Would Bitcoin no longer be Bitcoin if it were adopted by everyone in the world ?

[Marcellin9]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

[BALIK]

Satoshi created bitcoin intending to replace the centralized fiat system, meaning bitcoin is designed as a currency and not an investment asset. But people turned bitcoin into an investment and spread it to the next generations, and now most people only know bitcoin as an investment rather than a currency.

Regarding the case where the fiat will disappear completely, I think it will never happen because the government will never let that happen or if it is eliminated, it will also be replaced by some government-generated method, not bitcoin.

We live in a centralized world and the government controls everything so we can't expect something decentralized to be accepted as the main and only method, if ever, bitcoin it would just be an alternative besides fiat.

[mk4]

Though it would be a lot less attractive as an investment instrument when it reaches 'peak' adoption, why would bitcoin lose value if it's capped at 21 million? Especially if we're making the assumption that it would be the only running currency.

[Gallar]

you assume too far, bitcoin will still be bitcoin as it is now, there will be no lost value from bitcoin.
Bitcoin will always be an asset, and an exchange/payment alternative.
the only difference is that there are more and more enthusiasts, and automatically there are more and more bitcoin users or adopters.

bitcoin was created not to sink fiat currency, but bitcoin was created to stabilize fiat money.

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset.

Governments can make Bitcoin legal tender in their countries and they can make Bitcoin as one of paymen methods in their countries. Biqtcoin has many utilities, payment, investment, trading, gambling, lending ....

I am very sure that no government will eliminate their fiat currency and make Bitcoin as the only one currency or payment methid in their country.

However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate.

Same supply but bigger demand,  it is a very simple math. With Bitcoin halvings, price will increase and in future, people will not look for 2x, 10x profit from Bitcoin. They will invest in Bitcoin like how they are investing in gold. They did not expect gold will double its price after one year now and in future, they will invest similarly in Bitcoin.

[wxa7115]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

Bitcoin at heart was designed as money, now it is also true it has been a great investment opportunity during the last decade, but this is only a side effect and nothing else.

Besides even if bitcoin losses its attractiveness as an investment vehicle that does not mean that it will lose its value, its value will be more stable but that will be it, so if that scenario were to happen the only thing you will need to do is to look for other assets with high volatility and invest in them if you want.

[pooya87]

Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset.

You mean "money" not "fiat" because fiat is a currency as opposed to money that is a currency with fixed value. Which also means the two points you mentioned are contradictory concepts. Bitcoin can not be both money (fixed value) and an investment at the same time. It can be a store of value though which is what money is supposed to be.

If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?

Your confusion is because you think bitcoin is an investment but that was never the case. Bitcoin was created to be a currency that you use as a medium of exchange. That's the nature of bitcoin not an investment.

Satoshi created bitcoin intending to replace the centralized fiat system

Not "replace" but only to offer an alternative solution.

[worle1bm]

You are missing the part that when the adoption will rise then demand will also increase with the same rate but the limited supply of 21 million and that also with mining rewards halfed each halving will therefore reduce the circulation so it will automatically boost the prices as an investment tool for the investors.

But it's aslo treated as payment processing which will be boosted when adoption will be at peak so we can't ignore this fact also and when the time comes we will see how the situation is exactly.

[Despairo]

You have a wrong understanding, when Bitcoin are accepted everywhere in the world, it doesn't mean Bitcoin price can be manipulated or controlled by the government. They're only can control Bitcoin if the users are using centralized exchange, if the user use P2P or DEX, no one can control Bitcoin anymore. Bitcoin supply is fixed and everyone are using Bitcoin, this make Bitcoin price will keep increase until it's peak (although technically there's no peak since Bitcoin price can overtake it's previous ATH).

[ethereumhunter]

When the price of bitcoin becomes stable, we can still get investment from altcoins because I think that is the purpose of altcoins to provide other benefits besides making profits from bitcoin. The profit can be in the form of bitcoin or stable coins so that later, bitcoin will become very valuable as an investment.

You need to look at the price of gold, where many people want to buy more gold as their savings or investment. And roughly, that's what will happen with bitcoin later.

[Ucy]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate.
The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

In regards to the underlined parts of your post,  Bitcoin is more suitable for investment or for storing value long-term (Store of Value) than as a Medium of exchange. Both (MoE/Fiat  & SoV/Investment) don't really contradict each other as a lot of people don't  hold Bitcoin for too long. They exchange it for goods/fiats and services while others hold long-term.
If you take away the Store of Value feature, you may nolonger be able to use it to preserve value longterm which is a very important feature of Bitcoin.
 You can only keep the price volatility moderate for most of the time and only allow the extreme price movement, mostly upward, once in a while. This will help ensure that it maintains its SoV or deflationary feature rather than being inflationary like fiat currencies.

 Converting it into fiat currency will require hijacking it and having it massively altered in such a way that it becomes centralized and loses it important ideals that make it decentralized and safe. It will become inflationary, less transparent, opaque, mutable, non censorship-resistance . But it will be almost impossible to altered by normal people unless they just create contrary systems such as centralized platforms and get much of the world to use fake bitcoins, probably with the aim of manipulating the price or to prevent people from using Bitcoin properly and benefit from its features.

[inthelongrun]

So it means that you are only into Bitcoin in order to grow your investment? Be aware that Bitcoin was created as a decentralized currency and its real intent is to be used regularly in our normal day-to-day transactions. It isn't happening globally because it needs to stabilize its price and there is also the regulation factor. But I wish that would become a reality one day. By that time, the whole Bitcoin capitalization would be in trillions of dollars. Not as attractive anymore for long-term HODL but you can always do leverage trading just like the current forex market.   

[Cookdata]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

Satisfaction is not static for everyone, it changes based on how people see it, it might be 50:50 today and 70:30 tomorrow. Governments have forced down and adopted Fiat to the people, but just because they are using it does not mean everyone actually likes it, similarly, not everyone will accept bitcoin adoption, it may go against some opinions, but that is the truth and that is how the world works, not everyone fantasizes bitcoin, not everyone like fiat either.

Fiat has historically been the preferred form of payment that countries have accepted, I assumed if bitcoin would one day get to that level, it will be more of been used as a reserve than been used as means of payment and hence the nature remains the same, nothing will change like that. EL Salvador comes to my mind, despite the force and airdrops to bring people closer to bitcoin, many are still shifting away from bitcoin as a legal entity and the crash hasn't been helping their bags as well.

[Rikafip]

If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

How on earth would Bitcoin lose its value if people start massively using it for payment, which is its intended purpose? What you got wrong is that you think that majority of bitcoin value comes from its investment potential and if there are no 400% gains every few years, that is somehow not good enough for even that.

When the price of bitcoin becomes stable, we can still get investment from altcoins because I think that is the purpose of altcoins to provide other benefits besides making profits from bitcoin.

Purpose of 99.99% of the altcoins is to make their creators rich and nothing and they often bring "solutions for problems that don't really exist.

[CryptSafe]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

Irrespective of the growing global adoption, Bitcoin was invented for a purpose and for that purpose it would accomplish despite the challenges facing with government and other financial agencies from allowing it being adopted in their various nations. I see all these as a big solution to faster and rapid adoption of bitcoin when the time comes. Talking about bitcoin changing to another when it will be massively adopted, i doubt so if it would ever change its name or function contrary to the sole reasons for which it was invented.  Come to talk of it, what aspect of change are you referring to, are you referring to change in name or change in its function for which it was created? Well either way, i do not see any changes. If there would be any changes, it might likely be in functions and not name.

Like one of the reply here says
 

Satoshi created bitcoin intending to replace the centralized fiat system, meaning bitcoin is designed as a currency and not an investment asset. But people turned bitcoin into an investment and spread it to the next generations, and now most people only know bitcoin as an investment rather than a currency.

As you can see it above that is all the situation now and if there is any change you are referring to, it simply or likely as the quote above.
Talking of fiat, i really doubt if the government of various nations would allow it fade away just like that. Each and every nation has their own currency independent of any nation so how do you think  for instance,  American would want to do away with their dollar and opt for bitcoin as a legal tender? do you think European Nation would also do same? the hell no way. These nations would want to protect their  sovereign interest.

[FatFork]

Absolutely not. To understand why, you have to understand what Bitcoin really is. It's really not that difficult to understand Bitcoin: it is a peer-to-peer, decentralized network for transferring value over the Internet.

So, it doesn't matter whether you believe Bitcoin is the future of money or not; what matters most is that you start to understand how it works. A good starting point is to understand why people use any currency in the first place: because they need to exchange goods and services with each other. If everyone in the world agreed to use Bitcoin, it would be the only currency that matters.

[Leviathan.007]

I agree with the idea of saying bitcoin is changing more than it should change for example since after bitcoin adoption the governments forced people to pass the KYC, many people shared their personal documents with the governments and their transactions are clear with their identity from their wallets, while as far and I know bitcoin was created to be anonymous for the users and let them do transitions with out of passing any KYC or leaking their personal information with anyone.

[fennic]

That's impossible that a whole adopt btc. Cause Bitcoin cannot reach max numbers or even anything in world cannot outreach max capacity. I think in 2100s, Bitcoin might be adopted to the 20 to 30% people cause that's the reality. There are many bugs that needed to be fixed and they might need to fix for a long time.

[witcher_sense]

<…>
The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.
<…>

Can gold be considered an investment asset if people who buy it only expect their holdings to be protected from devaluation and likely do not expect them to grow in value? Investors base their reasoning on historical data that may confirm that gold is more than suitable when it comes to preserving the value of investments. Bitcoin is often compared to gold as being a good digital substitute for traditional precious metals used as a store of value. Bitcoin can be said to be an emerging means of preserving value; in this context, "emerging" means that its price fluctuates and is growing long-term, and eventually, it will become a proper store of value, maybe even better than gold, thanks to its unique characteristics. When it finally transforms into a new form with valuable functions, it won't stop being seen as an investment asset because people will still be eager to alleviate the consequences of an unpredictable future via reasonable investments in established stores of value.

[taufik123]

Satoshi created bitcoin intending to replace the centralized fiat system, meaning bitcoin is designed as a currency and not an investment asset. But people turned bitcoin into an investment and spread it to the next generations, and now most people only know bitcoin as an investment rather than a currency.

This is due to the fluctuating price of bitcoin and it provides fast returns as an investment compared to other types of investment. Bitcoin is also used for trading and some say it is only a speculative asset and has not been fully used as bitcoin was originally made for. some bitcoin adoptions have indeed been carried out and applied to real transactions. countries like EL-Salvador an early examples of countries adopting bitcoin as a legal tender.

Regarding the case where the fiat will disappear completely, I think it will never happen because the government will never let that happen or if it is eliminated, it will also be replaced by some government-generated method, not bitcoin.

The government does have full control and will not allow bitcoin to become the main currency even though Fiat will disappear. There will be another fiat coming up that will remain a priority. We live in a country where everything is regulated by the government, so there is no way for bitcoin to become a single currency.

[Smartprofit]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

The complete victory of Bitcoin over all fiat currencies, gold, corporate currencies, etc. would lead to a simplification of our world. 

Fortunately, our world is complex and diverse.  And this is good!  The surrounding world obeys the laws of dialectics (unity and struggle of opposite entities). 

This is why Bitcoin is both an investment asset, a means of payment, and a decentralized protocol for transferring value in the virtual space.  Bitcoin is a very complex entity, and this is its strength.  Satoshi Nakamoto started the evolution of cryptocurrencies (including the evolution of Bitcoin itself). 

However, even the creator of Bitcoin himself could not say exactly what Bitcoin would become, for example, in 2100. 

However, it is safe to say that in 2100 Bitcoin will not be the only investment asset, the only means of payment, the only value transfer protocol on planet Earth.

[agustina2]

If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ? 

If Bitcoin will be accepted globally, then we will be benefited from what Bitcoin is originally supposed to give and why it was created in the first place. Its value just becomes a "big thing" because instead of being a currency, it was now treated more as an investment. Technically, if bitcoin instead follows its original path, then it will act as a usual currency and there will be no expectation of moon price in the future.

Just go with the flow and try to take advantage of bitcoin being considered mostly as an investment.

[so98nn]

Though it would be a lot less attractive as an investment instrument when it reaches 'peak' adoption, why would bitcoin lose value if it's capped at 21 million? Especially if we're making the assumption that it would be the only running currency.

That would be hot currency of the era. Limited supply, increasing demand and most importantly increasing population! Man that would cost hundreds of dollar a Satoshi and still it would be difficult to break it down considering that is the last unit of it.

May be by that time cost of production would be high comparatively and there may not be anything worth few bucks. Or on the other hand it may happen that we will measure everything in Satoshi unit only since fiat wouldn’t be around. Fun but impossible.

[Yatsan]

Ofcourse it would still be. But for sure there'll be changes. In my opinion, chabges would happen in its market price and yransaction fees wherein its price could be more stabilized and maybe not as high as its ATH because if it would be accessible to many people, then demand won't be as high as the present. Let us be honest; the high demand on Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies at the present is due to volatility and profit that investors are taking good advantage of and that's nothing wrong with that. But if the price is more stable after the regulation, would it be the same?

With transaction fees, and with regulation, for sure there will be an increase to it as well since taxation might also take place through third party wallets.

[crwth]

My opinion on this is that bitcoin will never be the only crypto because there will be a lot of people trying to create and replicate something similar to bitcoin. But let’s say it has become to the point that it is the only one. It would be a stable and more reliable medium of exchange for everyone. This is also assuming that everyone in the world adopts it.

I think it would be great if it becomes like that because that is what it is designed for. Not as an investment tool but rather as currency, just like what the other members have said.

You’re a definition of bitcoin is definitely not what it should be.

[Falconer]

Initially bitcoin was designed as a means of payment or currency for the best choice for those who care about privacy. Bitcoin is a decentralized currency that is not controlled by the government, so its nature should not change even if it is started to be traded or used as an investment asset for most people.

This nature of bitcoin remains and will not change even if its use cases decline as a currency. But nevertheless bitcoin is a highly valued currency where its volatility has given a trader or investor two possibilities, gain or lose. Even if 99% of users only trade bitcoin instead of using them as a currency or a means of payment, they are still a means of payment.

[Woodie]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset.

As much as we want to fantasize what form Bitcoin takes, I think it's more of digital money than it's an investment asset as it tries to bring about financial freedom... but things kind of got out of hand along the way and btc is now regarded as an asset of several talents.

Would Bitcoin no longer be Bitcoin if it were adopted by everyone in the world ?

Bitcoin being widely accepted across the world would just Cement its success and and probably push is value up as a result of the overwhelming demand!

[justdimin]

The complete victory of Bitcoin over all fiat currencies, gold, corporate currencies, etc. would lead to a simplification of our world. 

Fortunately, our world is complex and diverse.  And this is good!  The surrounding world obeys the laws of dialectics (unity and struggle of opposite entities). 

This is why Bitcoin is both an investment asset, a means of payment, and a decentralized protocol for transferring value in the virtual space.  Bitcoin is a very complex entity, and this is its strength.  Satoshi Nakamoto started the evolution of cryptocurrencies (including the evolution of Bitcoin itself). 

However, even the creator of Bitcoin himself could not say exactly what Bitcoin would become, for example, in 2100. 

However, it is safe to say that in 2100 Bitcoin will not be the only investment asset, the only means of payment, the only value transfer protocol on planet Earth.

It is understandable for it to not be understandable all that much, because it is not that easy to see how it would be like. The best case would be understanding if bitcoin would be bought more and more, or not and that's all we can try to speculate about. Not the price or anything, just the direction and its existence.

For example, do we believe in 2100 bitcoin would still be around, and would it be very profitable to hold it from now until that moment when only our grandchildren, or maybe even our grandchildren children would be able to sell and make a huge profit? Or do we think that something better would come out by then and bitcoin would be long gone? That's all we can answer, not the price.

[mendace]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

We hope that your assumption is true.  But I don't understand exactly what you mean, I can only say that if one day Bitcoin were to be adopted as a means of payment then the problem of scalability will have to be solved and surely the lighting network is the right way.

[kryptqnick]

Bitcoin will not be fiat because fiat is in principle different from it. Bitcoin can become used more as a payment, as a form of money. But it won't be issued by a central authority, there will be no arbitrary printing of money by the authority, no physical Bitcoin banknotes, no regulation of the price. Moreover, currency and an investment asset aren't fully contradictory, as people do save up money in fiat, and sometimes even as an investment (if they own local fiat is less stable than, say, the USD, they might hodl the USD to then exchange it for more local fiat). I don't see adoption of Bitcoin as a threat to its properties or usage, and I also don't believe Bitcoin will replace fiat.

[Oilacris]

Satoshi created bitcoin intending to replace the centralized fiat system, meaning bitcoin is designed as a currency and not an investment asset. But people turned bitcoin into an investment and spread it to the next generations, and now most people only know bitcoin as an investment rather than a currency.

Regarding the case where the fiat will disappear completely, I think it will never happen because the government will never let that happen or if it is eliminated, it will also be replaced by some government-generated method, not bitcoin.

We live in a centralized world and the government controls everything so we can't expect something decentralized to be accepted as the main and only method, if ever, bitcoin it would just be an alternative besides fiat.

People should really bare up this thing into their minds that Bitcoins creation or existence is never intended to be an investment but it is really just a bonus which you cant blame out people on having

that kind of impression yet it could really give out that kind of chance or opportunity.It is really just that there are people who are really that too optimistic when it comes to its potential where they

do believe that it could replace fiat someday which is something that its really that impossible which same as you said that government wont be dumb enough on making things
to be on that way.They do love on having on control of everything so we do know on whats next.

[BIT-BENDER]

Definitely not, I personally want Bitcoin to be adopted by all, this would be an issue if anyone only sees the investment value of Bitcoin of not it’s not really a problem if you ask me.

Bitcoin is getting mass adoption and maybe in future it would be used in the same rate as Fiat. And then all issues in the financial system we are experiencing right now would be gone.

[isaac_clarke22]

We live in a centralized world and the government controls everything so we can't expect something decentralized to be accepted as the main and only method, if ever, bitcoin it would just be an alternative besides fiat.

Yeah, this pretty much what I mentioned to a lot of people back in the days in this section making such similar threads like "will Bitcoin replace fiat blah blah blah", "will Bitcoin become the global currency in the future", etc etc. Everyone knows that government is all about the regulation and control just from the word itself and decentralization just describes everything that is the opposite to what the government is all about.
I would not mind Bitcoin being an alternative/secondary method of paying stuffs. I would use it if I have the means to or if the system that I am using allows it.

[Blawpaw]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

I guess the whole purpose of Bitcoin is not to be the only currency in the world.
According to Satoshi, Bitcoin should be an alternative to the fiat system rather than a replacement. As one of the posters said, we live in a centralized world and it would be very unlikely for governments to accept a decentralized currency that they could not control. This is very true. Now, the reason Bitcoin is more attractive as an investment than a currency is due to the nature of Bitcoin.
Given that its value comes from the demand and the offer around it to make it useful, scarcity and volatility drives people to hold it rather than to spend it as a currency.

[ChiBitCTy]

No and I disagree with a good bit of your sentiment or proposed theories here. As others have stated Satoshi created bitcoin in order to replace fiat currency for the masses, meaning everyone world wide.  If anything I would call it bitcoin having done exactly what it set out to do in the first place, become a medium of exchange for those across the globe. Price stability may hurt investment potential, but so what.

[GreatArkansas]

Definitely not, I personally want Bitcoin to be adopted by all, this would be an issue if anyone only sees the investment value of Bitcoin of not it’s not really a problem if you ask me.
(.....)

I think OP misunderstood here. OP's thinking is the opposite. Bitcoin will be Bitcoin.
As for Bitcoin, I believe most of us want the endgame for Bitcoin os adopted by everyone in the world, regardless of its price of it.

Seems Bitcoin now for most of the people is like investment, they don't see the other side of Bitcoin which is as considering a payment method or making Bitcoin as legal tender.

[irhact]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment.

This is unlikely to happen because we live in a diverse world, there'll always be new cryptocurency getting launched so if the current ones become absolute then new ones will be introduced. Bitcoin can't do it all as it'll always need help of altcoins although that doesn't mean we should neglect Bitcoin and go chasing after this new altcoins. Bitcoin is a currency and that should be what it tries to achieve while leaving the Smart contract features to altcoins that specialized in that area.

If Bitcoin was to become a globally accepted cryptocurrency I think nothing else matters, the price of Bitcoin isn't the reasons why we should be using Bitcoin instead we should be using it because of its decentralized nature. We can always have other investment opportunities we can capitalized on beside trading the up and down of Bitcoin price.

[Alpha Marine]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

I read a post on this forum few days ago that said "people view bitcoin as an investment and not a currency". This saying is very true. Bitcoin was created to be a currency, so if everybody accepts it as legal tender and it replaces fiat (which won't happen, not in this life time at least) its for the better. You can spend the currency you have in any country, you don't need different mediums before you can send money to people in different countries. It means the whole world is using one currency, The investment side of foreign exchange and bitcoin might be non existent but i feel that was the original reason for bitcoin (to have a global currency that anybody can use anywhere)

[Kakmakr]

No, OP.....

Bitcoin stability does not mean that the price or value of the coins will go down, it just mean that the price will have much less price volatility. (Less high spikes and large dumps)

Let's take a look at Fiat currencies as an example.... the price stay more or less the same and it only fluctuate a little. (This is manipulated by governments)

In reality, price stability will increase the Bitcoin price... because higher adoption will increase the demand for the token. (Merchants and retailers want price stability, so more of them will start to accept Bitcoin as a currency and more people will start to use it as a currency, because they can buy more things or pay for more services with Bitcoin.)

[davis196]

Even if Bitcoin becomes the one and only global currency, there are many problems involved:
1.Can the blockchain handle billions of transactions per day? Off-chain solutions like the Lightning Network might help for solving this problem, but doesn't this change the entire nature of Bitcoin. Weren't BTC transactions supposed to be happening on the BTC blockchain only?
2.How the millions of people, who don't have access to electricity and internet are going to use Bitcoin? Will paper Bitcoins become a thing?
3.The problem with the Bitcoin price volatility, which is the most obvious problem and everyone on the forum knows it. What if the BTC price becomes even more volatile due to mass adoption? What if a bunch of billionaires and whales buy most of the BTC, when the price is low and manipulate the global BTC market?

[Minor Miner]

If Bitcoin was to become a globally accepted cryptocurrency I think nothing else matters, the price of Bitcoin isn't the reasons why we should be using Bitcoin instead we should be using it because of its decentralized nature. We can always have other investment opportunities we can capitalized on beside trading the up and down of Bitcoin price.

What you say is Satoshi's original purpose in creating bitcoin, but things are going in a different way. Bitcoin has become a form of investment, and everyone is entering this market just for profit, including you and me. Most of us are here for profit, not for the decentralization it brings. If bitcoin becomes stable one day, I believe many people will leave it and find something that can be profitable for them. But either way, OP's hypothesis will never happen, so expecting bitcoin to become stable will never happen.

[rokok lokal]

Assume one day, Bitcoin would be the only survivor as cryptocurrency in the world and each individual, company, organization and goverment would abandon all fiats/currencies and take Bitcoin as the only payment. When all obstacles were gone, Bitcoin would actually become a combination of both fiat and investment asset. However, as demand and supply were not to fluctuate much, the price of Bitcoin would be really stable and the value of investment would deteriorate. The two factors/purposes (fiat vs investment asset) will be contradicting each other all the time. If that happened, what's the point of making Bitcoin worldwide acceptable while losing its value and nature of Bitcoin ?  Metaphorically speaking, the hunting dog may be killed when all prey animals are gone.

What is your opinion ? Please let me know. Thanks.

Very interesting, but I'm thinking what will happen if finally BTC and Gold will be mass adopted as a legal currency used in the future.

[Antonas1]

As long as every country in the world has a government, Bitcoin will only be a payment alternative. If fiat should be destroyed, the government will definitely create another centralized payment system.

2.How the millions of people, who don't have access to electricity and internet are going to use Bitcoin? Will paper Bitcoins become a thing?

If electricity is the biggest problem, why did the government create a CBDC? Isn't the same?