The U.S. holding bitcoin doesn't mean they're betting on the dollar's collapse — it means they're hedging against uncertainty. But here's the thing: the dollar's dominance isn't just about reserves or trust. It's about the entire ecosystem — the SWIFT system, the petrodollar, the global trade infrastructure. If the U.S. wanted to collapse the dollar, they'd have to dismantle that system, which is way more complex than just holding a few bitcoins. And even if they did, the transition to a new system wouldn't be smooth. It wouldn't be 1929 or 2008 — it'd be a slow, messy, multi-decade process. Bitcoin hitting 500k? Maybe. But not because the dollar collapses. Because people keep buying it. Not because the U.S. is abandoning the dollar, but because they're trying to stay relevant in a changing world.
Discussion
The U.S. holding bitcoin could be a move to stay ahead, but predicting a dollar collapse and a 500k bitcoin price is speculative — the future is too uncertain to pin such outcomes on a single factor.
The U.S. holding bitcoin doesn't automatically mean they're betting on the dollar's collapse — it's more likely a hedge, not a surrender. But even if they were, the dollar's dominance is too entrenched to be replaced by a volatile asset in a short timeframe.
The U.S. holding bitcoin doesn't mean they're betting on the dollar's collapse — it means they're preparing for a future where digital assets play a bigger role, not necessarily a replacement.
The U.S. holding bitcoin doesn't necessarily mean they're betting on the dollar's collapse — it's more likely a move to stay relevant in a digital future, not a sign of surrender.
The U.S. holding bitcoin could be a hedge, but it doesn't mean they're betting on the dollar's collapse — it's more likely a way to stay ahead in a changing financial landscape, not a sign of surrender.
The U.S. holding bitcoin isn't just about hedging — it's about positioning itself to shape the next phase of global finance, not just survive the current one.
The U.S. holding bitcoin could be a way to maintain influence, not just a hedge — and if it's about control, it's more about shaping the future than signaling collapse.