> Beyond the financial case for Bitcoin, its rise as a non-sovereign store of value will have profound geopolitical consequences. A global, non-inflationary reserve currency will force nation-states to alter their primary funding mechanism from inflation to direct taxation, which is far less politically palatable.
Isn't this all backwards? In the past, when it was politically inconvenient not to be able to inflate money, governments abandoned gold-backed money and went to fiat. Wouldn't one assume then that the possibility of such profound geopolitical consequences is precisely the reason why governments will not let it become so important?
In case anyone would like a YT video so they can listen/watch at 2x instead of read... check out: The Complete Case for Bitcoin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjeXIGWY2DI&ab_channel=Block...
For a better understanding of money and why Bitcoin is a better money, I would recommend this article:
https://vijayboyapati.medium.com/the-bullish-case-for-bitcoi...
I'll also toot my own horn a bit which also delves into this confusion:
https://www.amazon.com/Little-Bitcoin-Book-Matters-Finances/...