1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ2,978 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,709 | |
| 3 | Ṁ1,292 | |
| 4 | Ṁ915 | |
| 5 | Ṁ674 |
People are also trading
During the Trump/Vance presidency, not required for either of them to do it themselves, resolving before 2026
@mods Inactive market creator. What should we do here? Some contend that this should resolve to yes now and cannot resolve to no, while others think that we should wait until an actual reserve wallet has been identified with Bitcoin inside. Since there are no rules, and a consensus of credible reporting characterizes Trump as having already created the reserve, I think this should resolve to Yes, but perhaps a N/A is also in order due to unclear resolution criteria since there is only a title and no rules.
@barbarous it seems that is should be. SBR is now signed in per https://x.com/BarrySang4/status/1898678154996105338
@nick Just interested to hear if you think this is resolvable or not. If not, what would make it resolvable?
As I interpreted what a reserve means, it would require Congressional action. This isn’t a monarchy, despite what the first 45 days would have you believe. The appropriations, ie, spending money to buy crypto, would have to be done by Congress. Calling the bitcoin we already had a reserve, is just more bluster to get a headline and confuse crypto chumps.
@KevinBlaw I think that without more concrete resolution criteria, this is too nuanced of a condition to make sense for this market and it should resolve YES simply based on the fact that they did create a National Bitcoin Reserve, regardless of what it accomplishes, or even if it accomplished literally nothing.
@MingCat yeah. I’ve pulled my position because there is literally no resolution criteria. We live in the dumbest times.
@KevinBlaw it's not just “calling the Bitcoin we already have a reserve.” Bitcoin will be added to it going forward from future forfeitures instead of being sold off. It is a loop hole around the congressional spending but it's still Bitcoin being held in reserve as an asset… hence a reserve.
@LiamZ Correct. The same thing that was happening before under Biden will continue to happen, but has been rebranded.
@LiamZ It's like how there won't be a Department of Education because someone from the WWE dismantles it, but there will still be a Department of Education because it would take congressional action to dismantle it. What was happening before will continue to happen, but Trump is calling it something else.
@LiamZ Forfeitures happened under Biden. Not selling them happened under Biden. The Executive Order explicitly does not permit the US to purchase bitcoin or any other crypto asset. This is marketing/branding exercise. A real reserve would permit the government to purchase assets, sort of like our stratetic oil reserve. Anyway, this market lacks any resolution criteria, and I made a profit, so let the chips fall where thay may.
@KevinBlaw who held the position of being the head of this office and how much BTC was set aside to not be sold previously?
Acknowledgement that legislation is required:
Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Treasury shall deliver an evaluation of the legal and investment considerations for establishing and managing the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and United States Digital Asset Stockpile going forward, including the accounts in which the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and United States Digital Asset Stockpile should be located and the need for any legislation to operationalize any aspect of this order or the proper management and administration of such accounts.
@LiamZ Trump is a marketing genius. He's done nothing, but got the crypto bros believing he has done something.
@KevinBlaw I don't support this action but it is an action and it does carry a change in policy. If anything I think the crypto bros in the short term will be very upset that there’s not immediately going to be direct extraction of wealth from tax payers to them by the government bidding on their coins.
I think it's a bad sign because now that a reserve has been established (the question in this market), it legitimizes+normalizes the idea which willmake it easier politically to start setting aside funds to grow it in the future.
Resolves YES
WASHINGTON, March 7 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday to establish a strategic bitcoin reserve, a day before meeting with executives from the cryptocurrency industry at the White House.
@FergusArgyll calling something we already had by a different name is not a crypto reserve.
@KevinBlaw Huh?
The US was holding BTC before bec it seized it from criminals etc. However the US has sold a lot of BTC before (read TFA) and has always planned to sell it's holdings like it does with all seized assets. [1][2] This order puts it in a reserve where it won't be sold - it will be held by the federal government as a reserve.
[1] https://www.usmarshals.gov/what-we-do/asset-forfeiture
[2] https://www.treasury.gov/auctions/treasury/rp/index.shtml
