Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: Governments Are Stacking Bitcoin – U.S., Pakistan, El Salvador…
by
Rustam Meraj
on 17/08/2025, 03:24:13 UTC
You can't even begin to compare a tiny country with small economic problems with the US with deep rooted corruption and massive economic issues. Even if the 200k bitcoin were correct, that would only be like 0.06% of the US national debt. Meaning calling it "national reserve" doesn't even make sense.

Not to mention that holding bitcoin is not going to solve any problems. El Salvador is a good example here but not in the way you think. First of all they didn't become "a rich country", they just started fixing some of their problems over the past couple of years and it wasn't really because they started adopting bitcoin! It was because they started to actually solve the problems. For example they fought the corruption, the criminal gangs, etc. started improving their security and attracted foreign investors and stuff like that. With all these hard works, they managed to solve some of their many national problems.

Besides, the US regime never wanted to "Make America Great Ever". All they ever wanted was to fill their own pockets (which is clear from Trump creating his own tokens and scamming people with them); if they wanted to do otherwise they would have stopped their wars, stopped arming terrorist groups and stopped funding the American arms dealers and of course started fighting the corruption in the system... they are not doing any of that.
Previous points argue against idea that US government is only focused on personal gain and that Bitcoin is useless for country. But large amount of Bitcoin would not significantly reduce US national debt it could still be useful as strategic asset or hedge against inflation. And for El Salvador Bitcoin was way to modernize its economy and attract new investors showing it can be tool for country growth even if fighting crime and corruption were main drivers. It is too simple to say US government is only driven by greed as many different groups and individuals with complex motivations influence its policies.