ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
stache 4d ago
Thanx for a great response…this is one of the reasons I regularly search your feed…as my younger ⭕️ of frenz say it’s always “high signal” …one more question…🤔 if BTC ends up largely being a rugpull (relative to the expectations of it’s holders that self custody…largely young men who are also the demographic most likely to violently rebel against leadership) isn’t that a fairly risky proposition?…especially when in theory if leadership controls (for the most part) the rails of finance they can easily continue to slowly accumulate non paper btc over time as they have with gold and other hard assets including but not limited to real estate. While I agree with the high likelyhood of a “great taking” event, I would think confiscation from the younger generations over longer duration is less risky than a “great taking” type event. A “great taking” as described by David Webb will have a greater impact on “boomers” who are much more invested in and dependent on the current system and therefore much more likely to submit to demands of leadership. …jus random thoughts…it seems im wrong way more often than im right🤷🏽‍♂️
💬 1 replies

Thread context

Root: 7670055e4232…

Replying to: 0a5c628e1b70…

Replies (1)

Control-Plane Capital3d ago
I think it's very unlikely for Bitcoin held in self-custody (properly) to end up being a rugpull because the government would much rather you own Bitcoin than physical gold or something like Monero. Based on my research, in 99% of cases, the government would prefer you own Bitcoin than physical gold. The other 1% of cases are mostly people who move 8-9-10 figures in Bitcoin to finance groups the government doesn't like (very rare). So I don't think governments wan to rug Bitcoin, but that doesn't mean they execute everything perfectly and don't overshoot. One area where they might overshoot is the Quantum scam ( https://controlplanecapital.com/p/a-quantum-resistance-up… ). At present, nearly 90% of stocks are held by the top 10% of society, and that same 10% of society performs nearly 50% of all consumer spending. So wealth is very concentrated (mostly amongst boomers as you said). For them to run the Great Taking, they don't actually need to rug most of the population. As you said, younger cohorts are still on average much more dangerous than older ones - which is why you build the control rails (Palantir/MSFT/ID/CBDC), and send some of them to die in senseless wars. It's going to be tough to get young people to organize if 1/5th of the people in their country were imported in the last 10 years (mass migration). Running the Great Taking is still very risky. If I am correct that they want to reset, they likely want to keep Bitcoin as a plan B in case they aren't able to execute Freegold cleanly (which would be relatively low probability but enormous upside). I need to write more on demographics because it's very important and nuanced, but TL;DR: The developed world ran: - a demographic Ponzi (ever-growing base), - layered with a financial Ponzi (ever-growing claims). Fertility collapse + aging = demographic Ponzi is over. Debt explosion + low real growth = financial Ponzi is over. Controllers now need some combination of: - expropriation (Great Taking), - re-basing (Freegold + inflation), - control rails (Palantir/MSFT/ID/CBDC), - and carefully managed leaks (BTC, physical gold in private hands). Demographics is the slow needle that burst the illusion that you can: - promise infinite pensions, - with finite young workers, - and never have to choose who eats the loss. In other words, demographics is the deep constraint surface the rest of the game is played on.
0000 sats