Just read this take:
"I hope everyone in crypto realises BTC cannot act as the currency standard. As the supply stops and wallets get lost, it will become more and more scarce. It will become unusable as a transactional product. It could remain as a store of value, but you will need secondary standards to measure it against. Example the USD, or sheep or diamonds etc."
What do you think? #asknostr
Para mi el valor de BTC es su capacidad para actuar como registo de propiedad absoluta fiera de los canales estatales. Las funcionalidades relativas a actuar como medio de intercambio, vendran solucionadas por los intrumentos financieros que ya se estan empezando a crear (y los que vendran) sobre la base de BTC
Bitcoin could always just do a decimal shift and suddenly, oh look, there's 10x as much, making it way easier to subdivide. Assuming value follows proportionally, i.e., 10x the coins and each worth 1/10th the value so total supply cap is unchanged, which to be fair is a big assumption, you once again have plenty in the economy.
In a broader sense, this suggests that a crypto can only act as a currency standard if it's inflationary so that the inflation can counteract the lost coins. I don't agree with that, but I could be proven wrong.
That makes sense. I don't think you need a constantly increasing money supply to work. Fixed supply would work just fine.
The US Dollar is constantly devaluing because they keep printing more. During "times of crisis", whether manufactured or not, more money is printed.
The dollar is getting less and less scarce and not even necessarily in a predictable way. Why can this be used to measure things but bitcoin cannot?
