The comments in this thread so far, imo, resemble comments at the beginning of dismissing BTC (just an observation, and I was one of those making similar observations in 2011/2012).
At that time the claim was that BTC was a payments solution that would replace credit cards and cash. I feel OK for having dismissed that. It turns out that BTC has little inherent value, and is mostly just a tool for speculation. It's desirable to hold only so long as you think someone else will buy it off you for more later.
I think it's the the same with these NFT art tokens. They are not particularly useful as a thing to own, but if enough people believe they're worth something, then I guess they're worth something.
No it isn't... You can buy just about anything with any of the world reserve currencies. You can also pay taxes in the applicable jurisdiction with any government currency.
Buying something with a currency, and paying taxes, are both other people buying the currency off of you. In one case they're buying your currency with goods and services, in the other they're buying it in exchange for protection. McDonalds gives you burgers because they want your USD. They want your USD because everyone wants their USD. That's how fiat works; the biggest difference between Bitcoin and USD is that Bitcoin is deflationary, while USD is managed by a central bank.
World currencies regularly collapse. What people fear might happen to BTC has already happened to the Zimbabwean dollar, the Argentine peso, and many others. It even happened to the denarius during the crisis of the third century. Even with stable currencies, there is plenty of risk to be had in FOREX trading. So... saying that BTC is a lot like every other fiat currency is not so much a complement as it is a neutral observation.
It isn't about potential for collapse, and even if it was it is far less likely that the USD collapses tomorrow than BTC does...
USD, Euro, Yen, etc. are all far more useful as a medium of exchange than BTC. I would argue that their primary usage is just that - a medium of exchange.
Until you can buy most useful things easily with BTC it is not like fiat.
Lastly, if BTC or any other crypto was to grow to the extent that most people were willing to accept it in exchange for goods or services, I believe that governments would be incentivized to shut it down.
I promise you, if I showed up at my corner store with a EU50 note and said "Would you give me a gallon of milk for this" the dude would take it.
He probably wouldn't give me change, so my effective exchange rate for Euro->USD would be something like 20x reality, but you gotta pay for convenience.
Too much inflation is obviously bad, but it's also bad if the most attractive investment in an economy is the currency itself. If a system actively discourages people from investing or spending their currency, things grind to a halt. The people who benefit the most are those with the most idle cash. The people who suffer the worst are those who are forced to spend their limited cash on basic necessities.
To be clear: I'm not advocating for unchecked inflation or runaway spending. I think the current US inflation rate is too high and excessive stimulus spending is ill-advised. However, investors have been investing their cash in assets and investments to avoid inflation long before Bitcoin was invented.
There's a big difference here in that NFTs as currently implemented are nothing more than an a trend. They don't have any actual value, or function. At least with BTC you could buy drugs.
What can you actually do with Nyan cat other than just sell it on to the next person. I can enjoy the image and I don't even own it.
NFTs are neat, don't get me wrong, but to have any value or use, they require an element of trust behind it.
I think it's the the same with these NFT art tokens. They are not particularly useful as a thing to own, but if enough people believe they're worth something, then I guess they're worth something.