https://thepavlovictoday.com/howard-lutnick-reveals-trump-to-unveil-bitcoin-reserve-strategy-at-white-house-crypto-summit/

https://m.primal.net/PUyP.mov

nostr:nevent1qqstwczznspze3r0y80h3hl99mchwguqpnquvkjngw6zj67nuzp4czspyfmhxue69uhkummnw3ez6an9wf5kv6t9vsh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet5x2qdcj

The IMF (and World Bank) has historically imposed economic conditions that force developing nations to prioritize foreign debt repayment and economic policies favoring multinational corporations over domestic economic sovereignty. These conditions often limit a country’s ability to pursue independent economic strategies, such as nationalizing resources, setting up protective trade policies, and now, in the digital age, adopting Bitcoin as a reserve asset. See nostr:nprofile1qqs9336p4f3sctdrtft2wlqaq5upjz9azpgylhfd3dplwf005mfrr9spzamhxue69uhkummnw3ezuendwsh8w6t69e3xj7spz3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wcq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kueg6g89xw and J. Perkins (Confessions of an Economic Hitman) bodies of work for more context on how the IMF operates and their economic aftermath.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗪𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗜𝗠𝗙 𝗢𝗽𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗕𝗶𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗶𝗻 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝘂𝗺𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻?

Bitcoin represents an alternative to the global dollar-based financial system, which is dominated by the IMF, World Bank, and Western financial institutions. If El Salvador successfully accumulates Bitcoin and demonstrates its use as a sovereign reserve asset, it could set a precedent for other developing nations to reduce reliance on the IMF’s financial mechanisms.

The IMF traditionally structures loans to ensure that the borrowing country remains within the dollar-based global economy. Bitcoin adoption could reduce El Salvador’s reliance on the U.S. dollar, challenging the traditional financial architecture in which the IMF plays a central role.

If El Salvador complies, it may remain dependent on traditional financial institutions and the dollar based system for a longer timeframe. By limiting Bitcoin accumulation, the IMF forces El Salvador to stay within an economic system prone to inflation, capital controls, and external geopolitical shocks.

El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment, spearheaded by Bukele, challenges the traditional debt-based system and represents an alternative development model that the IMF may perceive as a threat.

Much is at stake: if El Salvador were to succeed in integrating Bitcoin successfully, it could encourage other countries to follow suit. The IMF’s condition is likely a preemptive measure to prevent this trend from gaining traction.

𝗘𝗹 𝗦𝗮𝗹𝘃𝗮𝗱𝗼𝗿 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝗮𝘁 𝗮 𝗖𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗱

El Salvador already has a strategic geopolitical advantage compared to other countries that have accepted IMF loans in that they have accumulated over 6,000 Bitcoin.

The US Federal and State governments, other Western countries, and sovereign wealth are increasingly contemplating adding Bitcoin to reserves. As one of the first movers, El Salvador is in a unique position to repay it's debt with potential Bitcoin price appreciation with rising global adoption, unlike other developing countries that continue to take on debt (and loan conditions) via IMF loan restructuring.

Further, El Salvador has implemented soft Bitcoin initiatives like education (see the ES Bitcoin Office's initiatives), which position its people and businesses towards individual adoption and accumulation (vs at a national level). These are more likely to survive government terms and changing policies, and also build businesses that can compete globally in a growing Bitcoin economy.

When El Salvador adopted the Bitcoin Law, it appeared that Bitcoin could be an alternative pathway for developing countries becoming more economically sovereign instead of taking on IMF and World Bank loans. The disappointment observed by Bitcoiners in seeing the conditions imposed by the IMF are understandable. But it may not be black or white -- more time is needed to assess the lasting success of El Salvador’s efforts to become a Bitcoin Country.

nostr:nprofile1qqs94rjcrut2qyhzf54xgq2j44tzqkxtqe0pmu5wjp7ph75zc9gv3wspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqg5waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t0uf4w5l nostr:nprofile1qqsfkmv4ka4qzxg6f3mcrptgrmtl808d9ll63eq4zmk8sfqtyyegtagpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3ezua3sdshxjmcpr9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezu7n9vfjkget99e3kcmm4vswxn8hd nostr:nprofile1qqspfrgnv6j7geetzvs6muqry9mclp4zxudyhklfjyel9r0sk0fjlggprpmhxue69uhhqun9d45h2mfwwpexjmtpdshxuet5qngdep nostr:npub1phvflpwfkevj50jlvaw5lerl7avynpwt5tl9kpmt07kwmnsw04vqe9n97v nostr:nprofile1qqspgzz3qcml9esk5p5zzwyupqnk2rxcpv6pdueew35c9vnxwdsjwuqpz4mhxue69uhk2er9dchxummnw3ezumrpdejqz9rhwden5te0wfjkccte9ejxzmt4wvhxjmckxkg2n nostr:nprofile1qqsg86qcm7lve6jkkr64z4mt8lfe57jsu8vpty6r2qpk37sgtnxevjcpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejsz8thwden5te0dehhxarj94c82c3wwajkcmr0wfjx2u3wdejhgl0ln6a #bitcoin #nostr

https://www.hudsonbaycapital.com/documents/FG/hudsonbay/research/638199_A_Users_Guide_to_Restructuring_the_Global_Trading_System.pdf

He is the economist that Trump nominated to chair his Council of Economic Advisors. In that report, Mirran discusses the persistent US trade deficits, their causes, and overall it aligns quite closely with what I wrote in Chapter 13 of Broken Money: Heavy is the Head that Wears the Crown.

Mirran also goes into potential solutions for it, including the risks of performing those potential solutions. Basically, behind all the headline driven stuff, that's the intellectual version of this administration's playbook. Like, the steelman argument for what they're trying to do in theory.

Here's his executive summary:

"The desire to reform the global trading system and put American industry on fairer ground vis-à-vis the rest of the world has been a consistent theme for President Trump for decades. We may be on the cusp of generational change in the international trade and financial systems.

The root of the economic imbalances lies in persistent dollar overvaluation that prevents the balancing of international trade, and this overvaluation is driven by inelastic demand for reserve assets. As global GDP grows, it becomes increasingly burdensome for the United States to finance the provision of reserve assets and the defense umbrella, as the manufacturing and tradeable sectors bear the brunt of the costs.

In this essay I attempt to catalogue some of the available tools for reshaping these systems, the tradeoffs that accompany the use of those tools, and policy options for minimizing side effects. This is not policy advocacy, but an attempt to understand the financial market consequences of potential significant changes in trade or financial policy.

Tariffs provide revenue, and if offset by currency adjustments, present minimal inflationary or otherwise adverse side effects, consistent with the experience in 2018-2019. While currency offset can inhibit adjustments to trade flows, it suggests that tariffs are ultimately financed by the tariffed nation, whose real purchasing power and wealth decline, and that the revenue raised improves burden sharing for reserve asset provision. Tariffs will likely be implemented in a manner deeply intertwined with national security concerns, and I discuss a variety of possible implementation schemes. I also discuss optimal tariff rates in the context of the rest of the U.S. taxation system.

Currency policy aimed at correcting the undervaluation of other nations’ currencies brings an entirely different set of tradeoffs and potential implications. Historically, the United States has pursued multilateral approaches to currency adjustments. While many analysts believe there are no tools available to unilaterally address currency misvaluation, that is not true. I describe some potential avenues for both multilateral and unilateral currency adjustment strategies, as well as means of mitigating unwanted side effects.

Finally, I discuss a variety of financial market consequences of these policy tools, and possible sequencing."