[throwaway7644]

We've witness deflationary forces in computer hw for decades and no one is holding off their purchases. Time is scarce and it ultimately forces consumption because otherwise, what would you be saving for?

Don't need Econ 101 to understand this basic reality.

[qwytw]

Well there is a difference between people not buying anything at all and being significantly less than they are now. Consumer goods and services is only the tip of the iceberg.

How much do you think debt would cost and how easy would it be for businesses to get credit?

Combining a deflationary currency with a growing (or at least non static) economy is bad a everyone who has a basic understanding of history prior to the 1930s can see that. Something like bitcoin would be even much worse than the gold standard.

[throwaway7644]

You're forcing business to produce something valuable in real terms instead of nominal terms and you're making that calculation easier to do for economic actors because the measuring stick is now controlled by an algorithm as opposed to charlatans.

Having less of that garbage fiat short-termism is a good thing for society.

[qwytw]

> Having less of that garbage fiat short-termism

Yet having more of endless boom and bust cycles with major economic depressions lasting for years (outcomes of the gold standard was a good idea).

> You're forcing business to produce something valuable in real terms instead of nominal terms

I don't quite understand what does that mean. Pricing goods in oil or grain? (coincidentally either of which would function better as a currency than bitcoin).

[slongfield]

Computer hardware isn't trying to be currency. Bitcoin was supposed to be, but hardly anyone who uses Bitcoin these days is using it to buy things--it's used as a store of value or a speculative asset, not a means of transaction.

[XorNot]

Computer hardware actually does things - it is an economic value producer.

Bitcoin is an economic value consumer just to hold it. It does nothing if you have it.