This is just the tip of the iceberg. Of course the government cares about money, and of course it wants to control the money supply. And, as a consequence, the USA will never allow any major currency inside its borders other than the US dollar.
The history of the United States is littered with the fights over who gets to determine what is money and how much of it there is: Hamilton's fight with Jefferson and Madison over the need for a central bank, Jackson during his run for the Presidency denouncing the central bank--and this becoming the main issue in the campaign, the popularity of Williams Jenning Bryan (cf. the famous "Cross of Gold" speech), etc. etc. all the way up to the horrible stagflation of the 1970s ("Whip Inflation Now!") and the recession caused by the ultimately successful efforts by Fed Chairman Paul Volcker's to end it. It is reasonable to believe--and certainly most people in the US government believe--that control of The Money is control of the economy.
Why would any successful government ever voluntarily give up that control?
I pretty much agree with what you are saying : Governments (and central banks) would never voluntarily give up the control they have now, especially when a currency is being exchanged for one they have control over.
It is also interesting because bitcoin may be influenced by governments, but not issued by them nor central banks, which is already a fundamental difference in the battles that have come before.
The amount of time/resources that will be spent to try to control something that was never in their control (like kind of along the same lines as government measures in Argentina), nor under the control of any single entity for that matter, will be extremely telling. As far as I'm concerned the writing is on the wall… what is going on now is just the ongoing manifestation of what is to come next.
Not to mention that as more bitcoins are used/accepted by people in exchange for goods/services between individuals, governments will be and are increasingly being side stepped. It will be interesting to see this dynamic unfold more in places where (local) governments are becoming insolvent.
Bitcoin is in no position to supplant the USD, EUR, JPY, GBP, RNB etc, because bitcoin operates in between them now. And as more people loose faith in their respective currencies but still want ways to exchange between other individuals for goods/services, bitcoin will increasingly operate as well in a realm of its own.
> Why would any successful government ever voluntarily give up that control?
They really can't give it up. It's the foundation of government: the ability to issue debt and place an obligation on citizens to offer their goods and services to acquire that debt to fulfill that obligation. Unless the U.S. decides to adopt debt note convertibility to bitcoins, there's really no way for bitcoins to supplant the dollar.
The history of the United States is littered with the fights over who gets to determine what is money and how much of it there is: Hamilton's fight with Jefferson and Madison over the need for a central bank, Jackson during his run for the Presidency denouncing the central bank--and this becoming the main issue in the campaign, the popularity of Williams Jenning Bryan (cf. the famous "Cross of Gold" speech), etc. etc. all the way up to the horrible stagflation of the 1970s ("Whip Inflation Now!") and the recession caused by the ultimately successful efforts by Fed Chairman Paul Volcker's to end it. It is reasonable to believe--and certainly most people in the US government believe--that control of The Money is control of the economy.
Why would any successful government ever voluntarily give up that control?