This is the catch-22 of bitcoin, and one of the more interesting topics of thought, in my opinion.

Some of the factors:

Some believe people will not want to SPEND a deflationary hard money, but rather will SAVE into it.
As long as purchases with crypto are taxable events it disincentivizes commerce.
Gresham's vs Their's laws... how does that play out?

My thoughts...

Even if Bitcoin was not "spent" much it would be useful.  Currently in the west people are "saving" in the stock markets. You can't use stocks to buy things, and trades out are taxable events for most of us.  And yet the stock market continues to flourish.

Same with gold.  Gold is property. And people hedge with it.

But Bitcoin is a better hedge than either really. And the world is *juuuuust* figuring that out right now.

And here is the kicker.  Bitcoin's properties make it the most natural electronic money ever.  It is DESIGNED for commerce.  So once people are in it they will start to move it around.  I.E. SPEND it.

So... that's where it gets interesting.  How will that unfold?  Yes, I *do* think eventually people will spend their Bitcoin. I am just not sure about the path to that future.

A nice advice for all those who want to invest in bitcoin that you won't get rich overnight as no one has ever become in most cases but you need to think about safeguarding your future like you take insurance policies and plans for your kids and old age.So it is better not to regret at that time making same false and lame excuses.Be part of it now.

Now that there are bitcoin-based NFTs, I'm willing to entertain the idea of them having some valid use cases. Digital collectibles, souvenirs, in-game items, etc., are the obvious cases. But real-world items too, anything with a serial number could have its ownership connected to an NFT. Guns, cars, real estate, stock market certificates, etc.

Bitcoin is revolutionizing the world.

I mean, what the fuck are long term studies even good for anyway, amirite?

You're mistaking your inability to search with some sort of conspiracy. It's been debunked and forgotten.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/03/31/fact-check-covid-19-vaccine-not-associated-prion-disease/7053007002/

My body is ready for this seemingly endless accumulation/shenanigans to be over and btc moving beyond 1,2,3 etc tril (on the way to 10-11 tril first, then maybe 100 tril).
I think that we were tested enough in the last 8 years or even longer (for some others).

Yeah, I understand this, it was like ... a bunch of things Adobe did that protection was weak, like all their previous generation software, particularly Photoshop (which is why everyone seems to have it, or it's always at the top of the list on the pirate bay.)

Comes from Tuur Demeester

Always good content

Here are my 2c on Fed vs bitcoin.

It looks like the gov is in a mad rush to find anything extra that they could tax and spend.
In lieu of this, I think that it is exceedingly unlikely for them to effectively ban bitcoin, etc. since they would be decreasing, not increasing their tax base.
Witness gradual opening of the weed trade in US, the taxation of which definitely contributes to the individual states coffins. There was no tax and no revenue henceforth when it was illegal.

That said, they project completely unrealistic (currently) amounts that they can raise via bitcoin taxation as it is a small sliver of the overall economic activity and there lies some problems as they expect a lot more than they would see and when they would see a trickle instead of the flood, what conclusion would they have?
The answer is rather obvious and it would NOT be that they admit to overestimation.

Of course, that thread link is a great reference to attempt to devolve into stock to flow analysis - even though I still remain of the opinion that stock to flow has never been close to breaking, and so whatever, I might be getting into linguistics a wee bit, because personally, if the price were to underperform and stay in this range or lower until the end of this year, then sure maybe some of the curves of the model would need to be shifted downward.. but I would still not concede that the model would be broken, even if it were required to be shifted downwardly in order to have better co-integration of data to the projections.

Another aspect is that there may well be some pretty powerful folks (whether we refer to them as bearwhales, governments, status quo financial institutions, other entities/persons who would like to cripple or kill bitcoin, those who want to manipulate bitcoin to make a profit, or some combination of these folks/entities) who would like to provide both factual and proclamation evidence that stock to flow is broken... yeah, play around what they like, they might get lucky in killing/crippling bitcoin, but the more likely outcome is that bitcoin prices are going to revert back to the mean of the stock to flow model, even if it could experience extended periods of divergence... 6-24 months or even longer, perhaps? perhaps?

This is the perfect example of what I like to call the "Invisible Dragon" argument. It goes like this:

I have an invisible dragon sitting next to me.
Prove it does not exist.

Any argument made will result in a simple explanation that expands the powers of the invisible dragon. It doesn't displace air because it has no mass. You can't touch it because matter bends around it. And so forth and so on. The root of the problem is the person making the assertion is demanding that other people *disprove* the assertion when the responsibility for proving the assertion is that of the asserter.

The only way to handle this argument is to walk away.

Same thing here: The virus will kill people in a month by the millions. Then a year. Then 10 years. Then "infertility". Always things that can't be tested, can't be proven, and when they do fail you just slip in another argument.

It's a lot like the Millerites in the 1830's. This nutcase bunch attracted thousands by saying the world would end in 1843. When that didn't happen a "mistake" was found and it was 1844. Then it became "soon" and the sect split into the 7th day Adventists (nutcakes) and Jehovah's Witnesses. And they roll along to this day, saying the end of the world will be "soon". After all, try to prove the world "won't" end next week.....

Annoying that people still fall for this crap.

Either way we will get herd immunity its just whether we do it the easy or the hard way.

Personally I took the blue pill, if I was younger it might have been the red..

Oh! Inflation could end up higher than planned while printing all the brrrr.
Who'd have thunk?