Your point would make sense if the world was going to try to shoe-horn finite assets into the role of currency transactions, but again, this is a mistaken assum

Your point would make sense if the world was going to try to shoe-horn finite assets into the role of currency transactions, but again, this is a mistaken assumption. There is historical support for the idea of "two monies", soft/weak money, credit, fiat etc that is very good for commerce and day to day transactions, and as unit of account. And hard money for long term savings, and best for settling trade between foreign regimes. There's a reason central banks all hold gold as a primary reserve asset. Give this a read [0] it discusses in detail the idea that there isn't one type (hard or soft) money that best serves both competing use cases of currency and store of value, but that two different monies work best. [0] http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2011/05/return-to-honest-money.html http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2011/05/return-to-honest-money.htm... (Ctrl + F "two monies" for specific section; whole article is good read though)