3) Dilution. Central banks dilute sometimes. Sometimes they do the opposite –withdraw liquidity. That is happening right now. Bitcoin dilutes always, every second of its existence. Because only by dilution real electricity expenses of miners could be paid. Again, its not a bug, its a feature.

4)Rigged system. Bitcoin is the most rigged system that was allowed to exist in modern times. Bitcoin anonimity makes it an ideal vehicle for fraud and manipulation of markets. Any kind of insider trading, collusion, painting the tape, self dealing, front running — any scam that ever existed in trading is undetectable here and is rampant.

5) Micropayment. How is Bitcoin suitable for micropayment? Why wait 10 minutes for miners to compete to get a long hash with your block and waste time and money for you fraction of a cent payment? How could it conceivably be cheaper than just doing it through paypal that doesn’t have all these overheads? Why do so much work if you don’t give a damn of anonimity of your micropayment?

6) Execution in derivative. This makes zero sense. The same derivative brokers who played games in 2008 manage Bitcoin futures trading — futures trade on CME. They are regulated by the same government that could play the same games. Like ban shorts and cause short squeeze. Why wouldn’t they play the same and worse kinds of games?

7) Moral hazard. Yeah, you said it yourself — when there is fraud or hack or anything in bitcoin you are on your own. You are wiped out. There is no insurance, like it is with a bank account. It’s better for the taxpayers, granted, but not for Bitcoin holders. I guess you are saying that if someone is reckless enough to put money in bitcoin, let them take one for the team. This is your only point that i agree with.

Many good points here. I’m no economist, but I see a bit incorrect (or maybe imprecise) here and there; a lot of would-be economists make similar imprecise points. One item that could be misinterpreted:

“Every dollar that gets printed dilutes the value of every dollar we worked for, earned or saved. As I remarked previously

‘debt-based inflationary money creates a treadmill economy …”

I would think the current absurd debt-based monetary system has a deflationary mechanism since when conjuring up new money as commercial ‘loans,’ they don’t create the money with which to later pay the interest being demanded, and therefore if new money supply wasn’t being created faster than required by repayments of debt principal along with interest from ‘somewhere else,’ existing money would become more and more scarce, thus more valuable, since final payment of the principal results in the originally-conjured money being extinguished. (Meanwhile the ‘original loan’ in question has been re-deposited and multiplied many times by down-the-line banksters maintaining only fractional ‘reserves.’) But if the money supply were expanded by just the right amount during any given time period to nullify the former deflationary effect while avoiding inflation elsewhere in the monetary circuits by not expanding money supply excessively, theoretically there need not be inflation, I’d think. Of course, since the banksters at the top control the system firstly for the benefit of themselves and their fellow ruling-class cronies, greed/hubris/misanthropy/etc take over and allow money supply expansion far beyond what’s required by any real increase in humanly-beneficial [national] economic activity, we get inflation, volatility and booms/busts, etc. Also, of course most of the money in circulation never gets printed physically, but is only blips on some computer. The formulas by which this system is maintained assume endless expansion, endless growth: the ethic of the cancer cell, which tends to grow until it destroys both its host and itself. That’s compound interest for you: no relation to the real world, but a reliance upon disembodied mathematics which leads to real-world instability and has to be artificially cut short somehow. In recent centuries they’ve increasingly resorted to wars to destroy what was previously produced and then consume more bankster-created credit in order to rebuild, but war is essentially obsolete (although society hasn’t really realized that yet), so the war outlet becomes less and less tenable. The old system may be running out of options, leading to desperate measures. Can one or more new cryptos supplant and eventually replace fiat currencies? They would have to be elastic, which most aren’t (yet), to expand or contract based on total economic activity of a given set of people. Although Bitcoin is a pioneering effort, its “proof of work” mechanism is an inherently artificial and wasteful inefficiency which can’t scale to nationwide or planetary level, so we must look elsewhere for a better solution to the treadmill economy which creates temporary opulence for a few and longer-term misery for the masses.