Opinion: Considering a Strategic Reserve of Poker Chips or Digital Pokemon Stockpile
In the realm of imagination, President Bill Clinton could have established a Strategic Beanie Baby Reserve with the hope that these unattractive dolls might one day help reduce the national debt. Or, moving forward, President Joe Biden might have floated the idea of launching a Hunter Biden Paintings Asset Stockpile to promote investment in a product that conveniently lines the pockets of his son. However, here on the genuine planet Earth, we find ourselves grappling with a melding of the absurd and corrupt as President Donald Trump initiates plans to create a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve along with a Digital Asset Stockpile, urging the accumulation of cryptocurrencies even more unstable and dubious than Bitcoin.
Trump’s proposal has ignited a firestorm of controversy spanning across various political factions, especially among individuals well-versed in economic and monetary matters. Jason Furman, a prominent economist from the Barack Obama administration, argues, “There is no justification for the government to acquire and hold these assets.” Similarly, Peter Schiff, the head of Euro Pacific Capital Management, scoffs at the notion of utilizing these tokens, stating emphatically, “We’re never going to need any of these tokens because they don’t do anything; they’re merely utilised for gambling.”
Even Avik Roy, a former top policy adviser to Mitt Romney, concedes that amassing specifically Bitcoin, due to its finite supply and broad acceptance, could serve as a strategic hedge in anticipation of impending fiscal and monetary crises. Nevertheless, he recognizes the futility of enriching random billionaires by endorsing non-Bitcoin cryptos.
As recently as the summer of 2021, Trump characterized cryptocurrencies bluntly, declaring, “Bitcoin, it seems like a scam.” He specifically labeled it a “greater fool” scam, relying on finding individuals naïve enough to pay more than the previous buyer for something with little to no intrinsic value. However, after being presented with opportunities to profit from these ventures, Trump embraced the trend by capitalizing on the NFT craze through the introduction of Trump “digital” trading cards and eventually venturing into the brokerage realm with “World Liberty Financial” alongside his sons.
In a stark departure from ethical norms, three days before his inauguration, Trump introduced a dubious method enabling prospective benefactors to purchase his very own crypto “coin” as a means of influencing him through financial incentives. This mode of potential bribery culminated in Trump’s public endorsement of lesser-known crypto “coins” on social media during a golf outing, prompting a surge followed by a swift decline in their values.
At a “crypto summit” held at the White House, Trump affirmed his commitment to fulfilling his promise of making America the “crypto capital” of the world, translating into historic moves to advance this agenda. Despite the tempered initial reaction to Trump’s executive order, it is evident that the endorsement of various crypto assets by the federal government can have widespread implications, endowing legitimacy to an industry that thrives on baffling individuals with convoluted jargon and techno-babble.
The normalization of cryptocurrencies as investment “assets,” despite lacking the conventional benefits associated with traditional investments like stocks and bonds, aligns with the overarching narrative perpetuated by financial institutions eager to capitalize on the public’s fascination with virtual currencies. The propagation of brokerages, mutual funds, and investment firms facilitating the buying and selling of crypto products underscores the financial industry’s growing opportunism in catering to the heightened demand for unconventional investment avenues.
