$BTC

How would they make the price "stable"?

1. Set an "official price" as the U.S. did with gold

Historical example: in 1933, the U.S. government set the price of gold at $35 per ounce, and no one could officially sell it at a different price.

They could do the same with BTC: set that 1 BTC = X grams of gold, and require that this official value be used in banks, companies, and international trade.

2. Control of circulation and purchase

Only allow certain actors to officially buy or sell BTC (e.g., banks, State).

Restrict the amount of BTC that can enter the free market.

Like in the gold standard: no one could "sell gold to the highest bidder," but only to the State.

3. Create a "Treasury Bitcoin" distinct from free Bitcoin

A tokenized variant, backed by gold, that only the government can use as a reserve value.

The rest of the market would use common BTC, which would remain speculative.

Thus, they can buy free BTC, hold it, and convert it into their stable official version.

---

And why would it be beneficial for them to keep it stagnant?

So that it is not subject to extreme speculation within the financial system.

So they can accumulate more without the price exploding.

To use it as a geoeconomic weapon (as they do with the dollar): imagine being told "I pay you in BTC backed by gold." It is stronger than the dollar itself.

---

And could they continue mining and accumulating?

Yes, if:

They control mining from national or allied companies.

They prevent new BTC from entering the open market and absorb it into the "Treasury Bitcoin."

They maintain a fixed purchasing policy, as central banks do with gold.

---

But... the problem: the free market

Even if the U.S. sets a price, the rest of the world could continue trading Bitcoin at much higher prices.

So there are two BTC:

1. Free BTC: like the current one, speculative, that could be worth 1M.

2. Official BTC: used by governments or central banks, with a fixed price.