@JoshMandell6@dotkrueger They did two novel things almost at once, debt buyback using reserve and selling of Bitcoin. If they had only sold bitcoin and waited a few weeks before the debt buyback, it’s possible the market would has reacted differently.
@JoshMandell6@phongle Retiring debt using the cash reserve, AND selling 32 BTC (to inoculate the market) one right after the other may have been illed timed. Two novel actions that spooked investors. Doing them months apart would have been better.
Germany spent decades building the world’s industrial powerhouse. Now it’s testing how fast you can dismantle one.
High energy costs, overregulation, overtaxation and investment flight aren’t accidents, they’re policy outcomes.
What needs to happen for Germany to thrive again?
BTC’s systemic relevance does not arise from its technological content. It arises from the financial structures built around it: listed treasury accumulation, ETF redemption flows, collateralised leverage, miner credit, market-maker balance sheets, and correlated non-bank exposures. A sustained BTC price impairment therefore operates less like an isolated asset-price decline and more like a non-bank collateral shock with fire-sale potential.