finance

Bitcoin

I’ve been reflecting on how Michael Saylor’s strategy will play out in different “levels”. By adopting Bitcoin as a reserve asset for MicroStrategy, Saylor has not only driven the company’s stock price up but also gained popularity among its employees and investors.

This strategy could potentially be mirrored by nations and states. We’ve already seen an example with El Salvador, and it’s likely we’ll witness more countries following suit in the coming years. As Bitcoin adoption increases, both at a corporate and state level, those who support and implement these strategies could see a rise in popularity.

Imagine if the United States started adopting Bitcoin: as the prices rise, politicians who support this movement could gain more favor with the public, creating a cycle of increased adoption and popularity. The progression from individual adoption to corporate and eventually state-level acceptance is just beginning.

people and even businesses can fool people into thinking they create value from nothing, but governments ultimately cannot. they are too big. 

bitcoin at the governmental level does not add value, does not increase tangible commodity production, and does not increase energy generation for productive use.

humans are physical beings and real value ultimately lies in the physical world, where we must be sustained. 

buying bitcoin would only increase the transfer of wealth. smart-contract blockchains on the other hand have the potential of adding value through their programmability by providing efficiency to real-world, value-adding, physical productivity.

/bettik founder /outercorps stalwart | ex-binance, ex-celsiusX

This is insightful take and I absolutely agree with you.