I get that there is only  a finite (21 Million) supply of BTC.

But, The problem with cryptocurrencies generally
is that there's potentially an infinite amount in totality.
I mean even bitcoin is now forking and sort of spawning brother and sister coins like bitcoin cash.
What good is it if you can spawn a new one every day?"

So why should any Crypto (including BTC) be worth anything ?

Govt. can ban Bitcoin by instructing ISPs to ban bitcoin protocol.
Very easy to do.
Some othe alt-couns use TOR & I2P which make them more
Resilient to such bans.
But bitcoin ban can very easily be enforced by a govt.

If you relly think individuals can compete with nation states
like the size of China ; i am not sure what to tell you.

But i would like to know that how possible it is for a nation state like China to
to launch a 51% attack.

Snce bitcoin blockchain is pretty long; how probable is it that a 51%
Attack can be lauched (i don’t understand bitcoin tech 100%) but i read somewhere
That longer the chain, the difficult it is for fraud. Because they will have to  recreate all the blocks to create a new chain.
Is it true ?

The problem is that unlike rest of the world, China is not a democracy.
I like chinese people, but i don’t trust the chinese govt. Who knows, they might be plotting or coordintating a
51% attack right now.
My question is; is it possible ?
Can Chinese Govt. coordinate at 51% attack, assuming they somehow manage to control
The mining pools in China (which is really possible).

Does that bother anyone ?

1) Thx will read the paper.

2) Who is "The Prophet"

3) BTC transaction fees are a big turnoff as well ( https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction ) ; $120 for transactions ! 

These hard forks are huge turnoffs . 
Almost proves what some prominent nay sayers talk about,  that is, bitcoin eventually has no intrinsic value, its an artificial construct created and then replicated at will.
If the hardfork issues is not solved then more hardforks will happen, eventually destroying any confidence in Bitcoin, with all the FUD that the process will create.
My BTC 0.02

I understand the tech (enough)

However, it is ridiculous that a hard fork like BCH happens and overnight they are able to create another 21 million coins based on (similar principles to bitcoin).
Every hard fork dilutes the bitcoin value (indirectly)

How does the community solve this problem ?

Not sure i understand your point sadnu. As a programmer, I am just puzzled by the technology choice of not "tagging" coins to make the ledger simple and compact ; as opposed to tracking "quantity" of bitcoins being passed around from wallet to wallet.
The current ledger / accounting methodology will grow infinity and break at some point.

I am sure i am missing a huge debate around this topic ;  hence the request if there was a debate on this early on in bitcoin dev days.

Don't want to keep a list of all previous owners, just the current one ;  

Wouldn't it be much easier & compact to have only one simple map of <bitcoin-id:wallet-id>  ; and keep updating the wallet address as bitcoins change owners.
Lot more simpler to scale than the system we have now.
It will be a fixed sized map ;  a 2 dimensional array (or map for c++ programmers).

In terms of OOP, in this case the object becomes the coin (not the wallet address as in the current system).

Going through the mailing lists, there is some discussion about how bitcoin should be considered like "grains of sand" or a "bucket of water" transferred around from wallet to wallet. However, this mechanism of keeping a the whole ledger of who owns what all the way to epoch, would not scale.
I haven't found a deeper discussion thread on pros and cons of having the coins (all the way to Satoshis) to be tagged , so that a database of who is a particular owner of a particular coin can be kept.
If there is such a thread, would be great , if someone could link.