What If The Gold Is Gone? Bitcoin And The Future Of Sovereign Wealth #CriptoNews

Elon Musk is as much of a showman as he is engineer, and his idea about having his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) livestream a visit to Fort Knox is yet another example. The plan, at least according to what has been floated in the media, is to roll up to America’s most famous gold vault and show the public exactly what’s (or isn’t) behind those colossal steel doors.

Some might call it a publicity stunt, but plenty of Americans, grappling with rampant government corruption, inflation, and growing distrust in institutions, find themselves oddly intrigued. A live unveiling of the national gold stash would be quite the spectacle.

The timing couldn’t be more apt, given the shadows lingering over the international gold market. The Bank of England is facing significant challenges in fulfilling physical gold withdrawal requests, with delays extending to 4–8 weeks instead of the usual 2–3 days, raising concerns about the actual availability of its gold reserves. The strain stems from a surge in demand for gold deliveries, exacerbated by large shipments to U.S. COMEX warehouses and global political uncertainties. Critics suggest the Bank may have engaged in fractional reserve practices, lending or leasing gold it does not physically hold, creating a liquidity shortfall. These delays, coupled with vague justifications such as logistical constraints, have led to speculation that the Bank is scrambling to reacquire gold to meet obligations. If unresolved, this situation could undermine trust in the Bank of England as a global custodian and destabilize confidence in the broader financial system.

The price of gold has been on a roller coaster in 2025, reaching an all-time high of $2,956.22 per ounce in February, driven by strong demand as a hedge against inflation, geopolitical tensions, and central bank accumulation. After rising over 25% in 2024, gold has already gained 10.35% this year and is projected to surpass $3,000 per ounce by mid-2025, with some forecasts suggesting it could reach $3,200–$3,300 later in the year. Analysts attribute this bullish trend to declining interest rates, increased ETF inflows, and global economic uncertainties, which have reinforced gold’s safe-haven appeal.

Which brings us to DOGE. Beyond sheer entertainment value, there’s a deeper question: no matter what they find in Fort Knox, will anyone care?

What Happened in 1971?

It’s possible that many will, but that the concern will be borne out of ignorance of how the dollar actually works. Many Americans still assume that their dollars are tied directly to gold. Not long ago, I spoke to a friend who is literally a rocket scientist, and he was baffled to learn that the dollar hasn’t been redeemable for gold since 1971.

That year, President Nixon “temporarily” suspended gold convertibility, effectively abolishing the Bretton Woods system. This moment, known as the Nixon Shock, pivoted the world from a gold-pegged monetary order to the free-floating fiat currencies we all use today. More than half a century later, we can look back and notice dozens of fascinating correlations between this decoupling and fundamental changes to American life. Even still, people either forget or never learn that their greenbacks are not claims on any physical commodity.

Yet the federal government still owns about 8,133 tons of gold—by far the largest state-owned hoard in the world. Which raises the question: Why?

One answer is historical inertia. The U.S. built up gold in the twentieth century under Presidents from FDR (who famously confiscated private gold in 1933) to Eisenhower, under whom holdings soared to around 20,000 metric tons. Later presidencies saw major outflows or sales. Still, thousands of tons remain on the books. There is enough gold held by the federal government that if it vanished tomorrow, the global markets would register a shock unlike anything we’ve seen in modern finance.

Even though it doesn’t back the dollar, America’s gold serves multiple strategic roles. Central banks worldwide still view gold as the ultimate backup plan, and for the U.S., the sheer volume it holds may afford a psychological buffer. In times of extreme economic stress, gold reserves can be used to stabilize currencies or provide collateral. (In fact, there has never been a fiat currency that was not pegged to gold at first. Even though the dollar is not redeemable for gold any more, it would not exist today had it not been redeemable for gold in the past.)

It’s been decades since a major revaluation or gold-based policy occurred, but the assumption that there are thousands of massive bars tucked away in Kentucky helps reinforce the notion that the U.S. has levers to protect its currency beyond just military force. Whether that’s still relevant in a digitizing, inflation-wracked world is up for debate, but the fact remains that the bond market does not dismiss the significance of a gold hoard measured in the thousands of tons.

That said, a tiny handful of officials have actually seen this gold with their own eyes. In the 1970s, official reports were released stating that the vault was physically inventoried and tested. But no comprehensive public audit has occurred. That gap, combined with the secrecy surrounding how much gold the U.S. actually has, has created an informational vacuum that conspiracy theories happily fill. As a result, the DOGE plan to roll cameras through Fort Knox is a legitimate effort to shed light on a pillar of American governance.

Scenarios: Shortage, Surplus, or Status Quo

Contemplating the fate of Fort Knox can lead to some wild hypotheticals. If Musk and the DOGE team swing open those steel doors to discover the vault only half full, one immediate casualty could be the U.S. dollar’s reputation. Then, people might wonder if other vectors of U.S. power are equally hollow. The ripple effects could be epic. Creditors could lose confidence, bond yields could spike, and global markets could shift in search of a new haven asset – or shift capital into gold itself, running up the price. It’s not hard to imagine multiple branches of government scrambling to manage the fallout, or the Fed enacting emergency measures to prop up faith in American solvency.

But what if everything checks out exactly as official statements claim? In that case, the conspiracies would deflate overnight, and the federal government could boast, “We told you so.” The general public might lose interest, turning the entire escapade into a fleeting viral curiosity.

Then there’s the truly outlandish scenario: the vault contains more gold than expected. Could the U.S. have kept a secret stash off the books? Did it confiscate the gold of the many dictators it has toppled over the past century? Such a revelation might boost Washington’s global financial clout, but also raise awkward questions. In all likelihood, this scenario remains fantasy, but in a time when every official narrative gets scrutinized, it’s worth considering how the public would react if the numbers turned out unambiguously “too good.”

Auditing Gold vs. Auditing Bitcoin

Beneath the chatter about Fort Knox lies a more serious debate. Gold, for all its grandeur, is tough to verify in large quantities without expensive and time-consuming processes. If you wanted to confirm every bar in Fort Knox was genuine, you’d have to methodically weigh, measure, and assay them.

Modern techniques like ultrasonic scanning reveal if a bar’s interior has been hollowed out or replaced with tungsten. X-ray fluorescence (XRF) guns confirm surface purity, but can be fooled by thick gold plating. Full certainty might require drill sampling and fire assays. Historically, limited spot checks have been enough to maintain trust. But when the Perth Mint scandal came to light, or when tungsten-filled bars surfaced in Manhattan, the whole industry was reminded how easily trust can be shaken.

Ordinary individuals face the same challenge on a smaller scale. If you wanted to pay for a car with gold coins, how would you confirm authenticity at the point of transaction? You could use a handheld XRF device that costs thousands of dollars, or a conductivity tester like the Sigma Metal Verifier. These methods work for a coin or two, but would be cumbersome for large deals. The cost in time and technology underscores gold’s friction in everyday use. As Luke Broyles points out on X, “Every hour we waste debating if we should audit Fort Knox or not bitcoin gets audited 6 times.” Bitcoin’s audit never stops. Every ten minutes, a new block is mined, and the entire network validates it.

Auditing bitcoin’s circulating supply is straightforward. Anyone running a full node can type a command, for example, bitcoin-cli gettxoutsetinfoand see how many coins exist. The result updates in real time as new blocks are discovered. No specialized equipment is required, just a computer and an internet connection. If any miner tried to inflate the supply, the consensus rules would reject that block. Compare this to gold, where verifying a few thousand bars might take weeks or months and cost millions of dollars. Bitcoin was engineered so that trust is minimized. You don’t need to trust an auditor or an institution; you can verify the circulating supply yourself.

That’s a fundamental point the DOGE spectacle could illuminate. Even if America’s gold is all there, verifying it remains cumbersome and resource-intensive. Bitcoin, on the other hand, offers continuous, trustless audits, making it more reliable as a store of wealth for institutions.

If Musk’s Fort Knox livestream does happen, the world will watch in rapt attention. The result could be more than just fun entertainment. It might also wake people up to the problem of “proof of reserves,” spurring governments to consider strategic bitcoin stockpiles as a complement to gold—a sovereign store of wealth that any citizen can confirm in real time without stepping foot into a fortress of steel and stone.