rarity of Bitcoin a bad thing?

[ashapasa]

I own only a couple of bitcoins, bought them during the 2014 bubble at around $1100 per coin . The reason I bought? Cus there will only be 21 million coins ever!! Now I am sure there are thousands of people just like me who own one or two coins, people who would be reluctant to spend their bitcoins as it could potentially be worth a fortune.

What I am trying to say is, perhaps the limited number of bitcoins is both a good and bad thing. The limited number of coins probably is hindering Bitcoin commerce and maybe a larger number of coins like maybe a trillion  Coins would have been more appropriate . I know bit coin is infinitely divisible but that's not what I am referring to .

[1715367748]

1715367748

[1715367748]

1715367748

[1715367748]

1715367748

[morris826]

I like the idea of a dollar for one sat so 21 million coins is a good thing IMO. If there were going to be a trillion coins the price could never reach a dollar a sat. With only 21 million coins it will be difficult for the price to go so high.

[ashapasa]

I like the idea of a dollar for one sat so 21 million coins is a good thing IMO. If there were going to be a trillion coins the price could never reach a dollar a sat. With only 21 million coins it will be difficult for the price to go so high.

Fair enough, but with only 21 million coins ever in circulation most people just buy it for speculation, I think this is one the main reason for bitcoins volatility . people buy in hope of quick riches which don't happen fast enough leading to an endless cycle of boom and bust. Volatility obviously not good for commerce and is counter productive to bitcoins ultimate aim right?

[vincentvincent]

I believe in honest money: Gold, Silver and Bitcoin

I think that says it all. Bitcoin is meant as a store of wealth. So probably it is very natural that you want to keep it and reluctant to use it.

[iv4n]

I like the idea of a dollar for one sat so 21 million coins is a good thing IMO. If there were going to be a trillion coins the price could never reach a dollar a sat. With only 21 million coins it will be difficult for the price to go so high.

Fair enough, but with only 21 million coins ever in circulation most people just buy it for speculation, I think this is one the main reason for bitcoins volatility . people buy in hope of quick riches which don't happen fast enough leading to an endless cycle of boom and bust. Volatility obviously not good for commerce and is counter productive to bitcoins ultimate aim right?

I agree with reason why people buy it, cause of speculation and fast earning. Many people just doesn't have patience, they wish bitcoin to rise in couple days. Then selling and waiting for price to go down, again buying... its a circle. When price stabilize a bit, people talk like there is no fun in that. That tells me majority is looking for earning in short run, without thinking about future.

With only 21 million coins, bitcoin can be a rare thing one day in far far future. I believe that anything is possible in this moment, bitcoin need to survive in next 10, 20 years first. If he can make that, then bitcoin can have safe future.

[beastmodeBiscuitGravy]

Humans have a hard time understanding or desiring small fractions of things. Three years ago there was a push to use mBTC as the standard unit to help with this psychological factor. Like many things in Bitcoinland... there was a lot of talk... and then nothing changed. So here we are, and there you are, with 2 BTC that you paid 2200 dollars for.

[ashapasa]

Humans have a hard time understanding or desiring small fractions of things. Three years ago there was a push to use mBTC as the standard unit to help with this psychological factor. Like many things in Bitcoinland... there was a lot of talk... and then nothing changed. So here we are, and there you are, with 2 BTC that you paid 2200 dollars for.

mBTC as the standard unit would have been a better idea like you said, wonder why nothing came of it?

[gentlemand]

I think it's going to be a lengthy while before we discover what Bitcoin's truly going to become. Most of us are going to hoard and I can't see that changing. I think digital gold is the most appropriate case so far but we'll see if any interesting new developments make it more fluid.

[Hugroll]

the limited amount of bitcoins is a good thing for the long term in my opinion. a long time from now where the bitcoin being mined is extremely small. the rarity of bitcoins is what is going to cause the price of bitcoin to be really high.
Buying bitcoin at 1100 may feel like a waste right now, but i think in around 50 years that would sound like a great deal.

[yayayo]

What I am trying to say is, perhaps the limited number of bitcoins is both a good and bad thing. The limited number of coins probably is hindering Bitcoin commerce and maybe a larger number of coins like maybe a trillion  Coins would have been more appropriate . I know bit coin is infinitely divisible but that's not what I am referring to .

You're mixing up two things here that are not directly related:

1) The total number of coins in circulation
2) the fact that the total number of coins is limited

Basically you're using the common - yet unproven -  argument that inflation is necessary to stimulate economic activity and that a deflationary currency would lead to excessive hoarding, killing "growth". I'd argue that in a Bitcoin-only world people would still buy their daily necessities. Maybe consumerism would be less pronounced, but that's not entirely bad... Today Bitcoin is hoarded mostly because it is better money than fiat. You can't really compare the situation of today's "dual" fiat / Bitcoin world with a potential Bitcoin-only world.

The total number of coins is totally irrelevant to the argument, since the same potential effect would occur with a higher number of coins, only at a lower per-coin purchasing power. What's relevant only is that the total number of coins is limited.

ya.ya.yo!

[Hazir]

-snip-
The total number of coins is totally irrelevant to the argument, since the same potential effect would occur with a higher number of coins, only at a lower per-coin purchasing power. What's relevant only is that the total number of coins is limited.

ya.ya.yo!

I feel like this is the best explanation and I can second that. If bitcoin was set up to has 100 millions of coins people would ask:" why not 200 or 500 millions?".
After all there is more than 7 billions people on earth, let's create more BTC for everyone.

The thing is - we don't need to own full btc, and maybe in the future when price of BTC will reach some really high numbers one Satoshi will be worth more than 1 cent not?

[lumeire]

-snip-
The total number of coins is totally irrelevant to the argument, since the same potential effect would occur with a higher number of coins, only at a lower per-coin purchasing power. What's relevant only is that the total number of coins is limited.

ya.ya.yo!

I feel like this is the best explanation and I can second that. If bitcoin was set up to has 100 millions of coins people would ask:" why not 200 or 500 millions?".
After all there is more than 7 billions people on earth, let's create more BTC for everyone.

The thing is - we don't need to own full btc, and maybe in the future when price of BTC will reach some really high numbers one Satoshi will be worth more than 1 cent not?

With a huge fraction of the coins ghosted, it's even rarer and more limited than you think.