Leo Fernevak on Nostr: As some voice hope for a Kamala Harris pivot toward a pro-Bitcoin stance, I find this ...

As some voice hope for a Kamala Harris pivot toward a pro-Bitcoin stance, I find this implausible and will explain why I believe this.

Below I will have a look at Kamala's stand on taxes, energy and climate. First a glance at the Biden-Kamala constellation.

On March 9th, 2022, Joe Biden signed a document that involved the US government exploring CBDCs. The only way I can interpret this is as a plan to develop and implementing CBDCs. R&D does involve the 'd' as in development.



Source 1:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/09/fact-sheet-president-biden-to-sign-executive-order-on-ensuring-responsible-innovation-in-digital-assets/

Next, it can be instructive to have a look at Kamala's tax policies from 2020, which are also largely mirrored in her 2024 position.



Here we find that Kamala had listed capital gains taxes on her policy document in 2020 and still support them in 2024. Not very bitcoin-friendly at all and a disaster in terms of the erosion of private property rights.

Source 2:

https://taxfoundation.org/blog/kamala-harris-tax-proposals-2024/

Next up we have the subject of energy and climate. As expected, the more aligned a candidate is toward the UN Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030, the more climate alarmism and de-industrialization policies we find.

This applies to the US, Canada, France, Australia, Germany, UK, Sweden, Norway and a host of countries that are pro-Agenda 21. Not a coincidence.

Ironically, Kamala's negative stance on US energy will likely boost Trump's campaign and he has been consistent in his pro-American energy position for 8 years, in spite of the coordinated MSM backlash.











Source 3:

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/23/climate/kamala-harris-on-climate-energy/index.html


In conclusion, considering the ideological foundation of the Democrats, grounded in the UN Agenda 21 climate alarmism, and with 6 years left to reach the Agenda 2030 climate goals, we can expect Kamala to reduce the US energy capacity of oil, coal and gas in favor of environmentally questionable solar and wind energy, resulting in a de-industrialization and possible energy rationing.

Since CBDCs are necessary tools to implement carbon allowances and social credit score systems, we can expect that any political candidate that is on board with climate alarmism, also see CBDCs as useful tools in herding (forcing) consumers toward eating less meat, using less gas, driving fewer miles with cars, travelling less with planes and using less energy in general, which, under her policies, there won't be sufficient energy anyway.

Bitcoin mining under this kind of energy rationing scheme would become pointless due to the skyrocketing costs of energy. De-industrializing a nation while also embracing bitcoin mining is not a compatible match. Can't work, won't work.

Trump's energy maximization plan however, is compatible with bitcoin mining at low costs. Without the climate alarmism ideology, Trump doesn't even have a use case for CBDCs, which by the way he is vocally against. Trump doesn't believe in social engineering applied by central planners to pressure people to stop eating meat or stop driving cars. He has rejected climate alarmism consistently for 8 years, in spite of global demonization and recently, an assassination attempt.

The deep state has shown itself aligned with climate scaremongering and this is the lithmus test I use to determine who is aligned with the deep state and who is not.

Are they pro energy or not?
Are they anti UN or not?
Are they anti CBDC or not?
Are they anti capital gains taxes or not?
Are they for individual liberties or not?
Are they for private property rights or not.
Are they pro bitcoin or not?

These are the questions we must ask.

#Kamala #Harris #Donald #Trump #Bitcoin #Mining #Taxes #Climate #Alarmism #Energy #Policy