I am familiar with the arguments of Jim Rickards, Peter Schiff and other goldbugs regarding cryptos. They are generally saying that crypto is doomed and should

I am familiar with the arguments of Jim Rickards, Peter Schiff and other goldbugs regarding cryptos. They are generally saying that crypto is doomed and should be abandoned. They continuously brought up fraud and money laundering until they recently realized that blockchains make it easier to track down transactions — not harder. While I respect these people for their great expertise on the general economy, I don't agree with their take on crypto. They obviously misunderstand its nature and, to be frank, during the crypto boom they sometimes appeared to be a bit threatened by the rise of crypto (one of their core businesses is — you guessed it — gold). With regard to your other points: * Yes, you can create new altcoins out of thin air, but do you really think that will be possible forever? There are strong network effects at play and — as with any other market — there will be winners and losers. So far Bitcoin has oscillated around the 50% dominance mark. I don't see that changing in the near future. Saying that you can indefinitely create new alts is like saying that you can create unlimited Amazon clones. While technically true, this does not work in reality. * Yes, inflation is built into Bitcoin, but in contrast to fiat it will not go on forever. Eventually it's a deflationary currency. * According to the NYT the richest 1% in the US hold more wealth than the "bottom" 90%. This pattern seems to have nothing to do with Bitcoin, although I'd personally wish it would look different. * Yes, there might be fraud and maybe there are also severe bugs. But up to now, Bitcoin has survived all tests in the field and appears to be pretty stable. Probably more stable than most other pieces of software I have ever seen.