Funding is far less of an issue for an attacker who has a printing press, and it's the relative level of funding that matters. In order to defend against a 51% attack the defender must be able to spend more resources than the attacker. It's the "who can afford to lose more money game", where one side can just print as much money as they need while the other side has to earn every dollar. Are you really betting on the workin' man here? I wouldn't.
> attacking any single network does nothing to limit that demand
Demonstrating that they can afford a 51% attack on any blockchain they want to attack will affect the price of all crypto. Investors will need to discount that risk. This will surely affect demand.
> The idea that a centralized closed network that's severely hampered by operating restrictions can beat a well designed adaptable open network in the long run is a joke.
Nobody is claiming that the Fed's intention is to compete with bitcoin. They only need to attack it and destroy it. Remember, they want people to be stuck using their fiat currency, they don't want to make a competing type of sound money.
