Everything you wanted to know about Bitcoin Strategic Reserve

[moneystery]

Hard for him to prove his allegation since his accusation against Ripple is just base only on his personal belief, towards U.S strategic reserve and making XRP to be consider as that to.

His claims just pure ideological and he don't have any evidence to back his claims. So his claims will not provably prosper if he bring it out legal scene. So what's happening is like Jack Maller is doing smear campaign against XRP.

Maybe he need to provide solid proof of his claim so people reading his statement will pay more attention and possibly believe on those things he said against XRP. Also Jack Maller is long time XRP hater since for what I read he believes that XRP is harmful on Bitcoin.

Although he doesn't have any solid evidence to back up his claims, I believe he's right. The Ripple CEO has been a vocal advocate for the strategic reserve to encompass more than just Bitcoin, but also crypto in general, ensuring that XRP is included among the digital assets. He's also very close to many high-ranking American officials, and even persuaded Trump to expand the Bitcoin strategic reserve to a crypto strategic reserve, but that's still just a proposal and Trump's announcements on his social media.

With all the lobbying he's done, we shouldn't be surprised if one day the term 'Bitcoin Strategic Reserve' changes to 'Crypto Strategic Reserve' with XRP included among other cryptocurrencies.

[fillippone]

With all the lobbying he's done, we shouldn't be surprised if one day the term 'Bitcoin Strategic Reserve' changes to 'Crypto Strategic Reserve' with XRP included among other cryptocurrencies.

Simply put, Ripple is a bad actor.
There is a reason n why “Bitcoin Strategic Reserve” has been clearly differentiated from “Digital Assets Stockpile”.
Changing this setup would be simply criminal.

[laspol65]

The Czech President has been holding Bitcoin for over three years and has signed a law to remove the tax on the dividends from that Bitcoin. This is great. The Czech government has taken the right steps to attract more investors to their country. And many more investors will be interested in holding Bitcoin, this kind of news will definitely play a big role in increasing Bitcoin holdings.

[KawasakiNinja1_]

The Czech President has been holding Bitcoin for over three years and has signed a law to remove the tax on the dividends from that Bitcoin. This is great. The Czech government has taken the right steps to attract more investors to their country. And many more investors will be interested in holding Bitcoin, this kind of news will definitely play a big role in increasing Bitcoin holdings.

Lol Is this new news? Have you considered it? I saw this news on February 6, 2025, where it was mentioned that the Czech Republic has removed tax for long-term Bitcoin holders.So considering how old news it is, this might be a good thing for the Czech Republic because the holders there might be inspired by Bitcoin. It can be said that their initiative has made them known as Bitcoin advocates within the European Union. Anyway, watch their old news here and learn.

Czech Republic signs law removing Bitcoin tax for long-term holders — TradingView Haberleri https://tr.tradingview.com/news/cryptobriefing%3Aa8bf48daa094b%3A0-czech-republic-signs-law-removing-bitcoin-tax-for-long-term-holders/

[ultrloa]

Maybe he need to provide solid proof of his claim so people reading his statement will pay more attention and possibly believe on those things he said against XRP. It  Also Jack Maller is long time XRP hater since for what I read he believes that XRP is harmful on Bitcoin.

I must admit I didn’t check whether the video is new or just a retweet of something already known.
I find the accusation plausible, as I broadly know the “unfairness” of the Ripple Foundation, even if I would have liked some factual or semi-factual evidence of these claims. It’s too easy for him in his position to throw those accusations without any check.

Also I get it why those accusation seems have weights since somehow Ripple had bad history, but his doubt or statement cannot stand up if he cannot bring proof. So what's happening out their is he's just like speculating.

If he's really serious maybe better for him to back his claims with verifiable evidence and not just he's like throwing negative statement since he that will make him irrelevant and people support XRP might call him as a troll.

Hard for him to prove his allegation since his accusation against Ripple is just base only on his personal belief, towards U.S strategic reserve and making XRP to be consider as that to.

His claims just pure ideological and he don't have any evidence to back his claims. So his claims will not provably prosper if he bring it out legal scene. So what's happening is like Jack Maller is doing smear campaign against XRP.

Maybe he need to provide solid proof of his claim so people reading his statement will pay more attention and possibly believe on those things he said against XRP. Also Jack Maller is long time XRP hater since for what I read he believes that XRP is harmful on Bitcoin.

Although he doesn't have any solid evidence to back up his claims, I believe he's right. The Ripple CEO has been a vocal advocate for the strategic reserve to encompass more than just Bitcoin, but also crypto in general, ensuring that XRP is included among the digital assets. He's also very close to many high-ranking American officials, and even persuaded Trump to expand the Bitcoin strategic reserve to a crypto strategic reserve, but that's still just a proposal and Trump's announcements on his social media.

With all the lobbying he's done, we shouldn't be surprised if one day the term 'Bitcoin Strategic Reserve' changes to 'Crypto Strategic Reserve' with XRP included among other cryptocurrencies.

Yeah even if we believe on him still those statement is nothing if he don't have solid evidence, what he says will remain as his personal opinion. Ripple owners is really eager to make their coin to be added on national strategic reserve.

That proposal to make it crypto strategic reserve is really in discussions, but if there's no policy shift happens and government has no interest to make it happen. This will remain to be a speculation and still unknown if this situation would really happen. But I hope it will not and government will continue to focus on their Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.

[MagnificentX]

The Czech President has been holding Bitcoin for over three years and has signed a law to remove the tax on the dividends from that Bitcoin. This is great. The Czech government has taken the right steps to attract more investors to their country. And many more investors will be interested in holding Bitcoin, this kind of news will definitely play a big role in increasing Bitcoin holdings.

This is not a new rule, it has been made since February 2025 and has only been effective through to 2026. But over all, I suspect there is something more than what the President of Czech Republic is showing to the public. It is not new to be world that The Czech Republic Central Bank bought $1 million worth Bitcoin and other Crypto assets for testing during November 2025.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.reuters.com/business/czech-central-bank-buys-1-mln-bitcoin-other-crypto-assets-testing-2025-11-13/&ved=2ahUKEwjRr_7TyKWSAxUWU0EAHYpdICQQxfQBKAB6BAgGEAE&usg=AOvVaw1_cn2ihzQPS5auRpy7pVVr

Maybe Mr. President has some other plans in mind but we believe as time goes on, we will get to know it all

[Derekfunds]

The Czech President has been holding Bitcoin for over three years and has signed a law to remove the tax on the dividends from that Bitcoin. This is great. The Czech government has taken the right steps to attract more investors to their country. And many more investors will be interested in holding Bitcoin, this kind of news will definitely play a big role in increasing Bitcoin holdings.

It gladden's my heart when Government make this kind of rule and sometimes it is a way of helping the citizens they can not or may not be able to help or assist directly. And it is an impressive and remarkable thing for the president as traders and investors will appreciate it because paying tax to the government even when you are barely making something tangible from Crypto doesn't make any sense, I mean there are people who are struggling to make a living and this kind of rule will help these kind of folks and it is indeed a welcome development.

[fillippone]

South Dakota is looking for a proposal to allocate up to 10% of State funds to Bitcoin purchase.

South Dakota Republican Rep Pushes 10% Bitcoin Bill

South Dakota Republican Representative Logan Manhart filed House Bill 1155 on Tuesday, proposing the state invest up to 10% of public funds in Bitcoin. The legislation marks Manhart's second attempt at establishing a Bitcoin reserve after similar 2025 legislation stalled without passage.

It's a war of attrition. Taking down a problem at time to establish a Bitcoin reserve. It takes time, and multiple iteration of the same process.

[Lembo69]

JUST IN: SEC CHAIR PAUL ATKINS JUST SAID CONFLICTING #BITCOIN AND CRYPTO RULES WILL FINALLY BE HARMONIZED TOMORROW

CLARITY ERA BEGINS 🔥

Source:https://x.com/i/status/2016589573925597516

If all the conflicting rules of Bitcoin are really fulfilled, then it will be a real joy for investors. Now it seems that the crypto market is really going to see the world of their imagination after many years. If this is really implemented, then no one will be afraid to invest in the future.

[Ambatman]

It's a war of attrition. Taking down a problem at time to establish a Bitcoin reserve. It takes time, and multiple iteration of the same process.

It's cheaper now and could be the cheapest they would ever get it.
It would go better this time than last especially with the harmonization of regulations
Around Bitcoin and cryptocurrency
Bullish and would help those sitting at the fence due to regulatory ambiguity.

[impulse709]

It's a war of attrition. Taking down a problem at time to establish a Bitcoin reserve. It takes time, and multiple iteration of the same process.

It's cheaper now and could be the cheapest they would ever get it.
It would go better this time than last especially with the harmonization of regulations
Around Bitcoin and cryptocurrency
Bullish and would help those sitting at the fence due to regulatory ambiguity.

This is a view with which I concur. The creation of a Bitcoin strategic reserve is actually a war of attrition and not a war that can be handled in one night. The administrations and organizations must be reiterated several times in order to minimize the risk, trial the system, and gain the trust of people. In retrospect, the current prices might appear very low, particularly in case of adoption, with a fixed supply. The only difference between this effort and the ones of the past is that the regulations surrounding Bitcoin and crypto overall are becoming more harmonized. More explicit regulations minimize uncertainty and that is just what most diffident players are hoping. Comprehensively, this belligerent strategy is bullish and might be the ultimate even to fence-sitters.

[fillippone]

It's a war of attrition. Taking down a problem at time to establish a Bitcoin reserve. It takes time, and multiple iteration of the same process.

It's cheaper now and could be the cheapest they would ever get it.
It would go better this time than last especially with the harmonization of regulations
Around Bitcoin and cryptocurrency
Bullish and would help those sitting at the fence due to regulatory ambiguity.

I think, after all this time is time to reconsider the roadmap to bitcoin being accepted as a store of value.
With Gold rallying to all-time highs, Central Banks have been buying hoards of Gold, not Bitcoin.

For a 20-year investment horizon, you have to ask yourself: What's the probability that Bitcoin's current cryptographic foundation remains secure for the entire duration? Even if there's a migration to quantum-resistant algorithms, will it be smooth? Will old wallets be vulnerable? We're talking about unknowns that could crater the entire value proposition.

Store of Value needs certainty, not Volatility.

Gold has proven itself over millennia. It doesn't have Bitcoin's upside potential. But when central banks - the most risk-averse, long-term-thinking institutions on the planet - choose gold, we must reconsider the very challenging timeline to bitcoin acceptance we put in place when I started this thread.

Bitcoin is still the greatest invention in human history, but calling it a "store of value" comparable to gold? The market is showing us that it's increasingly hard to justify when the institutions that actually need to preserve value for decades aren't buying it, not even in the tiny size that would be allowed by the liquidity of the current market.

[JayJuanGee]

It's a war of attrition. Taking down a problem at time to establish a Bitcoin reserve. It takes time, and multiple iteration of the same process.

It's cheaper now and could be the cheapest they would ever get it.
It would go better this time than last especially with the harmonization of regulations
Around Bitcoin and cryptocurrency
Bullish and would help those sitting at the fence due to regulatory ambiguity.

I think, after all this time is time to reconsider the roadmap to bitcoin being accepted as a store of value.
With Gold rallying to all-time highs, Central Banks have been buying hoards of Gold, not Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is around 1,000x better than gold or more, so sure the road to such prices reflected in the market may well take some time, and we should not get overly distracted by the short term. Try moving gold and verifying it and dividing it and it is not even as scarce as bitcoin.  Good luck with your shiny rocks.

For a 20-year investment horizon, you have to ask yourself: What's the probability that Bitcoin's current cryptographic foundation remains secure for the entire duration? Even if there's a migration to quantum-resistant algorithms, will it be smooth? Will old wallets be vulnerable? We're talking about unknowns that could crater the entire value proposition.

So?  You considering lighting your bitcoin load?

Doesn't seem to be a good idea, even though you are surely free to make your allocation choices.

Store of Value needs certainty, not Volatility.

You are really devolving into short term thinking.  Gold has been more volatile than bitcoin in the last year-ish... to the upside.

Bitcoin kicked the shit out of gold in the past 14-ish years (and no we don't need to count the first few years, let's start from January 2012 - with bitcoin at $5).

Gold has proven itself over millennia. It doesn't have Bitcoin's upside potential. But when central banks - the most risk-averse, long-term-thinking institutions on the planet - choose gold, we must reconsider the very challenging timeline to bitcoin acceptance we put in place when I started this thread.

You sound lost based on short term price movements.

Bitcoin is still the greatest invention in human history, but calling it a "store of value" comparable to gold?

Yep.  Bitcoin is way the fuck better than gold (around 1,000x), including but not limited to store of value, and you better snap the fuck out of it.

The market is showing us that it's increasingly hard to justify when the institutions that actually need to preserve value for decades aren't buying it, not even in the tiny size that would be allowed by the liquidity of the current market.

Do the gold owners have actual gold or paper gold?  Have they verified what they supposedly have?  Have they taken physical possession of it?  I doubt it.

[fillippone]

So?  You considering lighting your bitcoin load?

Doesn't seem to be a good idea, even though you are surely free to make your allocation choices.

Lol.
NO.

Bitcoin is 1,000x better than gold.
I am not going to sell anytime soon.
I will keep stacking every possible satoshi.

My reflection is only about the unfolding of events. We have been fooled by Trump, who led us to believe the establishment of a Bitcoin Strategic Reserve was imminent.

The reality is that the imminent dedollarisation is not going to lead to an imminent Bitcoin Standard, but rather to a multi-decade-long fight between physical Gold and digital gold.
Bitcoin will emerge, but it will take time.
More time to stack SATs.

[MusaMohamed]

I think, after all this time is time to reconsider the roadmap to bitcoin being accepted as a store of value.
With Gold rallying to all-time highs, Central Banks have been buying hoards of Gold, not Bitcoin.

For a 20-year investment horizon, you have to ask yourself: What's the probability that Bitcoin's current cryptographic foundation remains secure for the entire duration? Even if there's a migration to quantum-resistant algorithms, will it be smooth? Will old wallets be vulnerable? We're talking about unknowns that could crater the entire value proposition.

Store of Value needs certainty, not Volatility.

Gold has proven itself over millennia. It doesn't have Bitcoin's upside potential. But when central banks - the most risk-averse, long-term-thinking institutions on the planet - choose gold, we must reconsider the very challenging timeline to bitcoin acceptance we put in place when I started this thread.

Bitcoin is still the greatest invention in human history, but calling it a "store of value" comparable to gold? The market is showing us that it's increasingly hard to justify when the institutions that actually need to preserve value for decades aren't buying it, not even in the tiny size that would be allowed by the liquidity of the current market.

Bitcoin is younger than gold and if we consider gold as the elderly, Bitcoin is like a baby, not even a child. So far since 2009, about 16 years and Bitcoin has very impressive parabolic growth curve that outperforms gold growth curve. Bitcoin has already passed through its hardest time and from now it will grow up more easily and safely without fear such as "Bitcoin is dead".

Not to shill Bitcoin or this book or to sink gold, but this book deserves time for reading.
The bullish case for Bitcoin (part 1) and you can continue reading with other parts. This book is available for purchase at Amazon too.

Gold has its own cycle about 16 years and latest years belong to its new bullish cycle so it's normal to see gold outperforms Bitcoin recent months but in long term, Bitcoin will be a better investment asset than Gold with better ROI.
A 16-year gold cycle?

One dollar invested at the start of each 16-year gold cycle is worth $5.20 at the top of the cycle, i.e. eleven to twelve years later. At the end of the downtrend, a dollar invested sixteen years earlier is worth an average of $2.70. These statistics are therefore real, and relate to gold's last three major 16-year cycles. They give a close enough picture of gold's actual behavior to date.

[MarryWithBTC]

So?  You considering lighting your bitcoin load?

Doesn't seem to be a good idea, even though you are surely free to make your allocation choices.

Lol.
NO.

Bitcoin is 1,000x better than gold.
I am not going to sell anytime soon.
I will keep stacking every possible satoshi.

My reflection is only about the unfolding of events. We have been fooled by Trump, who led us to believe the establishment of a Bitcoin Strategic Reserve was imminent.

The reality is that the imminent dedollarisation is not going to lead to an imminent Bitcoin Standard, but rather to a multi-decade-long fight between physical Gold and digital gold.
Bitcoin will emerge, but it will take time.
More time to stack SATs.

Price movements and political narratives can easily shake confidence in hodling, but they don't change what bitcoin is and what it stands for. That is why we should continue hodling and stacking sats as possible.

Your claim that bitcoin is 1000x better than gold is debatable, the physical gold has made name for itself and has nothing to fight against. But the emerging digital goal really has alot of related and unrelated fights.

but thanks for the reassurance. we need posts like this at this time.

[ultrloa]

So?  You considering lighting your bitcoin load?

Doesn't seem to be a good idea, even though you are surely free to make your allocation choices.

Lol.
NO.

Bitcoin is 1,000x better than gold.
I am not going to sell anytime soon.
I will keep stacking every possible satoshi.

My reflection is only about the unfolding of events. We have been fooled by Trump, who led us to believe the establishment of a Bitcoin Strategic Reserve was imminent.

The reality is that the imminent dedollarisation is not going to lead to an imminent Bitcoin Standard, but rather to a multi-decade-long fight between physical Gold and digital gold.
Bitcoin will emerge, but it will take time.
More time to stack SATs.

Provably that dethroning might not going to happen, but we can see it up on history that Bitcoin shows great momentum against gold. That dedollarisation thing they said provably won't create an immediate Bitcoin standard situations since there's provably lots of things will going to happen. But what good thing about Bitcoin is each cycle it proves its total resilience.

That fight between digital gold as what they named Bitcoin at physical gold might gonna take lots of decades, but the trajectory if Bitcoin is somehow clear that strong network and more high demands also wide spread adoption will provably hit new ATH.  That's the reason why accumulating Bitcoin for long term is not an ideology, but they are positioning themselves for a long term game.

[Jaksonhard]

you are absolutely right. regulation will only protect the interests of large corporate participants. ordinary users will face increased tax pressure, control over the movement of funds, introduction of all sorts of transaction reporting and so on.

Bitcoin was created as a tool for independent financial management which means you have to take all the risks by yourself rather than relying on the government or corporations.

That's all you're saying now. But what will happen next? When regulation becomes inevitable, what then? Will projects really risk their very existence? I don't think so. They'll follow the regulator's lead. Naturally, there will be those who absolutely refuse to be part of a system that dictates its own terms, but surviving under such pressure will become much more difficult.

You're correct, planning for the future is an important business decision. Most businesses that operate within the confines of established regulations will move toward compliance because of the long-term consequences of unlikely compliance. Since most established businesses are focused on complying rather than making large scale changes to their business, history has shown that the majority of long-standing businesses will remain in business after establishing a new regulatory framework. As such, a few businesses may wish not to comply with any regulations and continue to remain completely decentralized; however, operating under ongoing regulatory pressure will be a challenge. Businesses that successfully balance compliance, innovation, and customer trust are the businesses that will likely survive and prosper.

[moneystery]

If all the conflicting rules of Bitcoin are really fulfilled, then it will be a real joy for investors.

Not me, of course... because I believe the regulations they've introduced offer no benefit other than their own. They also provide no clarity, other than providing regulators and institutions with legal clarity that would allow them to profit more from cryptocurrency. So these regulations serve no purpose imo.

Now it seems that the crypto market is really going to see the world of their imagination after many years.

If this is implemented, I'm even more concerned that regulations will become stricter in the future, and even more unreasonable measures will be added under the guise of making the industry 'safer', when in practice, they have the potential to stifle innovation and benefit only a select few. As for investors, they will be increasingly pressured to comply with regulations, and over time, you will become their subjects. Is this what you imagined?

[JayJuanGee]

So?  You considering lighting your bitcoin load?
Doesn't seem to be a good idea, even though you are surely free to make your allocation choices.

Lol.
NO.
Bitcoin is 1,000x better than gold.
I am not going to sell anytime soon.
I will keep stacking every possible satoshi.

My reflection is only about the unfolding of events. We have been fooled by Trump, who led us to believe the establishment of a Bitcoin Strategic Reserve was imminent.

The reality is that the imminent dedollarisation is not going to lead to an imminent Bitcoin Standard, but rather to a multi-decade-long fight between physical Gold and digital gold.
Bitcoin will emerge, but it will take time.
More time to stack SATs.

Price movements and political narratives can easily shake confidence in hodling, but they don't change what bitcoin is and what it stands for. That is why we should continue hodling and stacking sats as possible.

Your claim that bitcoin is 1000x better than gold is debatable, the physical gold has made name for itself and has nothing to fight against. But the emerging digital goal really has alot of related and unrelated fights.

but thanks for the reassurance. we need posts like this at this time.

When it comes to monetary properties (you know about those, right? What makes a good money?  verifiable, transportable, scarce, divisible, fungible, costs in holding/transporting, etc) the physicality of gold is likely to be more of a burden rather than a benefit, except maybe in certain Armageddon scenarios  (is that your bet?  Sure Armageddon scenarios have seemed more likely since March 2020.. but still? is that what we are betting on/or insuring against with our allocation choices?).

I doubt that Gold's physicality helps it as much as you seem to be suggesting (or even arguing) in regards to offsetting bitcoin's around 1,000x superiority to gold in terms of money-ness properties rather than just picking out some random properties and proclaiming gold to be better based on your random selection of some property (I think that those are strawman errors when the arguments don't relate back to materially important attributes in terms of money-ness).

Of course, we can debate the extent to which bitcoin might be equal value to gold, or 10x gold, or 100x gold, or 1,000x gold or some other valuations, when current market price shows that bitcoin is right around 1/20 the value of gold in terms of market cap so a potential of 20,000 price increase in bitcoin and/or depreciation of gold relative to bitcoin, yet these kinds of more abstract ideas about total relative valuation and/or addressable market of each in theoretical terms still may not make very much of difference in the arguments in regards to how folks choose to allocate their time, energy and value and/or how to invest in bitcoin as compared with gold as compared with other places to but their value, since even the more bitcoin bullish angles could take 50-200 years to play out in the valuations as reflected in the market - as long as bitcoin doesn't end up getting killed prior to the longer term passage of time (and/or other unknowns about the future).. and yeah, perhaps treating bitcoin as future potential of 1,000x plus more valuable than gold is not reflected in today's prices since bitcoin is around 1/20th the current price of gold (going by market cap).

So even if in recent times (the past year or so) gold has some momentum and pumps and even some embracing by status quo financial institutions (and some governments), there still a lot of problems with aspect of its fundamentals and even the ways that it already had lost a lot of these monetary battles in modern monetary times that include its paperization in which the physicality had become part of the problem in resolving matters to transport it, verify it and even contributing to a lot of extra costs that are not present with bitcoin since the costs of bitcoin's security has tended to be spread out and part of the verification process to the extent that the projected shrinking mining reward can continue to incentivize miners to continue to mine bitcoin and to verify it in relatively decentralized ways.

You think that gold can maintain its value soley through the embracement of large institutions and/or governments?  It would be difficult to imagine that you (or other gold bugs) could imagine gold being transacted on the streets in any kind of meaningful way and to consider those ways of transacting value to be able to beat out bitcoin in any kind of meaningful way outside of maybe certain Armageddon scenarios.

By the way, don't get me wrong.  I do recognize and appreciate that there could be some value in using gold (or any other sound money) for settlement layers at higher levels, but surely a lot of costs involved with having a custodian, even if the custodians are spread all around the world and having multiple buildings.. but then there might still need to be some moving of the gold back and forth to the extent that the physical attributes are the ONLY ways to verify in a final kind of a way.

Bitcoin can be settled every 10 minutes and at all kinds of levels, Big cats (fat cats) medium and small potatoes, whether on chain or maybe using lightning or even optionally transferring through some third parties that might ONLY hold the keys for temporary times to the extent that parties might continue to use third-party custodians.