"The Fed's control over money is very strong and permeates throughout the entire financial world, with tentacles that influence every investment... including our dear bitcoin."
They can't control Bitcoin in the same way that they can traditional markets. Their manipulation techniques are much more limited. It is for this reason, and precisely because of their "tentacles that influence every investment" that the masses will eventually flock to Bitcoin. Why stay aboard a sinking titanic when you can hop on a rocket that has had over a hundred thousand percent gains in 5 years?
Key word I think is "eventually"... but not yet IMO.
The price of Bitcoin can be influenced by the Fed.
The code (monetary policy / technology) is not so easily influenced.
What you're referring to I think is the code. What I'm referring to is the price.
I hear you on the code. But I also mean the price. They are limited in the techniques that they can use to manipulate the price compared with traditional financial assets. For example, they can't exactly print Bitcoins.
I think you're approaching this from the wrong angle.
You're right, they can't print bitcoin. However, the supply rate of Bitcoin has little influence over price movements. Buying and selling is the main driver of pricing, and buying and selling is driven by perception. So if the perception of high-risk assets is slowly turning negative, it will drive prices lower for bitcoin.
My argument is that the Fed's decisions on USD supply heavily influences the perception of those who buy/sell. If the Fed says they're going to start reigning in on inflation, market makers will take notice and begin to sell their high-risk investments. That's because those high-risk investments only did well DUE to that inflation.
I see where you're coming from. But I don't know if we can really be certain that the perception of the Fed's influence on supply is actually moving the market the way that they want us to believe. For example, Silver smackdowns seem to always take place during these Open Market meetings, yet we know that these price declines due to orchestrated paper selloffs are purely timed to coincide with them for manipulation purposes. Why would it not be different in any other market where the Fed controls supply? This is a serious question.
I think your description is just another way of looking at the same thing. While I agree that if enough people perceive something, price will go in the associated direction. However, if demand begins to exceeds available supply, price goes up by default. Isn't this simply because peoples perception changed accordingly with the dwindling supply and increase in demand?
With the silver market this is not so since completely fake prices are thrown into our faces based on paper trades.