Whatever the case may be, any country buying bitcoin for any purpose (with taxpayers' dollars, I remind you) is extremely risky--and no matter how big a fan you or I may be of bitcoin, I don't think governments ought to be dabbling in it. And not just because of the risk; it goes against everything bitcoin stands for. I'm curious as to whether this story is going to be followed up on.
Eventually, it’s what El-Salvador have been doing in a couple of years now and it’s been very controversial, haven’t raised some issues of its own especially during the down times when Bitcoin was bearish. The difference here could be that, the El-Salvadorans used it as legal tender which would be opposed to what US government would be proposing.
Using it for some reserve and that’ll be investment to use in settling whatever debt and rescue the economy maybe.
I read somewhere how
here this can not work and yeah, it goes against everything Bitcoin stands for. Bitcoin wasn’t created for the purpose of having to rescue economies but to enable p2p transactions and as such, having to view it for a honeypot where they just invest with the intent of taking profit in a decade or 2 decades to save an economy they severe by perpetual borrowing and not enough revenue generation doesn’t work.
The US owes at least a budget deficit of $2 trillion annually according to the article above and Bitcoin’s market cap is only about $1.79 trillion in 15 years. How could that be rescuing the later. It’s as risky as proposed I would say. Government don’t have to underscore the process of revenue generation within its nation state and they would do fine not viewing Bitcoin for some economy rescuer.