Brian Armstrong

You know, I guess if let's say there was a matter of national security and these companies would not exist otherwise, and there was fundraising happening from the government, I guess they could end up with some equity in that situation.

But it just begs the question of like, well, who's going to be managing this portfolio of company stocks?

When would they sell them?

Because it's not like a foregone conclusion that Anthropic and AI are going to be the biggest AI companies forever.

It might end up being that, you know, Google or someone else does or SpaceX does a better job.

Right.

So now you're suddenly saying, OK, we're going to have like capital management happening inside the government.

I think the government should be limited to setting policy and the private sector should do the capital allocation.

Nice.

Yeah.

Okay, so that's a complex topic.

I think there's parts of it that I like a lot and parts of it I don't.

So the part that I like is that it would allow everybody to have skin in the game.

And I think we'd see more cohesion, less polarization.

And it's a little bit like in a company, you know, inside Coinbase employees get stock options because if we all have, we were kind of grumpy today and we get into a little fight with our coworker, but hey, we all own, we're making something bigger than this.

So we all kind of stick around and work out our differences.

So in that sense, I love the idea of people being able to buy into a sovereign wealth fund, but also maybe every citizen getting a share at birth.

It's a little bit like what they're doing with these Trump accounts right now.

So I think that'll actually make people more aligned to free market capitalism and have skin in the game.

The downside is kind of what we talked about earlier, which is who's allocating that money, right?