Not here to try to correct you, as I’m no expert in the arguments here, but this is food for thought maybe: 
Discussion
I tent to agree on that view.
I think facilitating trade and store of value are the two key functions of money.
I can't really see those separated as some see to do ?
The whole thread is pretty good imo. Pretty sure there’s a “famous” article on “hodling is using” but couldn’t find it. Like was said earlier, guess time will tell
its undeniable that demand for BTC bootstrapped the network. That demand was certainly largely hodlers.
So there is an argument that "hodling is using bc it creates demand"
unfortunately things aren't static.
with every halving it becomes more and more important that MoE use increases.
its hard to see how that would EVER happen if the dominant view is that the purchasing power of each sat will only increase.
I'd suggest those conditions incentivize fiat loans and other services that enable hodlers to keep their capital but still reap the benefits of having it.
it just a theory
but are we also going to call taking out a USD loan against a utxo "using bitcoin?"
I smell a trap in your question 🤔
Honestly don’t know, inclined to say no but maybe yes in some complicated way that’s not immediately clear (or tasteful to the e purists to consider). Activity that increases the usefulness arguably increases value of asset —> NGU —> less sats needed per block for miners. I dunno.
fair enough 😀