“I know that I know nothing” - Socrates
New quote to start these posts so I can just push out content without worrying about formatting and spelling errors. Instead of giving myself permission to be a beginner, I figured I could just admit that I know nothing and whoosh, all the pressure is off. One last Julia Cameron quote for the road:
“It is impossible to get better and look good at the same time. Give yourself permission to be a beginner.” — Julia Cameron, The Artist’s Way
Sorry for the 2 week hiatus, but it was out of my control. I am back in the saddle and hope to continue posting weekly updates once again.
“Backstreet's back, alright!” - The Backstreet Boys
“I’ll be back…and I am back” - Michael Scott
Since I was out of commish for two weeks, I do not have 3 weeks of content, but rather what I did during the original 3/10-3/16 period. Thankfully, it was plenty to make a post out of without having to have a truncated 3-week post.
There were one or two podcast episodes I listened to in the 3/10-3/16 period but I will just add them to the post for this upcoming Sunday’s weekly post.
The structure of this post is:
A BTC Strategic Reserve AI analysis; then several WSJ Articles that I thought were interesting, there is the link to the article and then key quotes/my thoughts in the bullet points that follow; same for a few articles I read; then notes from the first half of the Bitcoin Policy Institute’s Bitcoin For America Event
BTC Strategic Reserve EO Ideas:
On February 3, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order directing the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Commerce to develop a plan within 90 days for establishing a U.S. sovereign wealth fund. This plan was to include recommendations for "funding mechanisms, investment strategies, fund structure, and a governance model." The order itself did not specify exact funding sources but tasked these officials with identifying them, suggesting that the funding approach was still under development at that time. The 90-day period would conclude around May 4, 2025, meaning a detailed plan might now exist, though no public release of such a finalized document is widely confirmed as of this date.
During his 2024 campaign and subsequent announcements, Trump and his administration provided some hints about potential funding sources. Trump has repeatedly suggested that tariffs could play a significant role. For instance, he mentioned using "tariffs and other intelligent things" as a funding mechanism during campaign speeches in September 2024. Post-election, this idea persisted, with the White House fact sheet accompanying the February 3 Executive Order emphasizing the federal government’s $5.7 trillion in assets—such as cash, property, and loans receivable—as a potential base for investment, implying that existing assets could be leveraged or monetized. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reinforced this by stating the fund would "monetize the asset side of the U.S. balance sheet for the American people," though he did not elaborate on specifics beyond suggesting a mix of "liquid assets" and other national resources.
Other possibilities have been speculated upon based on Trump’s economic policies. These include revenues from natural resource leases (e.g., oil, gas, or land sales), though the U.S. lacks the budget surpluses or commodity windfalls (like Norway’s oil revenues) that typically fund sovereign wealth funds.
Here’s how the SWF could intersect with acquiring additional Bitcoin in a budget-neutral way:
Leveraging Existing Assets: The SWF could use returns from its investments—say, profits from monetizing federal properties, natural resource leases, or financial assets—to purchase Bitcoin. For example, if the SWF invests in revenue-generating ventures (stocks, bonds, or real estate sales) and earns a return, those gains could be redirected to Bitcoin acquisitions without dipping into taxpayer funds. This mirrors how state-level funds like Alaska’s Permanent Fund use oil revenues, though the U.S. would need to identify analogous federal streams.
Tariff Revenues: Trump has consistently tied tariffs to the SWF, suggesting during his campaign and post-election that duties on imports (e.g., from China, Mexico, or Canada) could seed the fund. If implemented, these revenues—projected to generate billions annually depending on tariff scope—could be allocated by the SWF to buy Bitcoin. Since tariffs are paid by importers, not directly by taxpayers, this could qualify as budget-neutral under the Bitcoin Reserve’s terms.
Proceeds from Specific Deals: The TikTok scenario offers a precedent. Trump suggested the SWF might acquire TikTok or use proceeds from a sale/partnership (potentially worth tens of billions). Similar budget-neutral windfalls—say, from privatizing government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) like Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, or selling seized assets beyond Bitcoin—could be funneled into Bitcoin purchases via the SWF.
Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF) or Similar Mechanisms: Posts on X and some analysts have speculated that the Treasury’s Exchange Stabilization Fund, historically used for currency interventions, could be repurposed to acquire Bitcoin using existing reserves (e.g., foreign currency or gold revaluation proceeds). If integrated into the SWF’s strategy, this could provide another budget-neutral avenue, though it would require legal and administrative adjustments.
Debt Instruments or BitBonds: A more creative approach, mentioned in X posts, involves issuing "BitBonds"—debt instruments backed by SWF assets or future revenues (e.g., tariffs or mineral rights). The proceeds could buy Bitcoin, with repayment handled by the fund’s investment returns, avoiding direct taxpayer costs. While speculative, this fits the administration’s pattern of unconventional financial thinking.
The overlap in leadership—Treasury (Bessent) and Commerce (nominee Howard Lutnick, a known Bitcoin advocate)—between the two initiatives suggests coordination is plausible. Lutnick’s firm, Cantor Fitzgerald, custodies Tether’s assets, and Bessent has shown openness to monetizing assets creatively. The SWF’s broad mandate to "maximize national wealth" and support "strategic economic growth" (per the White House fact sheet) could easily encompass Bitcoin as a reserve asset, especially given Trump’s pro-crypto stance and the Reserve’s symbolic recognition of Bitcoin’s value.
However, challenges remain. The U.S. lacks the budget surpluses or commodity windfalls (e.g., Norway’s oil) that typically fund SWFs, and its $1.9 trillion deficit in fiscal 2025 limits flexibility. Congressional approval might be needed for significant SWF funding or Bitcoin purchases, complicating execution. Market volatility also poses risks—Bitcoin’s price dropped from $92,400 to $84,971 after the Reserve announcement, reflecting uncertainty over government buying plans. If the SWF pursued large-scale Bitcoin acquisitions, it could drive prices up, testing the budget-neutrality premise.
In conclusion, the SWF could indeed serve as a vehicle for budget-neutral Bitcoin acquisition by redirecting investment returns, tariff revenues, or deal proceeds, aligning with the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve’s mandate. While no finalized SWF plan exists as of March 10, 2025, the administration’s rhetoric and the shared oversight by Treasury and Commerce suggest this synergy is under consideration. The exact mechanisms will likely clarify once the SWF plan is public, expected by early May 2025, assuming it stays on schedule.
Some WSJ Articles:
- Why, at this moment in history, are we asking how institutions should be reformed, or if they even can be? For decades we have been aware that institutions were failing—incompetent, wasteful and corrupt governments; biased and dishonest journalism; agenda-driven schools and universities.
- My answer is Covid. The mismanagement of the pandemic hit us personally and exposed a massive, across-the-board institutional failure. It was the most tragic breakdown of leadership and ethics that free societies have seen in our lifetimes
- The virus didn’t cause lockdowns. Human beings decided to impose lockdowns, which failed to stop the deaths and the spread. Lockdowns inflicted massive damage on children and literally killed people. A review of 34 countries with available data found that through July 2023 “the US alone would have had 1.6 million fewer deaths if it had the performance of Sweden.” A January 2023 paper in the Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control estimates that over the next 15 to 20 years, unemployment alone will cause 900,000 to 1.2 million additional American deaths—from the lockdown, not the virus.
- Censorship and propaganda are part of the explanation, tools of control that convinced the public of two lies—that there was a consensus of experts in favor of lockdowns, and that dissent from that false consensus was dangerous.
- Turning the page on modern history’s worst societal failure would be extraordinarily harmful.
- Failure to demand and issue official statements of truth about the pandemic management after the devastation endured by millions would eliminate all accountability. And accountability is just what we need to restore trust in institutions and among fellow citizens.
- No doubt, new versions of institutions need to emerge, and old versions of old institutions need to re-emerge, especially when it comes to fostering debate and the robust exchange of ideas.
- But most solutions come from individuals, not government, and ultimately individuals, not institutions, will save or destroy freedom.
- To quote C.S. Lewis, “Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.”
The 401(k) Has Become America’s Rainy-Day Fund
“Some 4.8% of account holders took early withdrawals last year for reasons such as preventing foreclosure and paying medical bills. That is a record high, up from a prior record of 3.6% in 2023 and a prepandemic average of about 2%, according to Vanguard Group, which administers 401(k)-type accounts for nearly five million people”
McDonald’s Gives Its Restaurants an AI Makeover
“McDonald’s tapped Google Cloud in late 2023 to bring more computing power to each of its restaurants—giving them the ability to process and analyze data on-site. The setup, known as edge computing, can be a faster, cheaper option than sending data to the cloud, especially in more far-flung locations with less reliable cloud connections”
What a Fast-Changing World Means for Your Money
“Since the Berlin Wall fell, we’ve lived through almost half a century of preferring butter to guns. With the rise of China, and with the U.S. no longer seen as a reliable ally, guns will again take priority. Restructuring the economy, trade and tax systems to replace consumption with defense spending will be politically contentious and expensive. European military contractors are clear winners. Who are the losers?”
How did I (DH) not see this coming? Hawkish on War government coming in - obvious in hindsight?
The solution for many countries after the Second World War was financial repression, keeping interest rates artificially low and using capital controls to prevent investors from taking their money out of the country while using inflation to whittle away the value of the debt.
Trump and the Art of the Poker Deal
Mr. Trump tipped his hand when he visited the Journal in October, describing China’s President Xi Jinping as a “good poker player.” Last Friday in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump told Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky: “You don’t have the cards.” Thucydides couldn’t have put it better, though maybe Kenny Rogers did: Time to fold ’em. The exchange put a new spin on the art of the “deal.”
MAGA-world is irrationally wedded to the chess meme. Chess is the game of kings, not Queens. I’d be surprised if Mr. Trump even knows how the pieces move. It’s complicated and takes sustained concentration. To succeed at chess you have to control your passions and act deliberately. When you’ve been bested, you resign gracefully and shake your opponent’s hand.
That’s never been Mr. Trump’s style. He’s temperamentally much more suited to poker, where trash talk and nicknames are part of the fun. You bully and bluff as you try to bankrupt other players and drive them from the game. Poker success requires an appetite for risk and an intuitive sense of probability. But you can also buy the pot with a garbage hand. Sound like anyone we know?
Poker rewards a certain personality type—the improviser, the opportunist. While it pays to have a cool head, you can’t win without an eye for the kill. Mr. Trump doesn’t always know when to shut up, but he never misses a chance to put the knife in.
Politics and the English language would both be poorer without their poker idioms: stack the deck, go all in, keep an ace up your sleeve, play the hand you’re dealt. Mr. Trump’s poker face is as good as they come. He’s got alligator blood. When the chips are down he doesn’t give away much, doesn’t smile or laugh very often. His body language is consistent. All good and necessary qualities for a card sharp. Equally useful for a politician.
I can’t be the only one who wonders how he keeps all the meetings, phone calls, press conferences, petty feuds, tariff threats, Truth Social posts and Fox News personalities straight in his head.
DH ^ same, man is about 100 years old
Stock Investors Go on Defense With Dividends
John Bevis, a full-time trader based in Clemson, S.C., predicted earlier this year that policy uncertainty might lead to market turmoil. He scaled back his position in big tech companies like Tesla and Nvidia in January and February, he said, and picked up shares of Coca-Cola and the household-products provider Procter & Gamble.
DH - good on ya Bevis
Though dividend stocks already make up about half of his portfolio, Kuehl said he plans to keep buying up shares of Nike and Exxon Mobil, he said, as well as smaller stocks like Papa John’s International and Blue Owl Capital.
“It seems to be a really frothy market—really jittery,” he said. “What I’m banking on is that people are going to move to security.”
Trump Declines to Rule Out Recession
President Trump declined to rule out that the U.S. economy would contract this year and enter a recession
DH - what a ridiculous article? How could someone rule out a recession
“Look, what I have to do is build a strong country. You can’t really watch the stock market. If you look at China, they have a 100-year perspective,” he said.
DH - Woah, this is a big time quote I didn’t hear anywhere
“The market and the economy have just become hooked,” Bessent said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “We’ve become addicted to this government spending, and there’s going to be a detox period.”
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick ruled out an economic contraction in his own television appearance Sunday. “There’s going to be no recession in America,” he said on “Meet the Press”
DH - eat your words first bullet point! Lutnick is hilarious, can’t take that comment seriously. Insanely bullish posturing from him on podcast appearances last year
Want to Save More for Retirement? First, Imagine Your Future Self
“The key here is to start in the future and rewind back,” Hershfield says, “rather than the traditional approach of only starting now and zooming ahead to the future.”
The Fool’s Gold of a Crypto Reserve
Subtitle “Government bitcoin and crypto reserves serve no useful purpose and invite political mischief”
DH - (Sarcasm inbound since this is such a ridiculous article) none! As in zero! Not even a single imaginable useful purpose
U.S. dollar reserves provide liquidity and facilitate payments with the rest of the world. Bitcoin doesn’t
DH - none! No liquidity! Nor Payments - I mean come on author
While Mr. Trump describes bitcoin as “digital gold,” many countries don’t recognize or accept it as legal tender.
DH - Gold is widely accepted as legal tender! Oh wait…
While gold has been used as a store of wealth for centuries, bitcoin has been around for all of 16 years.
DH - Yes, let’s give this technology centuries to see if it is better, just like we have for all other technologies that solve or greatly improve fundamental problems. I will be waiting until 3000 to ride a plane just to make sure that its safe!
The Trump plan is to keep confiscated tokens as investments, which might later be sold to finance a President’s spending prerogatives. Future presidents of both parties could raid the stockpile to bypass Congress on spending.
DH - Yeah they are very explicitly saying they will not sell the Bitcoin, and basically intimating that they will sell the ****coins to buy more BTC
Treasury might even buy tokens backed by the ruling party’s political donors to drive up their price.
DH - Very explicitly saying they will buy no coins except Bitcoin, funding the mysterious oligarch who goes by the name Satoshi?
What’s Behind the Rise in Autism Diagnoses
In 1973 Congress passed a law requiring schools that receive federal funds to make special accommodations for students diagnosed with disabilities, including autism. Two years later, Congress required states to identify such kids proactively and gave schools more money for each student who was diagnosed as disabled.
The predictable result: a sharp uptick in autism diagnoses during the 1980s and 1990s as schools chased federal dollars. Some of these students needed special education, but many didn’t. Congress changed the funding formula in the late 1990s because many schools were diagnosing unimpaired children with cognitive disabilities to get more federal money.
Many states also give schools more money when their students are diagnosed on the spectrum. A 2022 study found states that do so had more diagnoses.
How Overlooked European Defense Stocks Became a Hedge-Fund Home Run
Deem Global, a London-based firm that oversees nearly $600 million, also made money on the sector, owing to its “longstanding thesis of geopolitical reordering” and a “structural megatrend” of increased defense spending, the firm wrote in an investor letter seen by The Wall Street Journal.
DH - what a terrifying last comment
When the Cold War ended, governments slashed military budgets in favor of social programs.
The sector was also dented by the environmental, social and corporate-governance investing movement, which spurred some investors to dump shares of companies tied to war and weaponry, and other industries considered not socially responsible. Sentiment toward the sector began to change in 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
DH - This seems something that could have been more obvious at the time, downward pressure on these types of stocks because of these trends, basically just waiting for a bid
AI Will Soon Dominate Ad Buying, Whether Marketers Like It or Not
“AI buying agents are going to be directing upwards of 80% of digital media buys by 2030,” said Ben Hovaness, chief media officer at ad buying firm OMD, part of ad giant Omnicom.
Articles
https://russroberts.medium.com/eulogy-for-my-father-1c401085983d
He liked to say: In families, love flows downhill.
“His rabbi in Alabama said that he combined the curiosity of a child with the wisdom of a sage. That’s exactly right. Everything interested him. And he drank deep from the spring of knowledge. History, poetry, opera, horticulture, diplomacy, Judaism, Christianity — all interested him endlessly.”
He created imaginary worlds for children and adults to inhabit. They were essentially comedy routines that began seriously but eventually the listeners figured out the game he was playing and riffed on the story going forward in a long form improv routine.
My dad was a contrarian, a skeptic, someone who had little respect for so-called conventional wisdom. He did not believe you should drink eight glasses of water every day. He did not believe breakfast is the most important meal of the day. He did not believe economics, the field I chose to study, was anything like a science.
When I was younger, I’d argue with him. And oh how we’d argue. But Dad, you were right about all of those. Even economics. Maybe especially economics. Dad, please forgive me for when I was too harsh in my disagreement.
He told me years and years ago, that Judaism and Christianity would come closer together with time. I thought he was crazy.
He said it was good to walk barefoot through the grass. Yes, there were snakes in the world, but you’ve got to feel the grass between your toes.
That was my father. He rarely (never?) cared what others thought of him. He was the original cat that walked by himself. I think that’s part of the reason he liked cats so much. He identified with their unwillingness to curry favor with their owners.
My dad, like Robert Frost, had a lover’s quarrel with the world. And with many things. Especially Judaism. He studied the Hebrew Bible endlessly finding new meaning, new puzzles, new questions. Mostly questions. He loved rabbis so he could learn things but also to give them a hard time from time to time.
What can he take that cannot be carried? It’s the journey that all of us must take. And Amos discovers the one thing we can take on that journey which cannot be carried — our good deeds. The voices of those who love Amos, the people he has taken care of and nurtured through kindness, their voices rise up from the deep and bring him home. My dad is Amos Goodheart. The king has sent him on a journey, but I am sure he will find his way home, carried by his good deeds.
So If you want to honor my father’s memory, spend more time with your children. Or your parents. Or those you love. For dad, quality time demanded quantity time.
Spend the time. It’s more precious than rubies.
Truth-seeking or critical thinking? Reconsidering the university's mission
Many defenders of academic freedom frame the debate in terms of a conflict over the fundamental telosof the academy (I myself have done this several times.) Is the mission of the university the pursuit of truth, or is it a socio-political goal? Whatever this socio-political goal, whether the radical social equality of Herbert Marcuse or the fascism of the Nazis, when the university dedicates itself towards political ends, truth suffers, freedom is extinguished and the academic vocation is compromised. Therefore, in order to protect free speech in the academy, we must reiterate and defend the mission of the university as the pursuit of truth. But what if we have it all wrong?
Should a democratic society seek to cultivate activists or free thinkers? I would argue the latter – one cannot fulfill the right of free expression unless it is preceded by free thought and free thought can only be cultivated through liberal education.
this disagreement made me sympathetic to the crux of their critique of most free speech discourse: that the “truth-seeking mission of the university” may be unhelpful in the service of academic freedom, or just plain false. According to Khalid and Snyder, truth-seeking is an anachronistic view of academia, one that “neglects one hundred and fifty years of intellectual history in the academy” such as the secularization of higher education and the intellectual development of humanities disciplines towards more interpretive-based approaches.
Therefore, there exists a “sliding scale” of veracity from the hard sciences to the arts; on one end the mission is the pursuit of truth, on the other the discipline is interpretation, and the goal is critical thinking. In this view, critical thinking, that is open-mindedness and competent analytic skills, is the goal in itself, rather than the skills necessary to form a judgment of truth. In their telling, the constant reiteration of the truth-seeking mission of the university alienates potential allies in the humanities whose work is more interpretive.
free thought must precede free speech. But can critical thinking be an end in itself– an intrinsic good? We can accept that some academic disciplines are more directly concerned with truth and others with critical thinking, but what is one to do with the critical thinking acquired?
And yet there is something deeply unsatisfying about existing in a state of perpetual criticism, and one that is inimical to the classical goal of liberal education: the good, the true, and the beautiful. Constant criticism is a recipe for nihilism. In his essay on the discipline of history, Nietzsche wrote that criticism “ is always a dangerous process...for since we are now the products of earlier generations, we are also the products of their aberrations, passions, mistakes, and even crimes. It is impossible to loose oneself from this chain entirely…too often what remains is a case of someone who understands the good without doing it.” Critical thinking is indeed indispensable for liberal education, but it cannot be an end in itself, but rather an instrumental good towards the pursuit of truth. To paraphrase G.K. Chesterton, an open mind and an open mouth have the same goal: to shut it on something solid.
https://paulgraham.com/richnow.html
In 1982 the most common source of wealth was inheritance. Of the 100 richest people, 60 inherited from an ancestor. There were 10 du Pont heirs alone. By 2020 the number of heirs had been cut in half, accounting for only 27 of the biggest 100 fortunes.
The reason the percentage of heirs has decreased is not that fewer people are inheriting great fortunes, but that more people are making them.
3/4 by starting companies and 1/4 by investing
Two things changed: fund managers discovered new ways to generate high returns, and more investors were willing to trust them with their money
the main source of new fortunes now is starting companies
these are mostly companies that win by having better technology, rather than just a CEO who's really driven and good at making deals.
In 1982, 84% of the richest 100 people got rich by inheritance, extracting natural resources, or doing real estate deals. Is that really better than a world in which the richest people get rich by starting tech companies?
So it's not 2020 that's the anomaly here, but 1982. The real question is why so few people had gotten rich from starting companies in 1982. And the answer is that even as the Herald Tribune's list was being compiled, a wave of consolidation was sweeping through the American economy. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, financiers like J. P. Morgan combined thousands of smaller companies into a few hundred giant ones with commanding economies of scale. By the end of World War II, as Michael Lind writes, "the major sectors of the economy were either organized as government-backed cartels or dominated by a few oligopolistic corporations."
You could get rich from starting your own company in 1890 and in 2020, but in 1960 it was not really a viable option. You couldn't break through the oligopolies to get at the markets. So the prestigious route in 1960 was not to start your own company, but to work your way up the corporate ladder at an existing one.
Making everyone a corporate employee decreased economic inequality (and every other kind of variation)
But it wasn't just decay from within that broke up J. P. Morgan's economy. There was also pressure from without, in the form of new technology, and particularly microelectronics. The best way to envision what happened is to imagine a pond with a crust of ice on top. Initially the only way from the bottom to the surface is around the edges. But as the ice crust weakens, you start to be able to punch right through the middle.
The edges of the pond were pure tech: companies that actually described themselves as being in the electronics or software business. When you used the word "startup" in 1990, that was what you meant. But now startups are punching right through the middle of the ice crust and displacing incumbents like retailers and TV networks and car companies. [7]
Indeed, we should expect both the number and wealth of founders to grow, because every decade it gets easier to start a startup
But the main reason it's easier to start a startup now is that it's cheaper. Technology has driven down the cost of both building products and acquiring customers
The decreasing cost of starting a startup has in turn changed the balance of power between founders and investors. Back when starting a startup meant building a factory, you needed investors' permission to do it at all. But now investors need founders more than founders need investors, and that, combined with the increasing amount of venture capital available, has driven up valuations. [8]
So the decreasing cost of starting a startup increases the number of rich people in two ways: it means that more people start them, and that those who do can raise money on better terms.
But there's also a third factor at work: the companies themselves are more valuable, because newly founded companies grow faster than they used to. Technology hasn't just made it cheaper to build and distribute things, but faster too.
BPI Talk
Lummis first
Then jim justice
DH - man is so incredibly old and excited, pretty cool tbh
Saylor
DH - Perma bull, funny
SBR, digital capital, is stockpile of cheese, or oil, or nat gas, or uranium
In narrowest form, stockpile of apex asset of human race - nice dude
3 trn to 106 trn to the US
Recapitalizing on btc
Powerful metaphor for him is that SBR like digital property, part of manhattan
Not going to sell it, going to rent it, borrow against it, develop or finance asset
AIs are coming! Dont get bank accounts or CCs, will be built on digital capital and digital property
Digital energy
Opern digital energy flowing it is a commerce network, when reverse into defense, it is defense system, unstoppable uncorruptible immutable, to any known cyber threat
Can protect us commercial military and financnial systems behind a wall of digital energy
Even musk poiunted out ais dont know how to hack btc (dh - yet)
Whats it worth? Half of everything
Digital is everything you dont like about the building stripped away
Everyhting else in the world you own at the behest of someone more powerful than you
Dollar is currency btc is capital
In argentina 4 weeks peso, 4 years dollar, 40 years btc
Dollar competing but against cny, jpy, other currencies
If us banks can issue digital currencies, can expand by 10trn
Stable coin bill
Still not capital
Doesnt compete with dollar,competes with property, equity and bonds, 1% now
Expand currency and expand capital
Cant remain sovereign nature if lose control of airspace, cyberspace, outerspace
Superpower has to keep air routes open, not just ny to london, ny to chicago
Own cyberspace, need to own bitcoin and also the networks
Owning all of nyc but not owning sea lanes and air above you lose nyc
Need to preserve communication and transmission of information and of energy
Digital intelligence req digital energy secured by digital energy to enable digital commerce
Military, finance, politics, etc. are still relics of the 20th century, the tools tactics and strategies did in fact work in the 20th century and they will not work in the 21st century, we can see those things breaking down, old methods dont work and there is a clear break (dh examples, news stations to podcasts, propaganda, coordination is tracked, there are escape hatches
Not just getting new money, need to get the worlds money
Think if you get dropped off in africa, do you get btc or do you diversify and get art, and how and what are risks
Countries will make laws against it, thats why china has export controls on capital
If you cant physically come into the us, you come into the capital network and get those protections
Soveriegnty sound money property rights getting exported
When we are the ethos of the base layer we can export those things to the world
How should us pursue a btc strategy?
Doing stuff is highly overrated if the stuff is trading or selling your bitcoin
We bought 78% of the united states for 40mm dollars - btc
Could have clung to beads when gold, steam engine when world went to internal combustion, wood burning when rockefeller gave petroleum, could have dismissed nuclear, want to control the worlds digital energy?
Choices are prosperity or poverty, btc is manifest destiny for america
Vivek
Era of easy money
Showering room full of addicts with cocaine
Simple 5 yo explanation, under capital scarcity, institution has to make a choice, project a or project b?
Capital became effectively free - no longer have to decide between a and b, you could just do both (DH - love this)
Incentives for institutions get corrupted
raise int rates and exit period of infinite capital
Exit capital scarcity
Entering new and more persistent era of scarce capital again, disciplining effect on institutions
New hurdle rate for companies
Simple version of the world is 2 categories of projects that any entity could pursue, low risk cap investment or high risk, its a spectrum but simplifying
Low risk could pursue and high risk project
What should hurdle rate be, default is us treasury
Conditions of infinite capital over last 15 years
Now the conditions that used tobe forever are back
Hurdle rate for higher risk project - not a clear standard for what it should be, libor or ust + 5% or + beta whatever
Vivek - next 5-15 years what is the hurdle rate, low risk projects is andought to be 10y treasury
Higher rate, should be expected long run rate of return on btc
Reasons why are clear, tied to inherent attributes, fixed supply defined by math
God is real, math is math, pretty much everything else is negotiable or subject to change over time
Even other commodities, gold, etc. variable over long enough time horizon esp on planet earth, even interplanetary etc. eventually could discover more gold or something, more btc? Nope
Not going to find btc on another planet
Understanding of math does not change over time and not subject to anything in the natural world
Why havent we seen this hurdle rate in the past 15 years, we havent needed to
Why limit for higher risk projects and not also lower risk
Why shouldnt hurdle for all things be btc
Care about someone tell them the truth, care about yourself, tell them what they want to hear - (a la Jeff)
Not many institutions have adopted it
World is not auto tomorrow is sole rate of return
10y treasury going to be standard for low risk capital
Going to be seismic step forward, even though vol has been dramatically diff, returns have been way higher
If you believe that, makes the most compelling case for institutions at some level to hold some
Tethers your institutions behavior to something that has fixed supply and likely to go up over time
Company sitting on stockpile of cash, very few holding any of it in btc, vivek thinks likely to change
Over time companies are going to do what they should do, if not, then others going to put them out of biz
Strive played early role in beginning to help catalyze that change
Strive is firm vivek started to prevent esg overreach in cap markets, companies adopting policies that were hostile to their own self interest
Strive would vote and maximize corporations
Unthinkable that peak esg in rearview
To vivek, seems like the anti esg proxy voting a few years ago was so unheard of that now thats like strive voting for msft to but btc on balance sheet, a few years ago, maybe that too will be in the rearview
Things happen far more quickly than we anticipate
Not debating timeline, but debating whether the merits are true and sound
What are the best counterarguments?
No should be s and p 500
If you are in the s and p then there is a circularity
Probably doesnt make sense to put in 10y treasury, so try it on like a set of clothes for each of the alt asset classes
Less compelling case for things other than btc
Attribute of fixed mathematically supply, even gold doesnt share
Gold used to be cost of capital and opp cost
Cant say when its going to be, not tomorrow or next year or 5 years maybe
Thinks that it happens for companies before sovereigns, usually see sovereign follow private sector
Generally people in washington take their cues from private sector
Left out fact of brown vs board, deseg was already trending, horse had left the barn, unanimous came in to put a stamp and finalize trend that was inescapably and irreversibly underway
Thinks its going to be similar in realm of btc
Private institutions under now normalzied conditions of capital scarcity will take cues from private sector
Only will be natural extension of that where nations and states take their cues
Live in moment in history where we have yet to answer question decisively
Who are we as americans
Spread across vast expanse, connected by what? No common religion, lineage, heritage, never has been and certainly isnt today
What is it that binds us together across all of the different attributes
Common creed, ethos that binds us together
Ethos behind the dec of independence and constitution
More than just the words and the technicalalities
No matter who you are where you came from skin color etc. you have the opp to be your own hero in the american landscape
Leader at whitehouse, be a hero in hometown, son or daughter or teacher or business owner or entrepreneur
Nation founded on the freedom of every individual to use unique god given attribute to achieve your maximum potential without a gov or beuaracrayc standing in your way
We need symbols that represent that ethos
Live in a moment where we lost htat hero narrative
Accounts for fent and suicide and depression and everything
Role to recognize that the ethos of america overlaps with the ethos of america as well
Btc helps fill that void and hunger for a symbol and reminder of what american greatness is about
In national sense, national conscious filling up reserve with that asset that has those attributes
Helps to fill the void and embrace capitalism rather than apologize
Embrace success rather than victimhood, victors not victims
Future is not falling into a trap where we make mistakes of regulation and constraiining and crony capitalism to weed out competitors
What makes future of btc and policy more broadly, is that if ethos of btc and ethos of asset class is distinct and embodies the american spirit then need to make sure we dont adopt some of the same limiting forces that have stymied other industries
Say it as a word of caution
New golden age in america and innovation in america
Jack and paolo (king of stablecoins and ceo of strike
Helping more than anyoneand also at the same time buying up US Debt
18th biggest “country” buyer of us debt
Makes us more resilient
China only 770bn of us debt
Usdt all users will not coordinate and redeem simultaneously vs that is what China has been doing
Building on BTC and USD
Never top down, always bottom up
Tether is also indirectly helping to build out the power grid in remote places
It is the biggest distribution network for USD
Chase bank can’t have 400mm customers, not even that many people in the US
Bessent has said that stablecoins are strategic
Tethers customers typically cannot buy securities, this is the first time they are able
100s of millions of customers, peer to peer powerhouse
Countries waiting for deepseek moment to attack the USD
BRICs countries tried to do this with a basket of their currencies - put a bunch of pieces of shit together doesn’t make it chocolate
BRICs realized, what is better than a basket? A gold backed digital currencies
All BRICS countries are buying infinite gold, constant bid to attack the USD - Paolo has no doubt about it
BRICS creating infrastructure globally
If tether USDT fails, then USD will fail in those countries
Tether vs group of countries looking to de-dollarize the world
Onboarding argentinian cab driver to be a purchaser of US Debt
Tether customers have more immediate problems, so their preference is for USD to do immediate transactions vs. stuff with BTC alone
Have to pick from the options available, USD way better than the alternatives
We needed this moment, this SBR moment and other legislation stuff, now, its time to keep our heads down and get to work
Presentation from Matthew Pines
5-6 yrs ago thought about lt strategic things around btc
First whitepaper for the BPI, leading over the past month
Topic of talk is trying to paint pic of future and try to get context in radically changing world order
Quote from a movie: “The days move along with regularity, over and over, one day indistinguishable from the next. A long, continuous chain. And then suddenly, there is a change.”
Quote from EO, bc there is a fixed supply there is a strategic advantage to being first
3 legged stool g7 countries, then raw materials, then goods and manufacturing
Were in frenemy mode for a bit
Since covid and post with ukraine
Increasing stress, financial and other types of warfare, cyber ops, export controls, trying to derisk
Establishing a lot of things abroad for interbank systems, developments, belt and road
Structural changes reshoring realigning re arming and rewiring
National security and fgiscal dominance overwhelm market forces
Structural imbalances in global system
As a result us and sovereign bond market increasingly fragile and needs to be “managed”
Debt market fragile with scale of issuance
Outpaced the ability for institutions able to take in the issuance
Stable then things break then trillions of QE
Squeezes out fiscal space from important things, more interest rate payment than defense
Increasing natl security risk, dont have domestic manufacturing and industrial base to keep up militarily
China continuing to press their strategic position
6% in 200 roughly half of global production by the end of the day
Also trying to export their model of digital authoritarianism
Subsea cables, huwawe, ali pay, proliferation of advanced ai models
Digital competition but also has a Physical substrate
Monetary sphere, not going to be able to completely replace usd
Can do central bank to central bank in cbdcs
Can link more global nodes to be resilient to sanctions etc.
Trump sanctioning brics if threat the dollar
Treasury has been global reserve, inc substitutred for gold and accelerating
Us recognizing btc as digital gold
Liquid, decentralized, portable, fungible, verifiable, censorship resistant, and natively digital
Gold for 21st century
Some safe haven behavior
Changing perceptions globally
SWF with larry fink said probably a few % makes sense and hundreds of thousands
Govts dont move fast, but when they do they move in side
Congressman Begich From Alaska
Historic announcement - BTC act of 2025 in the US House
6 cosponsors in the house
No tax payer dollars needed
Principles mirror core values of freedom etc.
Safeguards built into act, 20 year holding period and rules around self custody and personal sovereignty
Zach Shapiro head of policy at BPI
Interest across states
State momentum led to federal
Once in a civilization opportunity
Congressman Ro Khanna
Bitcoin should be bipartisan
Cant have back and forth with executive order
Need consensus that good for SoV for us and good for the world
Hysteria is lack of central authority
Chris Catalini MIT researcher
Technology s curve, network effects
Incentive, if you bring security to the network, sometime you will be rewarded, economic forces drove
Has become professionalize
Adversaries are trying to undermine the role of the dollar and have been for a long time
Beaurucrats in basel also tried to make finternet?
Arpanet was better way, infrastructure for internet
The opportunity is here
Talent still in US
Prevent crypto sputnik moment
Btc hard to build in, like building for space really complex
TCPIP for information, BTC is that for value
Dollar and BTC are complements
Can increase chances of US leading
Stablecoins can reach where the dollar cannot
Troy cross moderate Zach bradford fred thiel and jason less
Nobody printed any bitcoin, it was all worked for
Incentives help to provide base load generation
Stranded islands of power, no electrons wasted
US additional 70 GW of power, if only could dispatch the load for 5% of the time
Plenty of power for AI
BTC miners can consume that
American companies going abroad are bring hash rate to the us
Projecting power with hash rate
ENDED AT 54:15