin Reserve" will be capitalized with bitcoin owned by the federal government that was seized as part of criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings, the White House crypto czar, billionaire David Sacks, said in a post on social media platform X. The order kept open the possibility of the government buying bitcoin in future. The U.S. commerce and treasury secretaries "are authorized to develop budget-neutral strategies for acquiring additional bitcoin, provided that those strategies impose no incremental costs on American taxpayers," a factsheet on the White House website said. "This is the most underwhelming and disappointing outcome we could have expected for this week," Charles Edwards, founder of bitcoin-focused hedge fund Capriole Investments, wrote in a post on X. "No active buying means this is just a fancy title for Bitcoin holdings that already existed with the Govt. This is a pig in lipstick."
Let's see... (Score:4, Interesting)
... how this confuses and bewilders the trrumpers who are also bitcoin-haters...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Let's see... (Score:5, Insightful)
Excluding Putin and possibly Kim Jong Un (haven't heard from him in a long time come to think of it) are there any economic experts, legal scholars, or otherwise educated individuals who can say that any of Trump's decisions and policies are sound?
I mean honestly who can stand up and say "You know what those tariffs are a fantastic idea". Anyone at all?
Re:Let's see... (Score:4, Insightful)
Getting rid of the penny is pretty sound...
Re: (Score:3)
I actually agree with that but his logic is stupid. Yes a penny costs three cents to manufacture but it will be in circulation for years. It’s not like they spend three cents and then sell the penny to the public at face value. The author John Green looked into the penny and the zinc lobby keeps it going.
Re: Let's see... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, that's exactly what they do. Look up the word "seigniorage."
Re: Let's see... (Score:2)
When taking a loss, maybe it should be called juniorage.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes a penny costs three cents to manufacture but it will be in circulation for years.
Except they don't circulate. They're so worthless now that people don't carry them around and use them. People get change, then stick it in a jar somewhere and it just sits there. Maybe eventually when the jar fills up, they take it to the bank to deposit. Or maybe they start another jar.
We make a ton of pennies so that cashiers can make change, and that change doesn't get used. So we make more pennies so they can make change again.
Other countries solved this problem by creating laws on how to round change
Re: Let's see... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And yet the way he went about doing it is idiotic. Canada passed laws allowing cashiers to round to the nearest 5 cents. Trump didn't do that, instead he just stopped production, meaning you will have customers screaming at cashiers for their money and claiming theyre being robbed. (Any cashier will tell you they meet these people.) And he did it without Congress, meaning it can be reversed by the next president.
Re: Let's see... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So the government has up until now been making them just for fun?
Banks will slowly run out of them as they fall out of circulation and eventually not be able to supply stores, this is why the government has kept making them. As someone who has also worked a register there are customers who will obsoletely lose their shit over this as the above says. Not the end of the world but as the above said shit could be planned better for this.
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't seen something prices in pennies in a real way since I was a child (there was a store with some low end candy still a penny a piece I'd ride my bike to).
They keep making pennies because state sales tax make weird numbers, everything is priced $x.99 and some things are sold by arbitrary weight/volume.
All of this could be pretty easily resolved with rounding. I'm sure even just flat out saying companies need to eat the average 2.5 cents/transaction by forcing them to round down would be fine in the
Re: (Score:2)
You said "If people want to use them there will be no shortage. " in regards to pennies. I then illustrating how the relatively brief interruption in supplying our banks with coin during Covid resulted in coin shortages including pennies. Clearly we would run out of enough pennies in circulation if we just up and stopped making them and did nothing else.
...were your customers aghast that you had to round to the nearest cent in order to make change?
No because there are laws that dictate how the rounding works. Without such laws there are people who will demand every cent of their change and they would
Re: Let's see... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Targeted and consistent tariffs aren't a bad thing, but unfortunately this is not what Trump is doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
... are there any economic experts, legal scholars, or otherwise educated individuals who can say that any of Trump's decisions and policies are sound?
May I remind you of Douglas Adams' description of the presidency?
I am sure most of us know it by heart.
Re: Let's see... (Score:2)
Tariffs are an import tax, how does Canada import Canadian milk to USA and then tax the import on it?
Re: Let's see... (Score:2)
Re:Let's see... (Score:5, Insightful)
... how this confuses and bewilders the trrumpers who are also bitcoin-haters...
It's a cult. If Trump's for it, they're for it now too. See: the reversal of opinion towards the TikTok ban
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
A cult is by definition centered around a charismatic leader or a specific ideology. The term can also refer to intense devotion to a person, idea, or object. Who are "anti-Trump" devoted to?
Your tu quoique fallacy falls apart under even basic scrutiny.
Re: Let's see... (Score:2)
Who are "anti-Trump" devoted to?
Logic, reason, common knowledge, I could go on. The problem is in the question. No one should be devoted to a 'who'. They should be devoted to people who practice ideology that has moved humanity forward instead of setting it back.
Re: (Score:3)
Who are "anti-Trump" devoted to?
Logic, reason, common knowledge, I could go on. The problem is in the question. No one should be devoted to a 'who'. They should be devoted to people who practice ideology that has moved humanity forward instead of setting it back.
Yes, the question is a non-sequitur. Being in a cult of personality like those who worship Trump does not mean that not worshipping trump requires worshipping another.
But that said, while I think that Trump and his merry band are dolts, it does not follow that everything that republicans follow is wrong.
And it doesn't follow that being a democrat makes you always correct either. We've reached peak political polarization, where people are easily manipulated by claiming party support for one thing means
Re: (Score:2)
Democrats hitched their wagon to the idea of transgenderism
Are you serious? Do you actually believe this? If that's the case, maybe ask yourself why that is. Do you remember seeing a lot of Democrats stumping about transgender issues? Did you see Democrats giving speech after speech after speech in support of trans rights?
I suspect more likely you're thinking of one or two mentions that a few Democrats might have given which got repeated over and over and over again in Republican advertisements. Democratic messaging in the last election focused on the economy, a
Re: (Score:2)
Democrats hitched their wagon to the idea of transgenderism
Are you serious? Do you actually believe this? If that's the case, maybe ask yourself why that is. Do you remember seeing a lot of Democrats stumping about transgender issues? Did you see Democrats giving speech after speech after speech in support of trans rights?
It was one of the issues that cost them. What we saw, and feel free to debunk the claims, and I did cite them earlier, is that the democrats renamed women to birthing people. This is in response to trans activists demanding that a person that called themselves a woman is in fact and legally a woman. Now of course, this makes for issues of biology, so in true far left fashion, there needed to be a new word made up name "Birthing people", that used to be women, but now a different term. Ironically, people wh
Re: (Score:3)
If the Democrats had done that as well then there might have been more discussion on the matter. As it was, the Republicans did a lot of yelling while the Democrats kept saying, "Why are you still talking about t
Re: (Score:2)
You've said a lot of things here, but not too many of them have much to do with the Democrats. Your new claim, that this is one of the issues which cost them, is more reasonable. But the reason why it cost them is because the Republicans hitched their wagon to transgender issues. As I said above. If the Democrats had done that as well then there might have been more discussion on the matter. As it was, the Republicans did a lot of yelling while the Democrats kept saying, "Why are you still talking about this? There are so many more important things."
I think the people who were very concerned about their children saw the transgender issues as an important thing I cannot tell people what they should or should not be concerned about.
My position is stark and clear. People over the age of majority are free to modify their bodies as they see fit. Young people who are not adults should not. Biological males should not play on women's sports teams. This is unfair to biological women. Otherwise, they are free to live as they will. But denial of biology is as
Re: Let's see... (Score:2)
Who was suggesting that we should allow kids to make permanent physical changes to their bodies without parental approval?
Re: (Score:2)
I can't really read everything you wrote because it's a big bowl of word salad and I can only eat so much salad, but... Who was suggesting that we should allow kids to make permanent physical changes to their bodies without parental approval?
If you cannot parse what I wrote, that's a you problem. If my posts offend, make use of the scroll. I won't be upset.
But the specific question as to who is plenty of people I'll do this in two stages:
https://gould.usc.edu/why/stud... [usc.edu]
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne... [dailymail.co.uk]
Now we can debate whether or not puberty blockers make permanent changes, but as I recall, it was considered dangerous when gymnasts used them.
Part 2: answering your question directly. California. I must caution you however, you might
Re: Let's see... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A cult is by definition centered around a charismatic leader or a specific ideology. The term can also refer to intense devotion to a person, idea, or object. Who are "anti-Trump" devoted to?
Your tu quoique fallacy falls apart under even basic scrutiny.
Let's face it - When Trump passes, who is the new person with the same persona and charisma? And you seem to be insinuating that anyone opposed to Trump follows a similar person. I find him a Buffon, but I follow no one.
Re: (Score:3)
I donÃ(TM)t like the guy but I also watch and assess each of his actions individually.
What? Why? I can't imagine that you have time to do anything else with your day.
Do you even know all of his actions? Here [imgur.com], a senator recently made a chart of just his most corrupt actions, just in the last six weeks. How many of these do you know? Do you know all the details?
Just for example, do you know all the particulars about why his firing of all of those Inspectors General is such a problem? It violates a law which was passed after his first term, explicitly to stop him from doing exactly this t
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing confusing or bewildering.
The orange shitgibbon's minions could not come up with a plan to immediately benefit from dumping real money on the shitcoin market, as was the originally discussed idea, so donold simply shafted the cryptobros who voted for him.
Just like he shafted the redneck farmers, the veterans, the Arab amurikans and so on.
An action that is totally in character for him.
Re: (Score:2)
You have it slightly askew. Maybe he did shaft the crypto-dolts, but this will help them as well. And did he do it to help them? No.
Whenever you observe one of el Bunko's actions, your first question should be: how does he profit? He and his crime family launched their own bitcoins....that's putting it a bit mildly. They launched their own bitcoin ministry....errr....industry. He could not get money from Congress so he decided he could repurpose money they grabbed from criminals. That money should have gone
Re: (Score:2)
just how badly the Democrats screwed up
They have nothing on the voter of the putin's states of America, though. Now that one guy is the dullest tool in the shed bar none.
As the second-dumbest president of those states said once upon a time, there's a saying in Tennessee, fool me once, shame on me...
Re: (Score:2)
just how badly the Democrats screwed up
They have nothing on the voter of the putin's states of America, though. Now that one guy is the dullest tool in the shed bar none.
As the second-dumbest president of those states said once upon a time, there's a saying in Tennessee, fool me once, shame on me...
Well, it is perhaps a salve to people to believe that Democrats are all smart, and Republicans are all stupid. So Americans izz Stoopid? No they aren't
But you know, we have to also sit and analyze things. Keeping in mind that Clinton received some millions more votes than Trump, Biden received more votes than Trump, There has to be an explanation that isn't some Fox News or CNN soundbite.
My research isn't going to win me any fans, but I stand by it. It has some nuance - which is considered bad today i
Re: (Score:2)
I know that I appear to be in a minority having done post curbstomping analysis of just why they received a political beatdown after what should have been a blue tsunami.
Funny then that your analysis doesnt include the economic hardship that came with the recent global inflation that happened when Biden was in office. Incumbent parties all over the world are being voted out of office right now as the party in office always takes the blame for economic hardship.
It's always interesting to see how you routinely claim objectivity and political moderation but your comments all seem to come from right wing talking heads. For instance, VP Waltz was specifically chosen for his attr
Re: (Score:2)
Funny then that your analysis doesnt include the economic hardship that came with the recent global inflation that happened when Biden was in office. Incumbent parties all over the world are being voted out of office right now as the party in office always takes the blame for economic hardship.
Do not confuse who gets blamed with the causative factor. This presumed Biden caused inflation was the result of Covid restrictions easing, and businesses working to recoup money they lost during the plague years.
It's always interesting to see how you routinely claim objectivity and political moderation but your comments all seem to come from right wing talking heads.
You really need to post the times I said that. I don't recall claiming anything other than I am a pragmatic, which is based on practical, and not theoretical or ideology based decisions. My personal politics are all over the place, because I prefer to think about issues, not mindlessly follow wha
Re: (Score:2)
Do not confuse who gets blamed with the causative factor. This presumed Biden caused inflation was the result of Covid restrictions easing, and businesses working to recoup money they lost during the plague years.
Who's confusing things? Notice how I say "...as the party in office always takes the blame for economic hardship.". This is regardless of actual fault. George Bush Jr. also took the fault for the 2001 market crash amongst Americans despite not having been in office long enough to have been able to do anything to stop it. This blame is normal in Democracies even if it isn't always accurate and can be observed happening all over the world right now.
Seriously skam240, making Walz somehow the ticket to the male vote is on the same level as the Republicans trotting out people of color to show how liberates and non-racist they are. Walz was a token penis wielder, and anyone who thinks otherwise or that he helped is naive.
You said "...the Democrats believed that men's votes were not
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Democrats were doomed the moment Trump signed PPP into law, then promptly removed any oversight, along with fucking up Covid. That set the stage for massive inflation, that EVERYONE suffered from, which Democrats got the blame for. Really that simple
Oh you are absolutely correct!
There was only one reason, and nothing else. Inflation only, and all the research I did means absolutely nothing - including especially the part of paying attention to what people who voted for Trump said. Interestingly, they had other reasons, but they must have been wrong as well. Nothing other than inflation, it is just that simple. /s
Mkay.
LOL (Score:5, Insightful)
In case there was any doubt as to whether the cryptobros wanted this to be anything more than the US government socializing the costs of a pump & dump scheme for them, here's your answer.
Second mistake (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
TFS says this is just a relocation of crypto reserves already owned by the federal government. ("seized as part of criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings")
It also says the commerce and treasury secretaries "are authorized to develop budget-neutral strategies for acquiring additional bitcoin, provided that those strategies impose no incremental costs on American taxpayers". That sounds like just more seizure, not buying, of crypto -- although buying wasn't ruled out.
Honestly, this sounds like it's mo
Re:LOL (Score:5, Insightful)
And I'm sure his private holdings didn't invest in any of the shit he includes in this "reserve" that he's basically promising that the government won't sell (i.e. self-identified as a bagholder), and absolutely didn't ride the value increase based on that announcement.
Oh wait, that would be insider trading, wouldn't it? I guess it doesn't matter since he's immune from prosecution from anything even remotely adjacent to an "official act" right?
This is nakedly corrupt, and saying anything else is ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The crypto bros are freaking out (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically we've reached peak sucker. There's only so many People dumb enough to part with money to these crooks to go around and Trump is bleeding them dry leaving nothing for the rest of the cryptocurrency scammers to scam.
Re: (Score:2)
Relax. Trump just put a fancy name on something the federal government already owns. I wouldn't put it past him to have some kind of angle, but for now it just looks like showboating.
Re: (Score:2)
There really is only so many people who have money to scam in this world and Trump has taken them for literally billions. A lot of scammers are out a lot of money because of Trump and they know it. Just like if a new organized crime ring muscles in on your territory you know it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:The crypto bros are freaking out (Score:5, Informative)
They're "freaking out" because they expected the Fed to hoover up a whole bunch of coins and jack up the value of their HODLings. Presumably, that wasn't the intent (see that part about "by using tokens already owned by the government" in TFS?), so the crypto bros have gone all sad panda over it.
Personally, on my list of things to be miffed about the current administration, this turned out to be a big ol' nothingburger. If Uncle Sam wants to sit on its seized crypto until it isn't worth the ones and zeros it's printed on, that's fine by me. As they say, "nothing of value was lost."
Re: The crypto bros are freaking out (Score:2)
Personally, I would like them to sell seized crypto once everything has gone through and the courts and the owner will officially never recover them. It would not do much for the budget, buy it would help temper the value of crypto so it is less attractive to speculators.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Basically we've reached peak sucker.
That's really optimistic.
"Love feels like a great misfortune, a monstrous parasite, a permanent state of emergency that ruins all small pleasures.” -- Slavoj Zizek . It doesn't just have to be love.
Not so bad (Score:3)
On the other hand, the fact that the U.S. government won't immediately sell off its bitcoins means that its exchange rate won't be hit as hard.
Re: (Score:2)
Or it means they're pre-announcing themselves as a bagholder for any future rug-pulling that may happen. I'm sure that's awesome for the average taxpayer, right?
Re: Not so bad (Score:2)
A "bag holder" is someone who spends money on an asset before it crashes. This law specifically excludes the government from spending money to acquire Bitcoin.
Re: (Score:2)
No, instead they're pre-announcing that they will hold onto what they have, regardless of if it makes sense to or not.
But do go on telling us all how that's not "being left holding the bag" when everyone else gets out.
Not so immediate (Score:2)
On the other hand, the fact that the U.S. government won't immediately sell off its bitcoins means that its exchange rate won't be hit as hard.
The US government seized bitcoins from The Silk Road a long time ago. They've been sitting on them for a while. "Immediately" is long gone.
Too volatile. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think this is probably a typical story. Back in 2011 or so I screwed around with Bitcoin. Back then it was possible to mine it without using the power output of Argentina. I figured it was a nice proof of concept, but figured that it wouldn't go anywhere. Then in 2015 I bought some back when it was valued much less. I sold it later at a profit. Then I forgot about the whole thing. I look now and if I'd sold at the recent top somewhere in the $90,000 range, I'd be a multimillionaire, even after I fed the IRS. In retrospect, of course, what I should have done was buy as much as possible back in 2011-2012, keep buying, and then worry about how to dump it.
It seems that is what is going on here. People have accumulated Bitcoin, and for some reason it refuses to die. But it's a deflationary currency, and the value will just continue to go up. That encourages people to hold on to it. But you still have an incredibly volatile price, which makes it not the best idea to convert some of your Bitcoin back to fiat currency for liquidity purposes. I figured that the crytobros out there would be salivating at this, but the "no buy" kind of makes it pointless. As a result, Bitcoin started up about $3500 today, and has swung all over the place, now down about $4000. That's a huge range. The point is that sooner or later people are going to start to mass cashout, and the price is going to dive like the world's fastest lawn dart and make a stock market crash look tame.
Re: (Score:2)
I figured it was a nice proof of concept, but figured that it wouldn't go anywhere.
I figured that since it could be infinitely forked, there is no intrinsic value to cryptocurrency. What I didn't factor in was that to people dumping money into the scheme, that didn't matter. The market is happy to share in the collective delusion that a Bitcoin is somehow more valuable than any of the numerous alt-coins, even though fundamentally they all operate in a similar manner. People just desired to play a greater fool investing game with real money and cryptocurrency made it possible.
At this po
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That depends what you mean. If you mean cryptocurrency, it inflates wildly. I can "print" a million quadrillion tokens right now, no problem.
If you mean bitcoin, I can also fork it and double the amount in existence whenever I want. There are over a hundred major forks already.
If you mean Bitcoin, the particular fork the most people think is "real," then that's true... for the moment anyway. It's based entirely on that "most people think is 'real'" though.
Re: (Score:2)
If you mean Bitcoin, the particular fork the most people think is "real," then that's true... for the moment anyway. It's based entirely on that "most people think is 'real'" though.
Exactly - people treat it as 'real' because it happened to be the first (or as some say, 'the original shitcoin').... until something else becomes 'real' enough to gain traction against it.
Now the crypto bros will all try to claim that can't happen, but Bitcoin is living proof that an alternative form of money can gain traction - if it happened once, it can happen again. And there's nothing Bitcoin can do to prevent that from happening.
Re: (Score:2)
The "Bitcoin" that people call "Bitcoin" now isnt' even the first. The actual first one is defunct, although apparently you can get it going with a few tweaks. The account balances have been maintained across forks, which is why people think it's "the original" but the system itself has changed. If in the future if someone wants more bitcoin to mine then they'll just fork it and add more, and any miners who also want more bitcoin to mine can download the update.
Re: (Score:2)
Bitcoin is deflationary in the long term. Every 4 years the number of bitcoins mined per hour is halved and at some point where will be no new coins generated, but that point is 100 years away. Also, coins can be destroyed.
The idea AFAIK was to model the output of a gold mine or oil well, where the output is high at first, but then goes down until eventually everything has been dug up.
Re: Too volatile. (Score:3)
"for some reason it refuses to die. But it's a deflationary currency, and the value will just continue to go up"
Your second statement here answers the question raised in the first.
It's the camel's nose under the tent. (Score:4, Insightful)
This isa camel's nose under the tent. It sounds not too bad right now, but I guarantee you it won't be long the US will be buying crypto to " stabilze the market to protect the savings of hard working Americans"
Uh, no (Score:2)
This may work for a while, at some point the government will want to sell those Bitcoin to "provide services" like welfare or whatever. Politicians or their constituents will get greedy, it's guaranteed. When that happens, the price of Bitcoin will collapse rapidly.
And this is all assuming nobody cracks SHA256 and RIPEMD-160.
Slush fund (Score:3, Insightful)
Stumpfingers, of course, is not concerned with turning a profit for the commonweal, it'll end up in his pocket.
Re: (Score:2)
"This may work for a while..."
No. There is no definition of "work" here. A reserve is a strategic cache of a resource, bitcoin is not a resource. There is no definition of "work" that can possibly apply.
The intention of such a government "reserve" is specifically as the greatest pump and dump of all time. Trump wouldn't care if the price cratered, so long as he can predict it for personal benefit.
Also, such an act by the government cannot be declared by executive order. It is illegal and corrupt.
Exit liquidity (Score:5, Insightful)
So there you have it. All the shitty liquidity that old wallet stores are waiting to dump on is becoming available. Finally they can afford to sell 1,000 BTC at a drop of a hat without tanking the price.
You see the story of BT is that of creating liquidity. When liquidity is good the price goes up and when it's bad it goes down...meanwhile all those wallets held in escrow agreements and others were just waiting for there to be sufficient REAL money in the mix to dump their shitcoin for actual dollars.
You think BTC will become the world reserve currency?! Just HODL through the next 10 years you'll be fine as you live on dividens...or not.
Look my 500k "asset" and "store of value" rose 8000% when rich people saw away to create yet ANOTHER vehicle for wealth transfer and pumped it and dumped it. No store of value drops 70% due to lack of liquidity because a store of value isn't pumped (read leveraged) 20 to 1 or even as much as 100 to 1 in the early days.
The price of BTC is the same price as a crypto kitty. It's whatever the next guy is willing to pay for it. Sure BTC has more value or utility worth than a crypto kitty as a specualtion investment but don;t confuse it with an actual store of value.
All the stocks and brokerages are competition so someone created a "free range eggs" variety of trading with an "asset class" called crypto. Pump the big one, pump the small ones shift the money around until most people lose their DOALLRS for the SHITCOINs.
Told you to buy BTC at 3k, told you to buy BTC at 17k - now telling you not to fucking buy BTC at 100k FFS - just because it might pump to $1m does not make it a sound or wise investment FFS.
IF you buy BTC just undestand you;re swimming with sharks. When shit hits the fan it'll tank hard like it always does because it's not a store of value for you, retail You're liquidity like this BS reserve act is just liquidity to cash out influential rich people. Good luck.
Re: Exit liquidity (Score:2)
No different than gold (Score:1)
Or foreign reserves. For it to be truly useful, though, they will have to eventually sell some.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes because gold and foreign reserves often sublimate >50% of their value.
Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick.
Re: (Score:2)
Gold has intrinsic value. Foreign currencies have values tied to an economy. Crapto has not intrinsic value whatsoever.
I'm confused (Score:3)
What does this have to do with grocery prices?
Re: (Score:2)
What does this have to do with grocery prices?
I really don't think you're confused.
Re: (Score:2)
Not a god damn thing, just like everything else they're doing.
Except the tariffs - that will effect grocery prices. Just not in the way anyone wants, except the corporations that will tack on their own extra few percent and blame the tariffs while they record record profits.
Just like 2020. Same merry-go-round, same guy at the operator panel. Just different music.
Re: (Score:2)
What does this have to do with grocery prices?
Price of a dozen eggs: $5.99
Bitcoin price: $85,999.44
5.99 / 85,999.44 = 0.00006968 BTC
0.00006968 is a smaller number than 5.99, so now your grocery prices are smaller! /s
Re: I'm confused (Score:2)
More importantly, grocery prices are becoming cheaper over time when denominated in Bitcoin.
"What inflation?" - every Bitcoiner
everyone in the world already knows the plan... (Score:3)
Trump/Musk buys billions in crypto, maybe with Putin's money, the directs the government to buy far more with the federal budget. Inflexible demand drives prices up, Trump/Musk sells then orders the government to liquidate Lather, rinse, repeat. This is why we have laws, and why we are officially fucked now that SCOTUS granted Trump blanket immunity.
Corruption? (Score:3)
So he is rooting out corruption by diving head first into a nest of it with our tax dollars. What a scumbag.
It's just good planning (Score:2)
Trump has a gift (Score:5, Funny)
I've never seen someone so capable of pissing off literally everyone. To piss off both bitcoin haters and bitcoin fanatics at the same time is amazing. Even better than his art of the deal threatening tariffs then revoking them when the other party promises to do something they were already doing without change.
I'm truly in awe.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty good joke, but it seems to me like everyone is missing the point. It doesn't matter what stupid thing the YOB does. As long as the rich puppeteers know the timing they can "win" and pocket the profits coming and going. They don't even have to pull the unreliable puppet's strings if they are sufficiently sure of when he will commit the next idiocy. So they profited on one hand from shorting the shares and how they profited on the other hand by buying auto stocks on the dip. Heads they win, tails we lo
Re:Trump has a g[r]ift (Score:2)
Whoops. FTFY.
Slashdot is amazing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to have a "victim"-personality. Excellent! Want to buy some land on Mars?
Hahahaha, the great leader has no clue! (Score:2)
Now this is a true Trump-decision! Technically fulfilling what he promised, but doing it in such a way that he may well have lied and would have come over as more honest. And on the other side, pissing off all people with a working mind by giving the impression that crapto is important.
The only ones he did not insult here are those that really do not care about crapto at all.
Idiocracy (Score:1)
Nope (Score:2)
What this really is is this. In criminal confiscations of property, sometimes Bitcoin is confiscated. So far, there is no indication the govt plans to *buy* Bitcoin, but rather, this is a place to put it. Same with the other crypto currencies.
Grifter grifting (Score:2)
Builds a market for stuff nobody wants