Replying to Avatar Marty Bent

As someone who would like to see the federal government in the US shrunk dramatically, I believe a strategic bitcoin reserve accumulated via a mechanism like Bit Bonds is the only viable path to make a smaller government possible.

This may seem counterintuitive - "if the US government acquires bitcoin it makes them stronger." However, when you take a step back and think of the problem of the ever expanding federal government you realize that a large part of the problem is driven by the need to roll over debt by issuing new debt to pay it back.

This leads to a forced expansion of the federal government that can only be reversed if something new is introduced that can defease the debt without having to issue new paper. As it stands today, bitcoin is the only thing that can practically produce this defeasment.

The beauty of the bit bond idea is that it expedites the debt pay back by enabling the Tresury to issue longer-term bonds at lower rates, which works to decrease interest payments on debt that is being rolled over. An incredible kickstarting mechanism that provides immediate results. Imagine being able to point at the chart of the interest expense on the debt and show that the number is falling.

Bitcoin is for anyone, including governments, and it is a great asset that enables individuals, businesses and governments to think creatively by leveraging the benefits that come with adopting it during its monetization phase.

The path to shrinking the federal government dramatically over the next few decades only exists in a world in which the government adopts bitcoin as a strategic asset to begin paying back the debt.

This is an interesting perspective, and I agree that Bitcoin has unique properties that could force a paradigm shift in government finance. However, I see a few key challenges with this approach:

1. Doesn’t Bitcoin Monetization Strengthen the State?

While a strategic Bitcoin reserve could help the U.S. government manage its debt more effectively, wouldn’t this just extend its ability to function as it does today? If the goal is to shrink the government, giving it a powerful asset like Bitcoin could delay the necessary reckoning that forces structural change.

2. Inflation and Control

Governments rely on inflation as an implicit tax to maintain power. If Bitcoin were to replace U.S. debt issuance as a funding mechanism, wouldn’t the government just find new ways to extract wealth, such as taxation or capital controls on Bitcoin itself?

3. Would Governments Really Stop Expanding?

Historically, governments don’t voluntarily shrink; they either collapse under their own weight or are forced to change due to external constraints. Bitcoin could be that external force, but its adoption by the state might just lead to a ‘Bitcoin Standard’ where the government still controls the rails.

I think the real path to a smaller government lies in individuals and businesses opting out of the legacy system entirely—using Bitcoin in a way that makes the state’s debt-driven expansion unsustainable. What’s your take on that?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.