> If the price of Bitcoin had been stable for a decade, and it worked reliably, it would be a useful medium of exchange, but nobody would care. This is all abou

> If the price of Bitcoin had been stable for a decade, and it worked reliably, it would be a useful medium of exchange, but nobody would care. This is all about MAKE MONEY FAST. Your counterfactual is nonsense. There is no world where Bitcoin remains stable for a decade. It's precisely the nature of Bitcoin that it either eats a large fraction of global monetary value or ends up close to zero. Bitcoin's existence provides the purest possible application of Gresham's law. The price of Bitcoin reflects the imputed probability of bitcoin eating monetary value, as well as the fraction it ends up eating. > all this stuff is zero-sum Bitcoin is positive-sum if you believe in the benefits of sound money, but yes, people who are net dollar bagholders (e.g. US govt and people with US govt debt) will lose wealth if Bitcoin successfully demonetizes the dollar. It would probably be wise to hedge against this scenario by balancing long dollar positions with long Bitcoin positions.