Why Bitcoin is not that good as currency?

[doomistake]

This is true, the inflation of fiat as a currency causing the market to become more expensive, the products will increase their respective price depends on the supply and demand, while cryptocurrency doesn't even care about this inflation thingy, on the contrary, bitcoin overpowered fiat because of that. I can't imagine why people are not waking up from their delusions that fiat is more better than bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

[ReiMomo]

This is true, the inflation of fiat as a currency causing the market to become more expensive, the products will increase their respective price depends on the supply and demand, while cryptocurrency doesn't even care about this inflation thingy, on the contrary, bitcoin overpowered fiat because of that. I can't imagine why people are not waking up from their delusions that fiat is more better than bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

But as we can see on image it's a short period of time 2024, it takes probably more time to realize them how useful bitcoin is. The answer is
simply it's because of its price. The price of bitcoin is volatile, It may rise or fall from time to time so it's hard for us to use it because we don't know when we buy things it value is high but when we are about to pay the value of bitcoin drop down so we might lose a lot of money.

[qwertyup23]

The problem comes with the limited supply that bitcoin has.

The majority who owns most of the supply of bitcoin has the power to manipulate and control the prices in the market. In addition, having a currency which the government cannot control through the Central Bank may be potentially problematic in the future. Not to mention, relying on a digital currency where most people lack the access to such is destructive and prejudicial to them.

[error08]

bitcoin is not used as a currency, it seems that the influence of total supply is very limited and the price is very expensive so it makes the price of bitcoin very expensive and is not suitable if used as a currency because it will be difficult to use for transactions.

But it has been used as currency for years, people buy and sell things using bitcoin as a medium of exchange, it's a daily routine here in this forum and many others out there do it. What makes bitcoin isn't so good as fiat money due to its volatility, early adopters hoarding bitcoin while the whales on the wall street manipulate the price according to their need to gain profit in this market. The limited supply of bitcoin isn't the main problem, scarcity makes bitcoin won't lose its value to zero instead keep rising.

[Wysi]

bitcoin is not used as a currency, it seems that the influence of total supply is very limited and the price is very expensive so it makes the price of bitcoin very expensive and is not suitable if used as a currency because it will be difficult to use for transactions.

But it has been used as currency for years, people buy and sell things using bitcoin as a medium of exchange, it's a daily routine here in this forum and many others out there do it. What makes bitcoin isn't so good as fiat money due to its volatility, early adopters hoarding bitcoin while the whales on the wall street manipulate the price according to their need to gain profit in this market. The limited supply of bitcoin isn't the main problem, scarcity makes bitcoin won't lose its value to zero instead keep rising.

Yes the demand and supply had never been a problem as the key factor is it's  price fluctuations band volatility  as we cannot use bitcoin like fiat currency is because it's  can be manipulated by the whales playing up with small and mid level investor's money by turning the tide based on their requirement.

I think the price manipulation might never end as far as greedy whales got huge chunk of bitcoin with them.

[jseverson]

-snip-

Bitcoin I think was created to be used as a currency and a currency means something which could be used as a means of settlement. So if you want to say that Bitcoin was not created with an intent to replace dollars then you are really mistaken.

Just because Bitcoin can be used as a currency doesn't mean it has to be used as a national currency. Fiat and Bitcoin have vastly different properties, so you can't really expect Bitcoin to replace dollars without a complete overhaul of the existing financial system. I don't think any state will support this.

Actually, I am not against making it a national currency or even with it but the point is if this is not the goal then what do you mean by Widespread Adoption? Because I don't see a great future with cryptos and fiats going hand in hand.

If you're rooting for a crypto-only financial system, I would assume you have a solution for the dilemma OP described? As for widespread adoption, people can freely use Bitcoin for one purpose, while fiat for another, like what people do now -- is that incompatible with the great future you've envisioned?

[Sithara007]

Although Satoshi Nakamoto designed Bitcoin as a currency, it is not practical to use Bitcoin for that purpose if the user base grows to billions of people. Bitcoin is having a fixed block size, and despite the new innovations such as Lightning Network, we are still facing delays in getting confirmations as a result of that. There is no long term solution for the scalability issue. We can't increase the block size indefinitely. If the number of active users grow from a few million (which is the case currently) to 5-6 billion (the number of fiat currency users), then Bitcoin will be needing at least 1,000x block size. And I don't think that the Blockchain can handle that.

So for now, I think Bitcoin will be best used as an investment asset. The controlled supply principle means that Bitcoin is ideal as a store of value, and for investment purposes. For usage as a currency, I have a feeling that currencies such as Ethereum will be more suitable, since the time needed for confirmation is low. But lately, I heard that Ethereum is also facing scalability issues.

[Btcvilla]

Bitcoin is good as currency with faster and easy for transfer your bitcoin from one wallet to other wallet around the world, if use your money maybe little difficult if sending money to other country and take several day for sent it, with using bitcoin or altcoin just take several minutes your payment have been sent.

[teosanru]

-snip-

Bitcoin I think was created to be used as a currency and a currency means something which could be used as a means of settlement. So if you want to say that Bitcoin was not created with an intent to replace dollars then you are really mistaken.

Just because Bitcoin can be used as a currency doesn't mean it has to be used as a national currency. Fiat and Bitcoin have vastly different properties, so you can't really expect Bitcoin to replace dollars without a complete overhaul of the existing financial system. I don't think any state will support this.

Actually, I am not against making it a national currency or even with it but the point is if this is not the goal then what do you mean by Widespread Adoption? Because I don't see a great future with cryptos and fiats going hand in hand.

If you're rooting for a crypto-only financial system, I would assume you have a solution for the dilemma OP described? As for widespread adoption, people can freely use Bitcoin for one purpose, while fiat for another, like what people do now -- is that incompatible with the great future you've envisioned?

Well if you would have paid some attention I am the OP myself and there is no solution this dillema because the supply of btc is already finite. I am not the one wishing for a crypto only financial system but the best I know is that everyone on this forum atleast says fiat is a hoax a scam you can see the Bitcoin discussion threads are full of that. I just addressed that issue that this idea is far away from reality.

Although Satoshi Nakamoto designed Bitcoin as a currency, it is not practical to use Bitcoin for that purpose if the user base grows to billions of people. Bitcoin is having a fixed block size, and despite the new innovations such as Lightning Network, we are still facing delays in getting confirmations as a result of that. There is no long term solution for the scalability issue. We can't increase the block size indefinitely. If the number of active users grow from a few million (which is the case currently) to 5-6 billion (the number of fiat currency users), then Bitcoin will be needing at least 1,000x block size. And I don't think that the Blockchain can handle that.

So for now, I think Bitcoin will be best used as an investment asset. The controlled supply principle means that Bitcoin is ideal as a store of value, and for investment purposes. For usage as a currency, I have a feeling that currencies such as Ethereum will be more suitable, since the time needed for confirmation is low. But lately, I heard that Ethereum is also facing scalability issues.

Not to forget scalability as an issue but I still think that this can be solved with some technological advancements but Deflationary nature of btc can never be altered.

[mersal]

Bitcoin is good as currency with faster and easy for transfer your bitcoin from one wallet to other wallet around the world, if use your money maybe little difficult if sending money to other country and take several day for sent it, with using bitcoin or altcoin just take several minutes your payment have been sent.

Its not only about the transaction time,if this is only then banks also could implement blockchain transactions ans can make it possible like cryptos but here is the value over long term period.Bitcoin manages to gain its value since it was created but the traditional fiat money just losing it.

[jseverson]

Well if you would have paid some attention I am the OP myself

Woops, missed that, sorry. I cut out nested quotes because they're hard to read.

I am not the one wishing for a crypto only financial system

So if you want to say that Bitcoin was not created with an intent to replace dollars then you are really mistaken.

Actually, I am not against making it a national currency or even with it but the point is if this is not the goal then what do you mean by Widespread Adoption? Because I don't see a great future with cryptos and fiats going hand in hand.

I'm confused, so let me clear things up a bit with the quotes above:

• You don't want a crypto-only financial system because it won't work as per your example in the OP
• You believe that crypto was created to replace dollars
• You don't think crypto coexisting with fiat will work well in the future

The first point contradicts the second and third points unless the ultimate point you're driving is that: only one of Bitcoin or fiat can stay, and Bitcoin staying won't work. Are you basically saying, like your title asked, that Bitcoin is just not that good of a currency?

[Willitivity]

Bitcoin as a traditional currency like fiat can't really work, at least for now and in the nearest future, It's already a digital currency in the virtual space. The level of  technology required is high while ease of flexibility is low. So many still don't understand how Bitcoin works and as such will prefer to cling to tgeyr fiat currencies.

[teosanru]

Well if you would have paid some attention I am the OP myself

Woops, missed that, sorry. I cut out nested quotes because they're hard to read.

I am not the one wishing for a crypto only financial system

So if you want to say that Bitcoin was not created with an intent to replace dollars then you are really mistaken.

Actually, I am not against making it a national currency or even with it but the point is if this is not the goal then what do you mean by Widespread Adoption? Because I don't see a great future with cryptos and fiats going hand in hand.

I'm confused, so let me clear things up a bit with the quotes above:

• You don't want a crypto-only financial system because it won't work as per your example in the OP
• You believe that crypto was created to replace dollars
• You don't think crypto coexisting with fiat will work well in the future

The first point contradicts the second and third points unless the ultimate point you're driving is that: only one of Bitcoin or fiat can stay, and Bitcoin staying won't work. Are you basically saying, like your title asked, that Bitcoin is just not that good of a currency?

The point here is:
1. We all are pretty aware why Bitcoin was created in the first place. Atleast the person who said this hasn't exactly said this but the advocates of Cryptocurrencies the old forum users say that it is here to replace the current financial system
2. I personally feel that blockchain technology is something revolutionary and so is bitcoin but bitcoin has it's own limitations which i mentioned above.
3. Due to these limitations government would not advocate Cryptocurrencies in long term so they can't go hand in hand. So what I am trying say is exactly that bitcoin's survival as currency is really difficult in such circumstances.

[jseverson]

The point here is:
1. We all are pretty aware why Bitcoin was created in the first place. Atleast the person who said this hasn't exactly said this but the advocates of Cryptocurrencies the old forum users say that it is here to replace the current financial system
2. I personally feel that blockchain technology is something revolutionary and so is bitcoin but bitcoin has it's own limitations which i mentioned above.
3. Due to these limitations government would not advocate Cryptocurrencies in long term so they can't go hand in hand. So what I am trying say is exactly that bitcoin's survival as currency is really difficult in such circumstances.

1. It's really a matter of opinion, but the fact of the matter is, Bitcoin was created to be a decentralized peer-to-peer electronic cash system. The white paper did not attack the current financial system in any way, except maybe by saying that middlemen can be slow and charge fees. It did not mention national currencies at all.
2. No arguments there.
3. Bitcoin doesn't really need governments' advocacy, as shown by its growth from basically nothing. If you're talking about regulations, countries which haven't banned Bitcoin far outnumber countries that did; sure that could change in the future, but I don't think I've seen any developments to signal that Bitcoin's survival might be in question.

[teosanru]

The point here is:
1. We all are pretty aware why Bitcoin was created in the first place. Atleast the person who said this hasn't exactly said this but the advocates of Cryptocurrencies the old forum users say that it is here to replace the current financial system
2. I personally feel that blockchain technology is something revolutionary and so is bitcoin but bitcoin has it's own limitations which i mentioned above.
3. Due to these limitations government would not advocate Cryptocurrencies in long term so they can't go hand in hand. So what I am trying say is exactly that bitcoin's survival as currency is really difficult in such circumstances.

1. It's really a matter of opinion, but the fact of the matter is, Bitcoin was created to be a decentralized peer-to-peer electronic cash system. The white paper did not attack the current financial system in any way, except maybe by saying that middlemen can be slow and charge fees. It did not mention national currencies at all.
2. No arguments there.
3. Bitcoin doesn't really need governments' advocacy, as shown by its growth from basically nothing. If you're talking about regulations, countries which haven't banned Bitcoin far outnumber countries that did; sure that could change in the future, but I don't think I've seen any developments to signal that Bitcoin's survival might be in question.

Well unfortunately I think it can be a question towards survival if you don't want to Bitcoin to be the next cocaine or Weed. China & India two highly populated countries have put restrictions upon its usage. If we see more countries following the same track I don't think how are you saying that Bitcoin Survival is at question. I hope you are just a normal middle class law abiding citizen of your country lik everyone of us. Would you to use Bitcoin if it's usage in your country is banned or is penalized?

[DabsPoorVersion]

The point here is:
1. We all are pretty aware why Bitcoin was created in the first place. Atleast the person who said this hasn't exactly said this but the advocates of Cryptocurrencies the old forum users say that it is here to replace the current financial system
2. I personally feel that blockchain technology is something revolutionary and so is bitcoin but bitcoin has it's own limitations which i mentioned above.
3. Due to these limitations government would not advocate Cryptocurrencies in long term so they can't go hand in hand. So what I am trying say is exactly that bitcoin's survival as currency is really difficult in such circumstances.

1. It's really a matter of opinion, but the fact of the matter is, Bitcoin was created to be a decentralized peer-to-peer electronic cash system. The white paper did not attack the current financial system in any way, except maybe by saying that middlemen can be slow and charge fees. It did not mention national currencies at all.
2. No arguments there.
3. Bitcoin doesn't really need governments' advocacy, as shown by its growth from basically nothing. If you're talking about regulations, countries which haven't banned Bitcoin far outnumber countries that did; sure that could change in the future, but I don't think I've seen any developments to signal that Bitcoin's survival might be in question.

Well unfortunately I think it can be a question towards survival if you don't want to Bitcoin to be the next cocaine or Weed. China & India two highly populated countries have put restrictions upon its usage. If we see more countries following the same track I don't think how are you saying that Bitcoin Survival is at question. I hope you are just a normal middle class law abiding citizen of your country lik everyone of us. Would you to use Bitcoin if it's usage in your country is banned or is penalized?

If Bitcoin would be banned in a certain country, it would be impossible to cash it out, finding a way of using cryptocurrency is easy, you can use vpn or any tool to change your IP address, but it will be useless if you cant use it to fund yourself or even use it to save for your own investment. If ever that you have been accused or seen using something that is prohibited, you have to face the consequences.

[teosanru]

The point here is:
1. We all are pretty aware why Bitcoin was created in the first place. Atleast the person who said this hasn't exactly said this but the advocates of Cryptocurrencies the old forum users say that it is here to replace the current financial system
2. I personally feel that blockchain technology is something revolutionary and so is bitcoin but bitcoin has it's own limitations which i mentioned above.
3. Due to these limitations government would not advocate Cryptocurrencies in long term so they can't go hand in hand. So what I am trying say is exactly that bitcoin's survival as currency is really difficult in such circumstances.

1. It's really a matter of opinion, but the fact of the matter is, Bitcoin was created to be a decentralized peer-to-peer electronic cash system. The white paper did not attack the current financial system in any way, except maybe by saying that middlemen can be slow and charge fees. It did not mention national currencies at all.
2. No arguments there.
3. Bitcoin doesn't really need governments' advocacy, as shown by its growth from basically nothing. If you're talking about regulations, countries which haven't banned Bitcoin far outnumber countries that did; sure that could change in the future, but I don't think I've seen any developments to signal that Bitcoin's survival might be in question.

Well unfortunately I think it can be a question towards survival if you don't want to Bitcoin to be the next cocaine or Weed. China & India two highly populated countries have put restrictions upon its usage. If we see more countries following the same track I don't think how are you saying that Bitcoin Survival is at question. I hope you are just a normal middle class law abiding citizen of your country lik everyone of us. Would you to use Bitcoin if it's usage in your country is banned or is penalized?

If Bitcoin would be banned in a certain country, it would be impossible to cash it out, finding a way of using cryptocurrency is easy, you can use vpn or any tool to change your IP address, but it will be useless if you cant use it to fund yourself or even use it to save for your own investment. If ever that you have been accused or seen using something that is prohibited, you have to face the consequences.

This implicates that it wouldn't be possible for Bitcoin to exist with restrictions imposed upon it. If most of the countries of the world come up with regulations No VPN or change of IP address would be at help because regulators too would be much stringent about it's usage and all it would become is a currency which can only be used in the transactions relating to Dark Web and not the real world. Why would any government allow it's citizen to launder their money into Crypto to evade taxes.

[shield132]

I like idea behind bitcoin, that's great improvement in overall but bitcoin was never meant for massive usage.
I like image that OP posted, it really shows how USD degrades and BTC developes. This means old fiat has to be changed with new and modern currency to meet current standarts.
I think there must be new currency, international one with fixed value, limited supply which will prevent inflation and prices will always be like demand/supply and inflation won't affect it everytime. Alsp number of population must be considered too and supply has to be changed once in every 10-20 year or something similar.

[teosanru]

I like idea behind bitcoin, that's great improvement in overall but bitcoin was never meant for massive usage.
I like image that OP posted, it really shows how USD degrades and BTC developes. This means old fiat has to be changed with new and modern currency to meet current standarts.
I think there must be new currency, international one with fixed value, limited supply which will prevent inflation and prices will always be like demand/supply and inflation won't affect it everytime. Alsp number of population must be considered too and supply has to be changed once in every 10-20 year or something similar.

I think you forgot to read the whole post below the image. It was that why an international currency with fixed value and limited supply which doesn't inflates can't survive because the equilibrium has to be maintained so either both the aggregate demand and aggregate supply has to increase to maintain equilibrium and if the supply becomes limited then the demand will just keep ln deflating the currency and taking all of us into that deflationary spiral.

[pecson134]

Bitcoin is good as currency with faster and easy for transfer your bitcoin from one wallet to other wallet around the world, if use your money maybe little difficult if sending money to other country and take several day for sent it, with using bitcoin or altcoin just take several minutes your payment have been sent.

Transaction wise it is good since it is faster but one of the main problem is how stable its value now was since there's a great increase in its price from the beginning up to now. This is a foreseeable risk for every business planning to use bitcoin as a method of payment because it may put them into disadvantage in some situations though there might be some instance that they can profit from it.