In fact it's the opposite I think that's its biggest strength.
If no one else sees it that way however, then it will not live up to it's potential because there is no reason for them to move over to it. Adopting bitcoin is a political decision because money is as equally political as it is economic.
It's super complex because the vast majority of people have no clue the power and complexity that sits behind the money they hold in their hands. They just see it as the next bag of groceries, or electricity payment.
If Bitcoin could become stable, then it would offer the freedom of converting wages into a more stable form. A Venezuelan would expect the purchasing power of today's wages to be 4% lower in just one month!
At least with stocks and companies, the stock actually means something: typically a vote for the board, or access to a dividend.
It is sad to see that this side of Bitcoin is not stressed more often.
BTC on the other hand is inflationary, due to the (artificial) cap of 21 Million BTC.
In any case, inflationary vs deflationary is a moot point. Too much of either side is bad. The important part is price consistency, which everyone can agree is relatively fair. 2% to 3% inflation (loss of value) is much more consistent than anything that BTC has accomplished... with wild swings of 100% to 1000% on some years.
------
I'm intrigued by DOGEcoin, explicitly because it adopts an inflationary model with infinite supply. I think that sort of model is more fair in the long term, and certainly more fun.
IE: If you actually want to make money, you have to go equities or start up a company.
Bitcoin is tiny, its measured in billions. How much did the Canadian currency just lose in the last view weeks? That amounts to hundreds of billions of vaporized wealth.
Huh, that is a really interesting question.
It's not as trivial to calculate as it is for Bitcoin, where you can multiply the moneys held by the change in exchange rate -- essentially no prices as denominated in BTC, while most prices most Canadians deal with are denominated in CAD. For most Canadians, the ratio of their income and rent or groceries will stay the same, so in some senses they haven't lost anything. But the price they pay for imports, like computers and oranges, will go up, so they have definitely lost something. I wonder what the balance comes out to.
In the long run, this can depress foreign prices and even increase manufacturing demand here due to lower labour costs. But these changes don't happen overnight.
(This assumes you are treating BTC as a currency, which appears to be the OP's intent.)
how's that divide between the rich and poor going? The fed has been upwardly redistributing wealth especially dramatically for the last 40 years since when the Nixon closed the gold window. I suppose if you think creating a kleptocratic state is beneficial for the future, then your statement rings true.
Why is active, central, management necessary?
>The biggest economic problem to me has always been an unintelligent control of the money supply.
The Bitcoin paper [0] lays down the rules of control and many have been able to follow it; In what way is that unintelligent?
If the USA suddenly adopted bitcoin as the official currency, you would see insane deflation. If people stopped using bitcoin as much, you'd see strong inflation.
Central banks manipulate money supply to keep prices steady.
That's why I can sign a loan for a house in dollars. But you would be insane to sign a loan for a house in bitcoin. The federal reserve will keep inflation from 0-2%. We can count on it. Bitcoin who knows.
Debt currencies are used for signing loans.
Anyway, there is probably a way to add an inflation metric over the blockchain based on it's length (or #transactions, or avg. transaction value, etc.), where some value equivalence can be drawn between older coins and newer coins, if it's really desired.
Have you been hiding away for the last 7 years? There are so many objections to central banks its difficult to know where to start, but just one question, you truly believe any group is capable of making gross monetary decisions that affect billions of people didn't we go with capitalism because markets beat kings?