Is limited supply of bitcoin a hinderence?

[Wapinter]

we know that only 21 million Bitcoins can be produced and this make most people to think that they might not be able to get bitcoin again if they spend them heavily.
This thought leads to storing bitcoin rather than spending them.IMO this is a great hindrance in bitcoin becoming mainstream.Your thoughts?

[Fishbones78]

we know that only 21 million Bitcoins can be produced and this make most people to think that they might not be able to get bitcoin again if they spend them heavily.
This thought leads to storing bitcoin rather than spending them.IMO this is a great hindrance in bitcoin becoming mainstream.Your thoughts?

Not really a problem to me. I just think it would be pretty cool to have a whole Bitcoin. When people ask me about Bitcoin and they ask how much I have, if I say half a Bitcoin, they just give a grunt as if it is nothing. The limit I would have thought lets Bitcoin have such a value? I just don't think people appreciate how much even 0.01 is worth. It sounds like it would be worth under a penny, but it isn't.

[franky1]

not a problem if it can be divided down and easy to share out

[odolvlobo]

we know that only 21 million Bitcoins can be produced and this make most people to think that they might not be able to get bitcoin again if they spend them heavily.
This thought leads to storing bitcoin rather than spending them.IMO this is a great hindrance in bitcoin becoming mainstream.Your thoughts?

I don't know why someone would think that they can't get more bitcoins. You can buy them off an exchange whenever you want.

[European Central Bank]

Yes. Because the public are dumb and don't understand divisibility. They probably don't know their normal money supply is unlimited too.

[blunderer]

Yes. Because the public are dumb and don't understand divisibility. They probably don't know their normal money supply is unlimited too.

Not about divisibility, but deflationary money in general. The reason it's not used is because it doesn't work.
 
Imagine the money in your country, Clownlandia, appreciates 100% per year. Meaning if 1 ClownCoin buys 1 alpaca sock in Cownlandia today, it will buy a pair of alpaca socks next year.
This, and the [dubious] presumption of sanity (i.e. "Citizens of Clownlandia are guided by rational self interest"), we infer:
1. Don't buy anything that you can put off buying -- it will cost you less tomorrow.
   1a. Investing is a form of buying. Unless an investment *guarantees* to [more than] double your money within a year, keep money in mattress FTW.
        1a(a). Very few businesses double your money within a year, hang on to your Clowns.
2. Due to (1), Clownlandian economy
   2a. Collapses, because much more profitable to hodl than invest in IRL business,
   2b. Prices skyrocket, because store shelves are empty, because no one makes anything. ClownCoin becomes inflationary -- not in the sense of "base money inflation,"
        but inflationary in the common sense of the word, as in "reduced buying power" (there are still only 21 million Clowns, only now 1 Clown doesn't even buy you
        a single Clownlandian alpaca sock).

Hope this helps.

[odolvlobo]

Yes. Because the public are dumb and don't understand divisibility. They probably don't know their normal money supply is unlimited too.

Not about divisibility, but deflationary money in general. The reason it's not used is because it doesn't work.
 
Imagine the money in your country, Clownlandia, appreciates 100% per year. Meaning if 1 ClownCoin buys 1 alpaca sock in Cownlandia today, it will buy a pair of alpaca socks next year. ...

A 100% appreciation rate is unreasonable. I doubt that your predictions hold if the appreciation rate is 1%.

[7788bitcoin]

Both inflationary and deflationary models have pros and cons. For bitcoin, just like gold, the limited supply is actually a plus. One of the main features for bitcoin is the store of value. If we employ a inflationary model, the value stored in each coins will decrease with time.

[Joel_Jantsen]

I'm sure Danny will have  a better explanation to this.Only if he cares to answer.In my opinion,no one would store coins for a long time ,either they trade or invest which again,is not limited since the ownership of 1 coin by two people is much determined.You can take bank loans for example.

[Krayshock]

There are a lot of Altcoins in which people can buy to reduce the rate of Bitcoin generation. I can actually see ETH as a viable Altcoin.

[nostal02]

There are a lot of Altcoins in which people can buy to reduce the rate of Bitcoin generation. I can actually see ETH as a viable Altcoin.

The limited supply of bitcoin is good to stabilized its price when all coins have been mined, for eth it just a hype coin with no bigtime supporter that why they are now dumping their premine.

[MingLee]

No way that the capacity limit is a hindrance to Bitcoin, if you want to see what happens to other high-cap or infinitely-capped cryptos, go look at the multitude of failed cryptos that would retain next to no value. This is why the 21m cap is a benefit.

[Yakamoto]

There are a lot of Altcoins in which people can buy to reduce the rate of Bitcoin generation. I can actually see ETH as a viable Altcoin.

The limited supply of bitcoin is good to stabilized its price when all coins have been mined, for eth it just a hype coin with no bigtime supporter that why they are now dumping their premine.

ETH was always hype and little substance in my opinion. We're seeing this with the recent dump, and I have a feeling it will continue to slip lower over the coming weeks.

If some dev could make a "Killer App" for ETH then it might be valued more, but I would doubt it's value until then.

[blunderer]

Both inflationary and deflationary models have pros and cons. For bitcoin, just like gold, the limited supply is actually a plus. One of the main features for bitcoin is the store of value. If we employ a inflationary model, the value stored in each coins will decrease with time.

>If we employ a inflationary model, the value stored in each coins will decrease with time.
Of course. That's the motivating factor behind investing vs. sticking money in a mattress.

>For bitcoin, just like gold, the limited supply is actually a plus.
If gold was as high-maintenance as Bitcoin,* no one in his right mind would use it as a store of value. That's like storing value in ice cream -- let the power go out once, and your "value" is a sticky zero.
Not to mention all the legal uncertainty/drama/infighting of Bitcoin.
*Securing ~$6 bn US is currently costing more than $600 mil per year, or more than 10% of all the coins in existence. Just to secure the Bitcoin *network*, not your personal bitcoins -- that's extra.

Now imagine needing to "store [you some] value" for a laughably short time, like 50 years. Bitcoin?

[Hirose UK]

we know that only 21 million Bitcoins can be produced and this make most people to think that they might not be able to get bitcoin again if they spend them heavily.
This thought leads to storing bitcoin rather than spending them.IMO this is a great hindrance in bitcoin becoming mainstream.Your thoughts?

I think it's not a hindance as long as people keep sharing their butcoins. I mean if someone sell his bitcoins to the other, it means that the butcoins aren't gone. they just move from an address to another address.

[4by2]

No way that the capacity limit is a hindrance to Bitcoin, if you want to see what happens to other high-cap or infinitely-capped cryptos, go look at the multitude of failed cryptos that would retain next to no value. This is why the 21m cap is a benefit.

I believe you're specifically referring to something like Dogecoin, right?

Well, you can look at the price of it now. It's like $0.25 per 1,000 Dogecoin at this point. Has it been going lower?

[Zeke2345]

Only issue is more zeros after the decimal as it either becomes expensive or spread thinner. Guess the latter would also stimulate increase in price.

If you need to buy a magazine for .00000234 it could become a issue of the people adding or subtracting a zero to rip off or by mistake.
Recall preauthorizing credit cards so people could rent game consules at blockbuster back in the day.
Once locked a lady up for 1k instead of the normal 100. The zeros will be a hinder, hopefully we create a workaround for that if the time comes.

[4by2]

Only issue is more zeros after the decimal as it either becomes expensive or spread thinner. Guess the latter would also stimulate increase in price.

If you need to buy a magazine for .00000234 it could become a issue of the people adding or subtracting a zero to rip off or by mistake.
Recall preauthorizing credit cards so people could rent game consules at blockbuster back in the day.
Once locked a lady up for 1k instead of the normal 100. The zeros will be a hinder, hopefully we create a workaround for that if the time comes.

I think it would be easier for people to just have 10^-(x) satoshi or whatever payment form, that way it would be harder to miss a zero or add one and everyone can get their payments performed smoothly.

[SFR10]

Mainly those who store BTCitcoin at the moment, are doing it due to the upcoming halving and not due to the supply staying at 21 Million once reached. I don't think this will be a block or complication for BTCitcoin becoming mainstream at all. Everything is going to be working just as how it works now. If it's going to be mainstream, it will happen eventually, regardless of people holding some.

[NorrisK]

Imo it is not a problem as long as you keep building on your bitcoin stack. E.g. try to provide a monthly btc income for yourself as well so you will never lose all your coins if you spend some regularly (ofcourse buy more coins depending on how much you use bitcoin compared to fiat).

Regarding the zeros, this can easily be overcome by introducing new names for stuff, such as mBTC and uBTC. As those get more integarted, you can then start buying stuff for 1 mBTC or 150 uBTC for instance. Also, for the near future, the USD price will always be displayed next to the bitcoin price, making it pretty much ok for most people to see what is what.