21 Million Doesn't Matter

The main argument that people invested in Bitcoin make about it's value is its inherent scarcity since there is a fixed number that can be created with the current rules. These rules could theoretically be changed if enough of the network made that decision, but I am not going to go down that rabbit hole in this post.

What I do want to discuss is why the 21 million cap doesn't matter at all.

This is specifically because while 1btc = 1btc; 0.99999999 is almost exactly the same as 1btc. Why is this? Because the only thing that someone can use bitcoin for is converting it into fiat. So having a whole coin is no different than having a part of a coin, other than you have less exposure to the price of bitcoin fluctuating.

The smallest number a bitcoin can be divided to on the bitcoin network is a Satoshi, which means that there are 21M x 100M pieces of bitcoin, or 2.1 Quadrillion Satoshis / divisible pieces overall.

But even this doesn't matter. Because exchanges, ETFs, etc can hold btc and then create all sorts of layers on top of it to make it truly infinitely divisible across the population.

The argument by bitcoiners continues to be made that the scarcity of this asset means it's important to buy into it now because eventually there won't be any to buy. But this is silly. Outside of network malfunction or government interference, there will continue to be a way for anyone to gain exposure to bitcoin price fluctuation in whatever amount they choose.

If we completely remove this scarcity argument (because it is always possible to gain exposure to bitcoin as part of one's portfolio) then what are the remaining arguments for bitcoin at all? That it will be the future of currency? Hopefully we can all see that as laughable at this point. One of the obvious reasons that this isn't true is because a deflationary asset is NOT a good currency. The "scarcity" of bitcoin makes it defective as a currency. The currency of the world cannot be one which does not have enough availability.

So at the end of the day, bitcoin is just a speculative asset, with no underlying value, and no future of being a currency. There are similarities to gold and other precious metals in a way, but that is mostly because the prices of all of these assets seem to move irrationally in reaction to financial crises in the world. The difference, however, is that there are a finite amount of types of precious metals as opposed to infinite crypto currencies and that precious metals can be used for actual real things in the real world.

I'd love for anyone to explain where any of these arguments break down.