Very entertaining, but I can only imagine how confusing this video is to the average person.  Almost every concept introduced could use some fleshing out.  Like the guy keeps asking "what does this have to do with my house?"  There's no real explanation of interest rate manipulation, inflation and deflation, the "business" cycle.  No mention of the reason for the Fed's quasi-independence (government would print money even faster than banks) and not enough mention of it's special government-like powers.  It's a difficult task to successfully marry the "evil banker" archetype with a belief in market anarchism since many people view evil bankers as a free-market phenomenon.

It's really well done, though, and would be a good candidate for a longer film.  That interview is really good too.

Inflation in the monetary sense is a term that lost all meaning with the advent of tiered money.  Now we can have both inflation and deflation at the same time.  The price of paper instruments (mortgages, derivatives) goes down, while the price of physical goods (food, energy) goes up.  Bankers call this deflation.  Everyone else calls it inflation.

To answer the original question, yes, many people will argue that a gold standard is 'deflationary'.  It's ridiculous, of course.  And it belies the extent to which wealth confiscation has become an acceptable part of American culture.  Any monetary standard that doesn't automatically enable the confiscation of productivity growth through technical advancement is considered 'deflationary' and therefore bad.

When, in reality, deflation just means cheaper goods and fewer jobs means more free time and the only real problem is the concentration of wealth created by, wait for it, monetary fraud and manipulation in the name of wealth redistribution.

Bitcoins are more economically generated in cold regions.  That could be considered both "cryptoracist" and a disadvantage compared to a more local currency.

You guys (and girls) are going to want to cultivate some industry if you plan for Bitcoin to become a viable currency in the long run.  Right now I see lots of resellers, lots of spices and web services, and a few people making tchotchkes.  But on the whole this doesn't look capable of supporting a 5 million dollar economy, let alone a larger one.  The web services in particular are easy to write-off, since they are naturally complementary to the production of Bitcoins themselves.

But where is the energy production?  Where are the agricultural products?  Where is the machinery?  Where are the raw materials?  Web services require electricity.  People require food.  Tchotchkes require raw materials to produce.

Given a few strategic additions, it wouldn't be too difficult to foster a self-sustaining economy capable of supporting an actual person, without resorting to currency conversion.  Add some wind turbines, some vegetable seeds, metal recycling and machining services, and generate velocity and a real economy.  Fail to do so, and it's likely the value of Bitcoins dwindles, the Bitcoin economy stagnates and remains dependent upon external sources, or the first embargo or resource crunch grinds it all to a screeching halt.

Don't get me wrong, I like what I see so far.  But once I've bought my alpaca socks and a grow-light bulb and organic coffee beans, there's not much else here that can be considered actual capital, or that can't be gotten more easily without the need for Bitcoins at all.

This is interesting.  I could do it, but it would be more "living off the grid with stuff I already own" and less "paying for rent and clothes with Bitcoins".

I have to admit I'm not completely up to speed on this stuff, but if a bitcoin is just a private key, then it should be easy in theory to make your wallet write-only and redirect it to a printer or some type of write-only media.  That way whenever you receive a bitcoin it is safely stored away, and an attacker would have to setup some kind of monitoring and wait for new ones.