It is very difficult to understand OP. I'd even say I am astounded by the amount of effort it takes. Is English not your first language or something?
Coinmelting, tainting, 30% of the network not adding tx are symptoms.
People know what the issues regarding and leading to coinmelting, tainted coins, and 30% of miners not processing transactions are.
I'm simply suggesting these are not individual issues but symptoms of a larger problem.
Hoarding is called thus not because people are jealous (there is that element, tho), but mainly because people (who have no Bitcoins) are not waiting for the system to change, reset, repair.
They want a medium of exchange that allows them to replace broken or provide missing infrastructure.
People also know that those who complain about hoarding are accused of being jealous that they are not early adopters.
People also have an idea what economic changes have been discussed and the notion of a reset and have the hope for repair to be possible.
I'm simply suggesting that they are not jealous but rather want to use Bitcoin to create economic flows in the places where the economy would be most vulnerable during a collapse. I'm also saying that those who hold a lot of Bitcoins are waiting for the economy to go through
magical natural processes such as:
to change for the better
to crash violently enough to punish all players which would cause a reset
to crash quickly enough so minimal collateral damage occurs so that repair is possible
I'm suggesting that waiting for these processes is a delusion. I'm also saying this delusion is the real problem which is causing those symptoms above. At this point I have to mention those symptoms again because all this redundant explaining is making it difficult to recall the original point. Those symptoms are coinmelting, tainting, and 30% of miners not including transactions.
You can also gauge the opinion of a currency by the behavior of thieves.
The amount of fraud in Bitcoin is right now related to how many people think it's a joke. Thieves want bitcoins to get easy dollars.
In the future they may steal Bitcoins so they can get a TV at a yard sale which they can put on auction for more Bitcoins.
But they are not doing that now.
The basic essence of the delusion is the idea that Bitcoins are filling the needs of an economy. The behavior of thieves shows that this is not the case. Thieves cannot yet benefit directly from stealing Bitcoin. Unlike people purchasing gold for its future dollar value, thieves steal Bitcoins and quickly exchange them for fiat. Bitcoin is useful at the retail end. It's not being used in situations where contracts and decisions are made for the long term.
The other issue in the delusion is the idea that we should wait while Bitcoin crawls its way into various non-retail markets. We don't have time. We either start building solid relationships in places the general public doesn't even think about or this economy is toast.
I have sent the chewing gum from my LTC auction. 30.1 LTC for 5 sticks (I sent an 18 stick pack I bought for $1.69 - no 5 stick sugarless anywhere near me). Most 5 sticks are $.35 here. 1.69 / (18 / 5) = 1.69 / 3.6 = $.45 ish
LTCs trade at $.0055 - on the hypothetical chewing gum market they are worth $.35 / 30.1 to $.45 / 30.1 or 2.3 to 2.8 times.
I'm demonstrating that litecoiners are willing to engage in markets that are more pedestrian than the speculation markets on these boards.
And that's from ppl who have a lot. Combine low supply with renaissance mindset and you'll really see some action. Also for ppl who say that ppl are getting a bargain at 30.1 - I don't want $. I want cryptocoins. So they are in fact undervalued. The gum is cheap only if you want $.
I will be auctioning a T2330 Intel 1.6 GHz Laptop CPU for LTC soon.
I wasn't kidding when I said I would make a stand.
I'm simply suggesting litecoiners are willing to roll up their sleeves while bitcoiners wait for the market to kill everybody off. I'm not waiting.
Now the question is: Why was it necessary to have all this redundant explaining of issues that have already been discussed? How is the shorter version unclear?