I'm going to try and be useful to this discussion, and I haven't seen anyone mention this by name yet so, here goes... The Law Of Diminishing Marginal Utility.

I'm going to try and be useful to this discussion, and I haven't seen anyone mention this by name yet so, here goes... The Law Of Diminishing Marginal Utility. It essentially states that the more of something you have, the less additional value each subsequent unit brings to your life relative to the last one you added. (Even billionaires stop with a handful of houses) The problem is the author implicitly tries to objectify the value of bitcoin, when in fact the value is completely subjective, just as the value of anything truly is. One cannot take the subjectivity out of value as the author has tried to do here by saying 'More = Good' Value, being subjective, comes in the form of utility. I do not care what you call it, what it's priced in, or if you value it but, if I were to acquire a voucher for unlimited free flights, lifetime duration, transferable from myself to anyone of my choosing, on any airline, I would value that voucher very highly. That being said, while I may keep the next one for family, and several for friends, at some point I'm going to start selling them to others for a metric boatload of money. Please note none of this implies any kind of 'rational actor' theory or any such thing. I see the law of diminishing marginal utility as just that, a law of nature. Despite what people may say, their actions prove it to be so. *Also I think the author is implying that people who act like the people he's talking about in his post will take a pretty big haircut at some point in this whole bitcoin experiment. I think that says more about the people than the system at large.