Similarly, the Gartner hype curve is at the peak of the Gartner hype curve.
Gartner doesn't change the fact that bitcoin is deflationary and will die as a currency for the same reason that precious metals died: They are deflationary.
Similarly, the Gartner hype curve is at the peak of the Gartner hype curve.
Gartner doesn't change the fact that bitcoin is deflationary and will die as a currency for the same reason that precious metals died: They are deflationary.
Precious metals are no longer used as money because of deflation? Care to justify that?
Are you sure it wasn't due to the numerous benefits of fiat money? (Not to say that fiat is perfect.)
And yes, being deflationary is why that is no longer done.
The amount of paper money in the world should equal the amount of resources. If it doesn't you have deflation and all sort of trouble.
You guys are referring to Gresham's Law which is only applicable due to legal tender laws. Without legal tender laws, the "good money" wouldn't be driven out by the "bad money" (i.e. US currency).
Also, the reason the US government went completely off the gold standard in 71 was to increase deficit spending without having to pay our debts in gold or something of real value. The Fed has a policy of steady inflation, only through debt liquidation can we ever expect to pay off the huge amounts we owe. That is, we borrow 10 trillion and inflate 50% over a certain time, now we only owe 5 trillion.
End the legal tender laws, allow alternative commodity-based currencies and end the central planning of interest rates. This is the solution. It has nothing to do with gold (or Bitcoins) being a deflationary currency. It has everything to do with big corrupt government.
edit- I don't want that last sentence to color my whole statement. I'm an Austrian, not a Republican. I worked for Obama last time and will vote for him again. For a better perspective on this, check out (future Fed Chairman!) James Grant's Interest Rate Observer http://www.grantspub.com.
After all, by exactly the same argument, why buy a computer today when you could wait and get a more powerful computer tomorrow? You could apply that logic indefinitely, except that the sooner you get a computer, the sooner you start getting value from it. At some point the balance changes, and you decide to buy one anyway.
I don't know enough about economics to say whether or not deflation is bad, but your argument doesn't hold up.