The idea you have about tracking all transactions and observing what you buy (and by extension of blockchain DApps, many other facets of your life) is very interesting. But again, I think government creation of Bitcoin is very unlikely.

If the aim was to keep the centralized system in place and simply be able to have a permanent ledger (so in other words just tokenizing USD or whatever FIAT), they would have started with a private blockchain. We see countries now that are very interested in Ethereum (including Russia and China) that want private chains they can manipulate. Singapoor is already well on it's way to tokenizing its currency with a private Ether blockchain. Starting with a decentralized blockchain and letting that idea gain public support and significant market capitalization sounds way too counterproductive.

Next, about your point about China wanting to move off the dollar for exchanges and as the reserve currency: yes, that is true. However, a decentralized currency is again, against their interests (at least in the current world economy where other governments can also manipulate their monetary systems' supplies and regulations). China has great power over their currency right now; as I'm sure you've heard, they can devalue their currency at will to lower the cost of exports or keep the Yuan trading competitively against other currencies of countries it trades with. I don't think they would be so keen on giving up advantages like that.

Lastly, you made a statement about Web 1.0 and 2.0 requiring immense governmental funding and effort and thus extrapolating that "web 3.0" therefore can't be done by a single person if it is the future of the internet. You're kind of right and wrong at the same time here, I think. You're right in the sense that bitcoin isn't web 3.0, it's the initial proof of concept. There are thousands of devs working on blockchain tech right now, which is really the "web 3.0", not bitcoin itself. However, saying one person can't write bitcoin because blockchain tech is the progression of the internet is over simplistic. Web 1.0 and 2.0 required lots of infrastructure (a lot of it was physical) and governmental involvement was needed to ensure the network was expanding and continues to. Bitcoin and other blockchain tech runs on top of the existing internet and changes the way we communicate and transact over the existing internet. There is physical infrastructure necessary such as hardware to verify transactions in the case of bitcoin, but satoshi tried to decentralize this infrastructure as well by incentivizing people with computers to keep the network running in exchange for a reward in bitcoin (mining). Sadly, this has not worked as bitcoin mining is kind of centralized with large pools and companies consolidating much of the hashing power, especially with the help of ASICs.

All that being said, I like that you're open to being wrong about all of it and even hope for it :) It was worth reading, thanks for the post.