Let's talk about an interesting question: If a country's currency wants to dominate globally, should it be the largest importer or the largest exporter?
Trump's little calculations are actually quite clear—he has been quietly fanning the flames for Bitcoin, hoping to make it the next global currency. Anyone with a bit of financial knowledge understands the intricacies here: the hegemony of the dollar and the return of manufacturing are fundamentally opposing efforts.
Why do I say this? If you want your own currency to become a global hard currency, you must first let it 'run' globally. This means the country has to be the largest importer, buying like crazy and spreading money around the globe—only when everyone has your money will they recognize your currency, and currency hegemony will have a foundation.
But Trump insists on bringing back manufacturing, turning America back into the 'world's factory.' Once the U.S. becomes a major exporter, selling more and buying less, the amount of dollars flowing out will sharply decrease. If people don't have your money, why would they take your currency seriously? Naturally, the hegemony of the dollar would be in jeopardy.
That's why Trump is so focused on promoting Bitcoin—losing the old hegemony isn't a problem as long as he can elevate Bitcoin; the new 'currency power' can still be in hand. This calculation is really quite clever 😏
