Thanks. It didn’t seem very focussed. One of the major thesis is that all currencies follow four steps to adoption as a medium of exchange. For this they cite Jevons’ and his discussion of gold. And indeed, Jevons said gold followed those four steps.
But I looked at the source text and saw Jevons said gold was an exception to the rule in that it developed as a currency late in the cycle.
“ The use of esteemed articles as a store or medium for conveying value may in some cases precede their employment as currency.”
The author has made a basic error in their major thesis. And they still haven’t shown why bitcoin needs to have a sky high value.
The other half of the essay is describing ratings for different types of currencies. But this is description, not argument for why it must rise in value.
Personally I'm not so concerned about the step "store of value" -> "medium of exchange".
Let's imagine for a second that most people on earth want to hold bitcoin, becuase they believe the price will not go down (i.e., it will remain stable or go up).
Then, they would rather accept bitcoin for payment, were it as easy to accept the fiat of whereever they live. This is because fiat is designed to lose purchasing power.
The way to make it "easy" will be solved by second layer solutions like lightning or even custodial solutions, these need not occur on the bottom layer all the time.
Anyway, to your last sentence. Why it must rise in value.
Satoshi created "number go up" technology which aligns perfectly with human greed and adjusted to occur in large swings on a four-year basis. No growth in price can be linear btw, because how would the front-running look?
Believers in bitcoin believe in "number go up" [1]
I’ve looked elsewhere and “the four stages of the currencycycle” seems to be a talking point in bitcoin world. And it appears to be nonsense taken from a misread of Jevons.
[1]: https://vijayboyapati.medium.com/the-bullish-case-for-bitcoi...
Please let me know what you think