We do live under a mismanaged monetary system, but the paper fails to elaborate how Bitcoin would be different. The argument that proof of work will become sust

We do live under a mismanaged monetary system, but the paper fails to elaborate how Bitcoin would be different. The argument that proof of work will become sustainable due to grid decarbonization is a large assumption, but it fails to cover how will Bitcoin become fair given that it is an asset class hoarded by early adopters and the affluent. Bitcoin is not a traditional investment, it's one of those money for nothing investments that does not create useful work. A useful monetary system must encourage gainful human activities, preferably the right ones, regardless if it's centrally controlled or not. Blowing bubbles is not a gainful human activity. Bitcoin can't encourage me to build affordable houses, or grow healthier food. The government can, with their regulations and monetary policies. They fail to do so effectively, we were on the market can solve everything (deregulation, a million investors can't be wrong, when the cat's away, the mice will play) train for far too long. But Bitcoin cannot do anything about any of this. It's an asset class, a Ponzi scheme, a dream that things can be different. It is however not an economic system. It's a spam fighting algorithm dressed up as utopia.