One thing that comes to mind here is, I don't know if you've ever read Dahlio's book Principles,

he goes through this scenario where he basically structured an options strategy, I guess, for McDonald's, to where it enabled

them to have the chicken McNugget for sort of a similar reason.

The prices of chicken were fluctuating too much.

So they went in and put a collar around this thing so they could get predictable long-term

chicken pricing, which led to the production of the chicken nugget, which is sort of what you're saying here in this competitive environment of fiat currencies that a sovereign or an issuer would then put these parameters in place.

I guess it would be a soft guarantee on purchasing power, right?

Yeah, it's soft because, of course, in a true shortage, that price is going to run away from you.

You should have to let it go, right?

Yeah.

But that's actually something, which is a, it is a reasonable product to offer.

Mm-hmm.

So I agree with all this.

I guess the issue would be you're still having to trust the issuer.

Like if they're giving you this long-term predictable inflation.

Yes, but that's portfolio theory because you wouldn't put 100% of your trust.

Yeah, you'd put zero.

Yes.

Right, right, right.

That makes sense.

So in this type of future, you end up, I mean, I guess as a sovereign individual, you're holding most of your reserve in Bitcoin. And then if you're operating in a particular jurisdiction for a particular amount of time, you're funding that fiat currency to go in and live or do business or whatever it may be.

That's right. Or in a truly internationally competitive environment.

...