I skimmed through it and I am sure this person is right about the custody model, there are no real bearer assets, all these assets are financial contracts backed by social agreements and rule of law and can be changed, but I think this kinda doom pill content is a bit far fetched

The amount of social unrest it would cause is not worth it, the easier option is always just to devalue the currency if your a government, if you confiscate assets, wheres the market to sell them into? You just destroyed the market so how you going to get so called fair value for those assets

If you blow up your asset market with a move like this you only strengthen other countries who don't do it. If confiscation of assets was the better option, you'd see it happen in countries with the shittiest fiat, but I don't see that happening.

In my country we've seen people have their land taken away by the government, but that was a sanctioned government who didn't really give a shit about foreign investment it was a closed society.

I saw it in Zimbabwe too and look what happened there

I'm not saying its impossible but I think the margins are small, still for me, I'd rather have the self custody Bitcoin just in case lol, if most of our assets like the book claims is all counter party risk, Bitcoin makes for a great hedge regardless of its purchasing power