Some crypto are actually better but with the caveat that they are only better if you keep it in the crypto ecosystem. Trading in and out of fiat currency is probably the biggest hurdle for crypto. Going in and out of crypto comes with massive fees if using a trusted exchange, headaches in accounting (in two monetary systems) and calculating fiat taxes, it’s slow, and adds inefficiency. For example, you may accept bitcoin for your product but now you need to pay one of your suppliers who doesn’t accept bitcoin - convert what you received to dollars, calculate a gain/loss on the change in value of bitcoin from the time you sold your product to the time you are converting it to dollars, pay a fee on converting, and finally you need all the same fiat accounts, credit, etc to then pay your supplier. It’s completely inefficient. In a new country that only used bitcoin or another crypto, you eliminate internal volatility completely because everything is priced in crypto in a closed self sustaining economy. Cryptos are not as volatile against each other as they are against fiat, after established. All of the volatility problems crypto has are exactly because people view it as an investment vehicle, in theory a currency shouldn’t fluctuate itself, it should just measure value of other items in a consistent way. There are many reasons one of the feds two main goals is price stability, both the prices going up and down can hurt the economy in different ways. Had bitcoins and other prices been able to remain stable rather than deflating however many thousand percent then the ecosystem would have been much more robust by now. I know your thinking stable coins do that, but I’d argue stable coins are just an extension of fiat but allowing a non-government entity to print money, and the only stable coins worthwhile are those backed by fiat bank accounts holding ever single dollar and not allowing the company to use customer funds or accounts as collateral to make their own decisions but without the regulation of a typical bank.