If you think 21,000,000 BTC is not enough for everyone then you are wrong!

[elevates]

I have read many times here that 21 million Bitcoin is less if we want a complete adoption of Bitcoin. They generally quote how big organizations like MicroStrategy, whales, and big investment houses (banks, investment funds and etc) have been continuously buying Bitcoin and depleting the general public or new investors of Bitcoin. Satoshi Nakamoto was very smart and that is why he created 2.1 quadrillion satoshis.

After the inception of LN, we can divide that same amount of sathosis by thousand smaller units that can be called microsats. If you question the number of Bitcoin lost or unclaimed then still we would have a sufficient amount for the whole population of earth. We all know such a situation would take a lot of years till then those who question the amount of Bitcoin can be silenced with this topic.

[Charles-Tim]

With the lightning network, you can represent bitcoin in a smaller units, but what about the onchain? The smallest unit is still satoshi. 21 million BTC is perfect because it is not limitless, it will make it scarce and help in its valuation and adoption.

Even if it comes to a time (but that I do not think would be possible) that smaller unit is needed , I do not think that would divide the bitcoin community if truly there is a need for a unit smaller than a satoshi.

We should know that a satoshi is a very small unit, bitcoin do not need a smaller unit than a satoshi.

[un_rank]

Supply discussions and talk on scarcity are a couple decades too early. There is currently no shortage of available Bitcoin for purchase and as such no immediate need to implement a new, smaller unit to make it more readily available, and at the time we hit such a bottleneck, there is already a ready solution for it.

After the inception of LN, we can divide that same amount of sathosis by thousand smaller units that can be called microsats.

A 2nd layer is not needed for the implementation of a smaller unit, it can all be done on chain.

- Jay -

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

I have read many times here that 21 million Bitcoin is less if we want a complete adoption of Bitcoin. They generally quote how big organizations like MicroStrategy, whales, and big investment houses (banks, investment funds and etc) have been continuously buying Bitcoin and depleting the general public or new investors of Bitcoin. Satoshi Nakamoto was very smart and that is why he created 2.1 quadrillion satoshis.

Yes. You do actually have a point in this very statement of yours, because on the contrary, 1 Bitcoin = 100,000,000 Satoshis, and Satoshi is the smaller divisible unit of Bitcoin, which means that the price increase of Bitcoin is directly proportional to increase in demand (I.e if the demand of Bitcoin start increasing, it's price value increases too) so as to enable it's limited supply go round.

[Lucius]

21 million is quite enough and I think it will be enough in the future, because no matter what some expect that a mass adaptation will happen, I think that Saylor and similar people are just exceptions who are far ahead of others when it comes to Bitcoin. From 2009 to today, there was enough time for a lot more people to decide to use Bitcoin, but less than 5% of the world's population did it, so I don't believe that in the next 10 years that percentage will be more than 15% in the best case.

If the price rises to some six-figures, then even 1 million BTC on exchanges will be quite enough for all those who want to invest.

[aysg76]

When Satoshi setup the bitcoin network he thought of many things and capped the supply to 21M bitcoins but do you own full bitcoin at this time? Many of the people who have invested in it are holding the small units while some whales are holding thousands of coins so we are not into that time when everyone will have it right.We still have time and can adopt it now but if we say how all will have it then it's wrong perception according to me.

Full 21M supply to be unlocked is in 2140 so still it's more then a century and in coming time the prices will be too high that you can't get full bitcoin with big amounts also so that's why smallest unit satoshi will be more traded and more people can have access to it.The people are also losing the coins but in reality the actual coins lost are those send to OP_Return command which burns the coin and those who have lost access to wallets can get it back if they remember the seeds or passwords.

But remember the less supply the more value it will give to the existing coins and we all know that so instead of thinking these things we should be more focused on investing and safely holding our coins in our custody.

[mk4]

Supply discussions and talk on scarcity are a couple decades too early. There is currently no shortage of available Bitcoin for purchase and as such no immediate need to implement a new, smaller unit to make it more readily available, and at the time we hit such a bottleneck, there is already a ready solution for it.

True — but despite this, we should still be using a smaller denomination by default (in my opinion) like sats or bits. Buying stuff using 0.000xxx BTC is far less welcoming than using something without decimals. It's easier said than done due to the inevitable different opinions and backlash, but yea.

[hosseinimr93]

The people are also losing the coins but in reality the actual coins lost are those send to OP_Return command which burns the coin and those who have lost access to wallets can get it back if they remember the seeds or passwords.

They are not the only lost coins.
Lost coins are those who have been burned using OP_RETURN and those who have not been claimed by the miners as the block reward.
Those coins that have been sent to the burn addresses have been probably lost, but we can't be 100% sure of that. In theory, it's possible that someone has the private key of burn addresses.

[Dunamisx]

Have you considered the sum of the total 21 millions worth amount of bitcoin into dollars, how big such amount could be if converted, the truth is that not everyone will hold the huge of this digital asset because everyone cannot be a whale, but we have the little set of organizations that has it enough in possession while also we are having a large number of users performing bitcoin transactions worth a million numbers each day, which is also an indication that bitcoin is cross-globally distributed regardless of the amount you're holding there will always be a transaction occuring each day confirming it's circulation.

[un_rank]

True — but despite this, we should still be using a smaller denomination by default (in my opinion) like sats or bits. Buying stuff using 0.000xxx BTC is far less welcoming than using something without decimals.

You are suggesting Bitcoin be represented using a smaller unit by default, so instead of BTC it is promoted as Sats or millibits?
This has the pro of making calculations easier in the long run (but would be confusing in the short term) and could also help those who still think they have to acquire whole bitcoins to fully be holders.
And as you pointed out, there is the con of difficulty reaching consensus on a decision.

As is stands, while there is no change on that, holders can choose to configure what denomination shows up on their wallet. I am aware this is supported by a couple of softwares.

- Jay -

[BIT-BENDER]

I am not saying that 21 million Bitcoin is small but what I am saying is that we fail to note that it’s no longer going to be 21 million bitcoin any more let’s say when all available bitcoin has been mined.

There are many bitcoin lost in time. Probably careless or natural causes of death and the owner not passing the wallet down to anyone. Of potentials with get to the peak of bitcoin era then I believe the amount of Bitcoin available would be reviewed.

[hosseinimr93]

You are suggesting Bitcoin be represented using a smaller unit by default, so instead of BTC it is promoted as Sats or millibits?
This has the pro of making calculations easier in the long run (but would be confusing in the short term) and could also help those who still think they have to acquire whole bitcoins to fully be holders.
And as you pointed out, there is the con of difficulty reaching consensus on a decision.

Take note that the amount field of a bitcoin transaction is always filled in satoshi. So, at the protocol level, bitcoin is measured in satoshi and that's the base unit of bitcoin.
Currently, we use BTC more than sat, just because it's much more easier. If bitcoin value reaches 10 million dollars one day, then we will probably use sat more than BTC.

[drwhobox]

There are many bitcoin lost in time. Probably careless or natural causes of death and the owner not passing the wallet down to anyone. Of potentials with get to the peak of bitcoin era then I believe the amount of Bitcoin available would be reviewed.

Agreed with you. There are many bitcoins lost in time, and many more bitcoins will come on that list. Owners don't pass their wallets, lost their wallets, and soo many more reasons. It cannot be recovered by anyone or bitcoin is created that way. 21 million will not be the same number after a certain number of years.

[Darker45]

Is this really a problem? 1 Sat is not yet even a thousandth of a dollar, why are people too worried about it? 1 Sat is only 0.00023 USD. In the first place, will Bitcoin replace the USD? Will Bitcoin become the world's official currency? I think this is an imaginary problem whose primary goal is to debunk Bitcoin's potential as a currency. Does complete adoption of Bitcoin mean it is going to be used in the day-to-day transaction of everybody on earth? I don't think so.

And if ever the time will come that 1 Sat would reach 1 USD, what can you buy with it anyway? Probably not even a piece of candy.

[Jon_Hodl]

If the money is absolutely scarce, then it also needs to be absolutely divisible.

The lightning network does exactly that with millisats but if the price of bitcoin goes so high, we can divide sats into even smaller units.

Even 1 BTC that is infinitely divisible is enough. The total number isn't as important as the absolute scarcity and divisibility.

[BlackHatCoiner]

If you divide 21,000,000 with 8,000,000,000, you get 0.002625 BTC per person. Yes, that's the bitcoin per capita, of the entire world, but it doesn't say much in my opinion.

After the inception of LN, we can divide that same amount of sathosis by thousand smaller units that can be called microsats.

Yes, but it's more complicated than that. First of all, with lightning and current protocol, it must take years for all the people to have their opening channel transactions confirmed. Secondly, micro-sats should not ever become the standard, unless they're introduced in the protocol. And even with the entire world invested into Bitcoin, micro-sats will have little value.