Out of Satoshi Nakamoto's paper:
By convention, the first transaction in a block is a special transaction that starts a new coin owned by the creator of the block. This adds an incentive for nodes to support the network, and provides a way to initially distribute coins into circulation, since there is no central authority to issue them.
In order to render Central Bank obsolete, you would need major economies like the US, EU, China to switch their currency to Bitcoin.
Also it used to be the case when all currencies used the gold standard and there are reason why countries left it for regular fiat currencies. Those reasons where not for technical issues, so a better gold will not convince countries to switch to bitcoin on their own.
It is a bit of a chicken-egg problem, bitcoin needs to rise in popularity a lot before that happens. From a consumer point of view, there is no benefit to use bitcoin over using his VISA card. So the push will need to come from somewhere else.
I fail to see any killer benefit in Bitcoin that would put Bitcoin as the main world currency. But, if I did I would have converted all my money in Bitcoin right now, since in that case Bitcoin value is several order of magnitude cheaper than it will be when that happens.
If there is such a stupid population, which I don't believe there is, but IF then they are really deserve what they are getting into.
At the end of the day, it does not really matter. The people that have the power to adopt it listen to different arguments. Although a lot of them recognize the same problem as people on HN, they share the same opinion as you do. The others have no interest in changing a system that favors them. So the point is mood regardless what my opinion is.
The only other option is to have the population impose its currency. In a lot of third world countries, the USD has been adopted as a alternative to the local currency. They could adopt bitcoin. To them, the possibility to build complete financial services outside the official channels is good. Having a currency controlled by few rich people rather than the US government and few rich people could be perceived as an improvement.
Difficult to see that happening in the biggest economies though. The balance between corruption and general interest is good enough, and there is just nothing for the consumer.
The key to bitcoin success is the balance between popular interest in emerging nations and the games the financial institutions of the first world nations extracting as much profit out of it. Significant success in that area could force first world economies to deal with bitcoin as a currency, despite its flaws.
After that, eventually, I guess there is the extremely remote possibility that bitcoin proves a better currency in the long term and gets adopted (for example, in a world where growth and recessions alternate all the time, it may become beneficial to rely on a currency with predictable deflation / inflation curve rather than a man being a printer )
That's an awful lot of ifs.
I agree with your views and I like the feeling that I get from your comments, as you strike me as where someone who seeks the truth rather the following a new trend like a bigot.
I like better the man with the printer as far as I know his name and I can even indirectly exert some influence, but as you said it's just a personal opinion :-)