🎙️ nostr:nprofile1qyx8wumn8ghj7cnjvghxjmcpz4mhxue69uhk2er9dchxummnw3ezumrpdejqqg8de5s9trchmxfj0kzpu3vzlxcqvvc6csqssph05qsw7r2qq78xmgtpplrn made a commendable effort trying to talk sense into Peter Schiff — but honestly, it's like talking to a brick wall.
The man clings to his anti-#Bitcoin stance with the same dogmatic fervor as Senator Warren. That kind of ideological rigidity often signals either a lack of understanding, a fixed mindset or worse, an agenda.
Still, Schiff did ask one good question in over an hour of talking:
“If Bitcoin is so great, why are central banks accumulating gold and not Bitcoin?”
Here’s the answer:
🧠 Why Central Banks Choose Gold (for now) over #Bitcoin:
🔹 They already own gold and have a vested interest in preserving the fiat + gold system they control.
🔹 Bitcoin’s volatility & regulatory uncertainty still spook most institutional actors.
🔹 Lack of understanding + perceived risk remains high, especially among older central bankers.
🔹 Loss of monetary control — Unlike gold, central banks can't manipulate or control Bitcoin. It is pure monetary competition and a threat to their power.
🔹 Custody and infrastructure challenges — Managing Bitcoin requires a secure, digital-native setup most central banks aren't ready for.
🔹 IMF/BIS pressure — Supranational institutions actively discourage Bitcoin adoption, especially for emerging markets (see: El Salvador).
🔹 Geopolitical optics — Buying Bitcoin would signal alignment with a pro-sovereignty, anti-establishment monetary movement. That’s a political no-go for most central banks.
So yes, Peter — there is a reason. And it has everything to do with control, legacy bias, vested interests and fear of monetary truth.
https://talkingbitcoin.com/podcast