Aren't those investing in silver and gold (moreso gold) counting on it's future utility value (currency)? Or is that bullshit too? I suppose you'll say next that BTC is not a store of value like silver and gold is? True but only because a proper amount of time has passed. Silver and gold are largely recognized as they are due to the fact that they were the best alternative.
Silver and gold are quite similar to Bitcoins in that sense (the only thing keeping the price high is because of demand, the speculative and/or "store of value" price is far higher than it's utility price, and as others have said in terms of a convenient 21st century currency Bitcoin is far, far more suitable than gold is), however the key thing that pro-BTC people miss when they compare Bitcoins to precious metals is that we've been conditioned for generations to covet precious metals. As I said in another thread (or perhaps earlier in this thread), despite it having absolutely no utilitarian purpose, rich dictators routinely gold plate firearms, because the gold is a symbol of wealth.
Bitcoins do not share these traits - there is no years of conditioning fostering the belief that everyone will want them in the future so you should want them now - the project itself is what, two years old? For that reason, the flimsy promise of "it has nowhere to go but up!" is not really enough to keep people interested. I
can see the idea that a store of wealth that can be securely, pseudo-anonymously, and quickly moved around the world is useful, but many outsiders simply see it as a game of hot potato that'll eventually leave someone holding the bag. Why should they volunteer to be a part of the chain, taking the risk they might be the end of it?
A growing economy will start to sway people's minds that maybe the chain doesn't have to end, and do wonders to sure up it's value.
Real work does need to be done and time needs to pass. The fact that it's a speculative vehicle doesn't invalidate it. Au contraire, it demonstrates that there's a demand for it. Patience is the key, grasshopper. Trying to rush this into the mainstream is also delusional.
I agree with you in that respect, and I realize it'll take time - I would just like to see more people outside of this forum focusing on building the economy rather than roping in more investors. While it being a speculative vehicle has helped to an extent (giving it a dollar-value people can relate to), it's also hobbled adoption by varying the "value" wildly and been a PR-nightmare because there are many who view it as nothing more than a geek ponzi scheme.
It's my humble opinion the better thing to do to shut those people up is to show them we can build a sustainable economy, rather than telling them "see I told you it would break silver parity".