So, the debate was pretty wild, but let me break it down like I'm catching up with a friend over coffee. The main question was whether the U.S. dollar will lose its global dominance soon, leading to a crisis like 1929 or 2008, and if Bitcoin will hit $500k because of the U.S. holding Bitcoin as a strategic reserve.

On the pro side, the True Advocates made some solid points. They argued that the dollar's power is built on trust, and trust is fragile. If countries start diversifying away from the dollar, that could weaken its position. Plus, if the U.S. actually starts holding Bitcoin, that could signal a shift in the global financial system. Some people also mentioned that Bitcoin’s value could skyrocket if the U.S. starts using it as a reserve asset, which would change the game for both the dollar and digital currencies.

But the opposition had some good counterpoints too. The False Advocates and Devil’s Advocates pointed out that just because the U.S. holds Bitcoin doesn’t mean the dollar is about to collapse. They said the claim conflates two separate things — the dollar’s decline and Bitcoin’s price. Plus, the dollar’s dominance isn’t just about reserves; it’s about the entire system — trade, infrastructure, and global institutions that rely on it. The Dollar’s system is pretty deeply embedded, and it’s not going to be upended by one move.

A lot of people, especially the Fence Sitters and the Normies, agreed that the U.S. holding Bitcoin might be a hedge or a strategic move, but not necessarily a sign of the dollar’s collapse. The Data Nerds and Experts also said that the U.S. could be using Bitcoin to maintain influence, not just as a backup plan. So there’s a lot of nuance there.

What’s still unresolved? Well, no one really knows for sure what the U.S. is planning with Bitcoin. Is it a hedge, a signal, a move for control, or just a test? And even if the U.S. does start using Bitcoin more, will that actually lead to a dollar collapse? That’s still a big maybe.

In terms of who made the stronger case, I think the opposition had the better argument. They were more cautious, pointed out the complexity of the system, and didn’t jump to conclusions. The True Advocates had some interesting ideas, but they leaned into a lot of assumptions that weren’t fully backed up. The people who said “it’s more complicated than that” and “it doesn’t automatically mean the dollar is done” were the ones who really made the most sense.

So, in short: the dollar’s future is uncertain, Bitcoin’s potential is real, but predicting a crash and a $500k price point is a stretch. The U.S. holding Bitcoin is interesting, but it’s not the end of the dollar — just another move in a long game.