For sure I am not going to get too excited if the USA government creates incentives to seize the assets of bitcoiners (or even shitcoiners), especially if they start to follow similar kinds of civil forfeiture kinds of laws that end up incentivizing the government to seize the coins and then we have to prove that we got the coins through lawful means.. .

From a regular person perspective (aka normie) the idea sounds scary.


Of course, the US government should not be so dumb as to be holding fake bitcoin (or wrapped bitcoin) or some other inferior version, but yeah, you never know when it comes to various kinds of delusions that might end up playing out in these new ideas about BSR.  Now conveniently or perhaps amorphously or perhaps misleadingly calling the BSR as CSR?..  which causes (at least this here cat) speculation that they might be better off sticking with BSR so that they are able to emphasize real BTC in the reserve, but hey who knows what is going to come out of this?  Seems that a committee investigatory process would have to give the committee a chance to work through potential proposals and perhaps receive public comments and other stake holder comments on the topic too.


I doubt that the topic needs to be framed in political ways, even though it is going to be, and surely there is going to be discussion of pros and cons, and hopefully those of us who have a longer bitcoin history are going to be able to chime into any discussion in more meaningful ways.

By the way, it seems pretty regarded to have anything other than bitcoin within a BSR (or CSR), unless there is some kind of reason to show that any of those shitcoins have any justification to go into such BSR/CSR.. which I doubt, but surely there can be reasons to at least allow them to submit their facts and logic in order to argue their case., .otherwise the presumption would likely be that ONLY bitcoin would be worth the USA government holding for the purposes of pegging themselves in order to be more responsible (in a sound money kind of a sense).

By the way your listing also sounds pretty retarded.. so it seems hard to take you seriously if you are suggesting that any of those shitcoins would even come close to being justifiable when considered from a sound money kind of an angle.  Of course, the angle might be something other than sound money, so then there might need to be some discussion about how the  public interest might be served by having something other than a sound money justification in regards to determining how much is held, how it is gotten and/or other various parameters for using and/or storing it.


Aren't you the smartest and most objective person in the world whom I never did meet.   

hahahahahahahaha   


Oh gawd..


Kill me slowly.

 


Some folks within these here parts seem to be quite confused on the topic as if we traversed through a worm hole and into an alternative universe, and they seem to believe that Donald Trump and Elon Musk are now in charge of how wee here peeps talk with each other about what used to be known as "bitcoin"  aka king daddy, aka dee cornz, aka my lil precious, aka honey badger and aka some other now extinct naming conventions that we used to believe that we had, but we seem to have had been preempted into new ways of talking/thinking about these here now historical (or should I say hysterical?) matters.