Will Governments Become the Biggest BTC Whales?

[Negotiation]

Countries like El salvador accumulating more BTC isn’t bad in my opinion, this will definitely result in price increase and that’s good one after all.

It won’t be bad for them to accumulate more bitcoin but the thing is they are even among the lowest Bitcoin holders among countries which hold Bitcoin even as they made it a legal tender, their resources won’t allow them to have much more compare to what other countries have acquired through seizure, price increase is not only attached to countries having more bitcoin, as that have more negative effect than positive one.

It's true that it has negative impacts the idea of ​​depositing bitcoin in a country like El Salvador is a very bold and innovative move but it also comes with some risks. Given bitcoin's global acceptance and price volatility it could be a double edged sword for the country's economic security if the country can manage it properly and take educational initiatives for the local population bitcoin could benefit them in the long run.

[woez]

I think any Government will always ask something they don't know specifically to a big private investor, let's say they rate it a little below BlackRock especially if they have been in the business for a long time and understand it.

Watch where BTC is going and why all small, large and government institutions will continue to buy BTC in large amounts in the future because a recession is just around the corner and BTC is an undeniable safe haven asset to use as their reserve.

Eventually all is allowed by them.

[Woodie]

On paper it looks like a great idea, but there is so much red tape to cross especially that this involves public funds to fund such project's,  and I know El Salvador has done this before (not mining though  ) but not sure if other countries can take this up because accountability Is a bit difficult to put across when price can go down dropping the portfolio value.

So for me I believe private entities will always be the biggest whales as they have less red tape and have had the headstart for many year's.

[KiaKia]

I don't think the governments can be the heaviest whales we are going to be having, though we may not include El-Salvador in this, because they were already known for bitcoin investment right from time, but as of now, currently we can't predict on which country is going to accept bitcoin as it's official and legal currency, then also have the same mentality for investing in bitcoin, but since their leader is already showing interest for crypto reserve, let's expect that bitcoin should be the first consideration on this.

You are mistaken if you believe that this centralized world is free from control. Isn't it the government that holds this power? The U.S. government, for example, has seized thousands of illegal Bitcoins from criminals involved in unlawful activities online. Some time ago, they auctioned off a portion of these Bitcoins, but not all of them. Without spending a dime, they now possess a significant amount of Bitcoin.

Put aside any misconceptions you may have; the government is likely to hold more Bitcoin than anyone else—unless they choose not to. They can continuously print money and invest it in Bitcoin, fueling a competition among nations. In the near future, we may witness a conflict over Bitcoin as countries compete against one another.

[SensitiveEyes]

Countries can accumulate Bitcoin to become whales. They would be laying foundations for future generations to have an improved way of life than their forefathers. Only in future if their BTC has fiat value will we say it was successful gamble but more countries would have to legalise Bitcoin as a tender.

It won’t be bad for them to accumulate more bitcoin but the thing is they are even among the lowest Bitcoin holders among countries which hold Bitcoin even as they made it a legal tender, their resources won’t allow them to have much more compare to what other countries have acquired through seizure, price increase is not only attached to countries having more bitcoin, as that have more negative effect than positive one.

[Jating]

On paper it looks like a great idea, but there is so much red tape to cross especially that this involves public funds to fund such project's,  and I know El Salvador has done this before (not mining though  ) but not sure if other countries can take this up because accountability Is a bit difficult to put across when price can go down dropping the portfolio value.

So for me I believe private entities will always be the biggest whales as they have less red tape and have had the headstart for many year's.

Yes, and it depends on who is sitting as the head of that country. That's why Bukele try to bend their laws to allow him to run for another term. And so with him, winning, they continue to accumulate as much as Bitcoin as they can.

In terms of Trump, very hard for him to be elected again consecutively, and so with that, if he losses, they will make a U-turn and not hold their Bitcoin and might go to another auction to sell, just like what they have been doing in the past.

[DanWalker]

~snip~

You are mistaken if you believe that this centralized world is free from control. Isn't it the government that holds this power? The U.S. government, for example, has seized thousands of illegal Bitcoins from criminals involved in unlawful activities online. Some time ago, they auctioned off a portion of these Bitcoins, but not all of them. Without spending a dime, they now possess a significant amount of Bitcoin.

Put aside any misconceptions you may have; the government is likely to hold more Bitcoin than anyone else—unless they choose not to. They can continuously print money and invest it in Bitcoin, fueling a competition among nations. In the near future, we may witness a conflict over Bitcoin as countries compete against one another.

The government has the money printing press and they easily control this hundred trillion dollar economy, and even though the bitcoin network is decentralized but it runs on the flow of money from the economy. So it would be naive to say that bitcoin would escape their hands if they wanted to.

But I don't believe there will be conflicts between countries because of bitcoin. Bitcoin is not oil, gas, rare earths or gold, and despite its potential but it is just a virtual asset. As long as you have money, you can buy as much as you want, it's not like other mineral resources. So there will never be a geopolitical conflict because of bitcoin.

[gunhell16]

Obviously when a government of a country invests in bitcoin, there is no doubt that they will be one of the whale investors of Bitcoin because they are the ones who hold the taxes of the citizens under their jurisdiction in their country.

However, at this time, only a few countries are really investing in bitcoin and other top altcoins. Then the others, even if they are individuals, have accumulated much more bitcoins than other countries that invest in bitcoin, just like Michael Saylor, Elon Musk, Vitalik Buterin if I am not mistaken. And other tycoon businessmen who are interested in Bitcoin or large companies around the world that are also investing in Bitcoin like Blackrock and others.

[qwertyup23]

Some governments (like El Salvador and Russia) are moving into bitcoin mining. If more nation-states accumulate BTC, what impact will this have on decentralization and price stability? Could this lead to geopolitical bitcoin wars?

I do not think so. Even if government were to own at least a substantial amount of BTC in the market, there are still factors that are present that counters inflation and total price control from these entitites.

Remember that BTC is a deflationary crypto with its limited supply of 21 million (which is expected to be fully mined by the year 2140). Basing from its price history alone, the trend of its price is upwards- meaning, its price continues to rises as coins are being mined each year. With dozens of forks happening, this translates to volatility. I really doubt that the price of BTC would be stable in the market. I mean, that is what makes BTC so attractive to investors- you can either profit/lose money in a relatively short amount of time.

Countries can accumulate Bitcoin to become whales. They would be laying foundations for future generations to have an improved way of life than their forefathers. Only in future if their BTC has fiat value will we say it was successful gamble but more countries would have to legalise Bitcoin as a tender.

It won’t be bad for them to accumulate more bitcoin but the thing is they are even among the lowest Bitcoin holders among countries which hold Bitcoin even as they made it a legal tender, their resources won’t allow them to have much more compare to what other countries have acquired through seizure, price increase is not only attached to countries having more bitcoin, as that have more negative effect than positive one.

I would also agree on your statement. I do believe that if a certain entity controls majority of the supply in the market, they can at least have a big contribution to its price manipulation in the market. But from the experience of many over the years, I guess this will not do as big damage as some thought of.

[YOSHIE]

Some governments (like El Salvador and Russia) are moving into bitcoin mining. If more nation-states accumulate BTC, what impact will this have on decentralization and price stability? Could this lead to geopolitical bitcoin wars?

If that happens, I'm sure you will see the price of Bitcoin $ 1-2 million/pieces, the general reason for the supply of 21 million will result in Bitcoin to be rare, not to mention the countless bitcoin The amount is immersed in the wallet because the owner dies and another factor reduction of each Halving occurs.

For that, if all countries adopted Bitcoin, you know for yourself what happens to rare goods, but I think that will not happen, only a few countries are brave like El Salvador, others are still pros and cons, because not all countries think like El's mindSalvador, I think it's just a hallucination.

[AsvXrin]

Some governments (like El Salvador and Russia) are moving into bitcoin mining. If more nation-states accumulate BTC, what impact will this have on decentralization and price stability? Could this lead to geopolitical bitcoin wars?

If that happens, I'm sure you will see the price of Bitcoin $ 1-2 million/pieces, the general reason for the supply of 21 million will result in Bitcoin to be rare, not to mention the countless bitcoin The amount is immersed in the wallet because the owner dies and another factor reduction of each Halving occurs.

For that, if all countries adopted Bitcoin, you know for yourself what happens to rare goods, but I think that will not happen, only a few countries are brave like El Salvador, others are still pros and cons, because not all countries think like El's mindSalvador, I think it's just a hallucination.

I've been thinking about what'd happen if more countries jumped in to mine and stash bitcoin. I mean, there's only so much of it right? So I figure that could push the price way up, maybe even to crazy high, since it's get harder to grab some. But it kinda worries me too, because if big governments start hoarding it, they might end up controlling too much and that feels off for something that's supposed to be free from all that. I dont think we're headed for wars over bitcoin just yet, most places still seems nervous about going all in. The way its supply stays tight and gets cut in half every few years keeps me hooked, though it's like a slow burn that keeps the value ticking up. For me, the whole point of bitcoin sticking around is that it stays spread out, not locked up by a few big shots. I'm curious to see how it shakes out as more folks wake up to it.

[Marvell1]

Yes, and it depends on who is sitting as the head of that country. That's why Bukele try to bend their laws to allow him to run for another term. And so with him, winning, they continue to accumulate as much as Bitcoin as they can.

In terms of Trump, very hard for him to be elected again consecutively, and so with that, if he losses, they will make a U-turn and not hold their Bitcoin and might go to another auction to sell, just like what they have been doing in the past.

Trump is in his second term as president, which means he cannot run again in the next US election, which will take place in 2028. According to the US Constitution, each president can only serve two terms and the US constitution is more complex than any other country in the world, changing or amending the constitution is almost impossible.

That's right, if the Democrats regain control of the White House in 2028, bitcoin reserves will almost certainly be repealed and they will likely try to sell those bitcoins.  The only way to prevent that from happening is for the Trump administration to turn the strategic bitcoin reserve into a bill, and to do that, they need to convince Congress to approve a strategic bitcoin reserve. But I doubt they will be able to succeed because the Democrats are almost against the idea.

[SensitiveEyes]

It has to be about market manipulation and control otherwise countries would not have Bitcoin in their sights. There is a limited supply of Bitcoin in circulation of which many have been lost because of inexperience or negligence. Over time countries will become the biggest whales because they have the biggest money available to buy.

I would also agree on your statement. I do believe that if a certain entity controls majority of the supply in the market, they can at least have a big contribution to its price manipulation in the market. But from the experience of many over the years, I guess this will not do as big damage as some thought of.

[hero_the_bossman]

It has to be about market manipulation and control otherwise countries would not have Bitcoin in their sights. There is a limited supply of Bitcoin in circulation of which many have been lost because of inexperience or negligence. Over time countries will become the biggest whales because they have the biggest money available to buy.

Only if they will see the reason to do so on such a scale.
 
Most are still ignorant.

[Abiky]

Trump is in his second term as president, which means he cannot run again in the next US election, which will take place in 2028. According to the US Constitution, each president can only serve two terms and the US constitution is more complex than any other country in the world, changing or amending the constitution is almost impossible.

That's right, if the Democrats regain control of the White House in 2028, bitcoin reserves will almost certainly be repealed and they will likely try to sell those bitcoins.  The only way to prevent that from happening is for the Trump administration to turn the strategic bitcoin reserve into a bill, and to do that, they need to convince Congress to approve a strategic bitcoin reserve. But I doubt they will be able to succeed because the Democrats are almost against the idea.

That's a big "IF". A recent poll showed the Democratic Party's favorability rating decline. They're unpopular as ever. I doubt this will change by 2028. Despite Trump's controversial tariffs, America is a lot safer thanks to the President's increasing deportation efforts. I have faith that the American economy will eventually recover after a short period of "pain". Hopefully, Congress will turn the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve into a bill to make it official.

I'd say Gold is history as Bitcoin adoption increases at a fast pace. More governments and investors (both retail and institutional) are adding BTC to their portfolios. $1m is feasible in the long run. As long as there's a balance between governments and people holding Bitcoin, there should be nothing to worry about. Things will start to go in the wrong direction if governments accumulate most of the circulating supply. The future is unpredictable, so I'd hope for the best.

[Marvell1]

That's a big "IF". A recent poll showed the Democratic Party's favorability rating decline. They're unpopular as ever. I doubt this will change by 2028. Despite Trump's controversial tariffs, America is a lot safer thanks to the President's increasing deportation efforts. I have faith that the American economy will eventually recover after a short period of "pain". Hopefully, Congress will turn the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve into a bill to make it official.

I'd say Gold is history as Bitcoin adoption increases at a fast pace. More governments and investors (both retail and institutional) are adding BTC to their portfolios. $1m is feasible in the long run. As long as there's a balance between governments and people holding Bitcoin, there should be nothing to worry about. Things will start to go in the wrong direction if governments accumulate most of the circulating supply. The future is unpredictable, so I'd hope for the best.

It is too early to predict who will be the next president of the United States as Trump has been in office for less than 3 months and anything can happen as in his first term. He unexpectedly lost to Biden in the 2020 election.
In my opinion, nothing is certain until Congress passes a strategic bitcoin reserve. Because there is no guarantee that the next president will support bitcoin even if he is the Republican candidate.

Look at the current price of gold despite the amount of gold mined and supply increasing every year. That shows that the demand for gold has never cooled down, so I don't think gold is history. Although bitcoin has become more popular and has a stronger foothold over the years, but honestly, I don't think it can surpass gold as the choice of the vast majority of people in the world in the near future.

[EarnOnVictor]

Countries like El salvador accumulating more BTC isn’t bad in my opinion, this will definitely result in price increase and that’s good one after all.

It won’t be bad for them to accumulate more bitcoin but the thing is they are even among the lowest Bitcoin holders among countries which hold Bitcoin even as they made it a legal tender, their resources won’t allow them to have much more compare to what other countries have acquired through seizure, price increase is not only attached to countries having more bitcoin, as that have more negative effect than positive one.

First, it will not be good for the government to have the most of Bitcoin because they might find a way to control it despite being decentralised and that can't be good. It may be a good thing initially to help the price pump, but with time, it will not be. Again, you can't blame the government for not buying Bitcoin, Bitcoin itself is risky in terms of volatility and they have to be cautious of what they can't control. And this doesn't mean they do not invest, governments invest in various ways and forms.

[SensitiveEyes]

Most countries are not ignorant. They have economy experts who advised them to jump on the gravy train a long time ago without disclosing their intentions. We have not been told their precise BTC balance but expenditures should be published in annual accounts documents.

It has to be about market manipulation and control otherwise countries would not have Bitcoin in their sights. There is a limited supply of Bitcoin in circulation of which many have been lost because of inexperience or negligence. Over time countries will become the biggest whales because they have the biggest money available to buy.

Only if they will see the reason to do so on such a scale.
 
Most are still ignorant.

[dezoel]

First, it will not be good for the government to have the most of Bitcoin because they might find a way to control it despite being decentralised and that can't be good. It may be a good thing initially to help the price pump, but with time, it will not be.

For them it is good because they are mainly the ones that can benefit out of it but if we know an advance info about their movements we can also benefit on it. Being decentralized doesn't mean it is now free from market manipulation but the ones that being decentralized mean is that our funds won't get frozen just like what we experience on banks, Paypal, and other centralized entities.

Again, you can't blame the government for not buying Bitcoin, Bitcoin itself is risky in terms of volatility and they have to be cautious of what they can't control. And this doesn't mean they do not invest, governments invest in various ways and forms.

Yes. None is forced here anyways. Some governments can even do worse things like banning it. Instead of blaming them, we must be thankful if our government doesn't do this. Another reason to be thankful is like you said earlier, about BTC being manipulatable.

[Zadicar]

Most countries are not ignorant. They have economy experts who advised them to jump on the gravy train a long time ago without disclosing their intentions. We have not been told their precise BTC balance but expenditures should be published in annual accounts documents.

Pretty sure there are, but we do know on how government works and on the hidden schemes that they've been doing behind the curtains and without having that kind of transparency. Its not really that shocking anymore. The current numbers that government do owns arent only those numbers that been known on public, There's always having those plans and we do know that they dont really want to be get left behind on the trend on which specially if this one talks about making money because we do know that more money which means that it do have even more power. Would the be become the BTC whales? There's no doubt on this one on which they can just simply print out fiat and purchase it out. This might be not be looked upon but actually this is happening. Government do always love that manipulation on which this isnt really that talking about into those casual market markers or manipulators.