Hacker News Reader

Comment by jaredklewis | Hacker News Reader

Which part didn’t resonate? Is it a good idea for a highly indebted nation to make a sovereign wealth fund out of an extremely volatile asset? Won’t the sovereign wealth fund just become a tool for, at best, industrial policy (which has a horrible track record) or at worst, corruption?

View on HN

I’m not sure I follow how establishing a strategic reserve out of a digital commodity confiscated from crime is a threat to “a highly indebted nation”.

Additionally they’re planning to use revenue neutral ways to add to the Bitcoin reserve.

The great part about Bitcoin is that it can be time-locked to avoid spending to prevent, say, changing political parties that may decide to liquidate the reserve.

Because selling those coins and paying down debt reduces our interests payments. It’s risk free revenue. Holding assets, be it stocks or bitcoin, is making a bet on something. There’s risk in exchange for potential reward. Will the government be better at making those bets than, say hedge funds? I don’t know, but kind of doubt it.

On the other hand, the price has steadily risen far beyond any other investment over the past 15 years and there's a credible argument for why this would continue. The amount of money recouped by selling, which is only done once, is far less than the continuous payments of the absurdly bloated and outright criminal administrative state and so many other federal programs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com