#Economists oppose the Fed investing in Bitcoin.#
Hot Topic Overview
Overview
Recently, old-school American economists have strongly opposed the proposal to allocate US reserve funds to Bitcoin. Steve Hanke, a professor at Johns Hopkins University, believes that shifting funds to Bitcoin would hinder economic growth because these savings are not invested in real capital assets, and improving productivity is key to improving living standards. He even called the idea of Bitcoin reserves "the stupidest idea." This view stands in stark contrast to Senator Cynthia Lummis's proposed "Bitcoin Act," which aims to establish a Bitcoin strategic reserve and purchase 1 million BTC. At the heart of this debate is whether Bitcoin can become a viable reserve asset and whether it will be a distraction, raising questions about the future direction of digital currencies.
Ace Hot Topic Analysis
Analysis
Recently, old-school economists in the United States have strongly opposed the proposal to allocate US reserve funds to Bitcoin. Steve Hanke, a professor at Johns Hopkins University, believes that shifting funds to Bitcoin could hinder economic growth because these savings are not invested in real capital assets, which would fail to improve productivity and thus affect living standards. He even called the idea of Bitcoin reserves "the stupidest idea." This view stands in stark contrast to the "Bitcoin Act" proposed by Senator Cynthia Lummis, which aims to establish a Bitcoin strategic reserve and purchase 1 million BTC. At the heart of this debate is whether Bitcoin can become a viable reserve asset and its impact on the economy. Opponents argue that Bitcoin lacks real value and cannot promote economic growth, while supporters believe that Bitcoin has advantages such as decentralization and inflation resistance, and can serve as a new reserve asset, bringing new opportunities for economic development. The ultimate outcome of this debate will have a significant impact on the future direction of digital currency development.