Yes, I certainly can't say I'm an economics expert. Mind sharing with me what part of the article you think is misguided?
Honestly, I'm kind of scared/surprised more people aren't talking about this.
What I'm trying to say is that if people have a choice, they'll keep their wealth in a currency that destroys their wealth the least slowly. This, I suspect, will have a runaway effect. We probably wouldn't be able to stop it if we tried, which sounds a lot like the AI singularity.
You are also effectively demoting the US dollar to the current inferior currency of the two to support your little adage, which I find a bit strange.
I believe your intention was just to write a little thought experiment, which is cool. I'm just a little baffled the way some people follow along for the ride without question.
Perhaps obvious, but I hold no cryptocurrency. I'm not saying I never would, but the sheer amount of dreamy speculation like this is exactly what keeps me away from the market.
I appreciate your replies - not sure if I mentioned it earlier to you, but I posted it here in HN because there is no shortage of smart people willing to express their thoughts.
You are talking about the singularity being the point that we switch to crypto currency. I suppose my argument is that the singularity may not come because of deflation counteracting and convincing people to continue holding.
All in all I'm glad it's been such a diplomatic discussion. I would engage people the same way if I were you and appreciate that you seek new information.
It sounds like what you said is that the singularity may not happen because cryptocurrency deflation will make cryptocurrencies more attractive to hold compared to inflationary fiat. I'm fairly certain I understood it wrong.
Won't people move more of the money into deflationary currencies if they are accessible and exchange friction between the inflationary one and deflationary one is acceptable?
I appreciate the appreciation!