&gt;A cursory glance at the historical ubiquity and utility of non fiat currencies would suggest that this is not correct.<p>Such as the tulip bulb? Or spices? There are very few things that have stored value in a long term fashion and that&#x27;s because they are rare in nature (e.g. gold, silver). Bitcoin&#x27;s value relies entirely on faith in the system that places arbitrary computational constraints on generating new units of currency. It is still a currency controlled by people.<p>&gt;I do not care that you don&#x27;t accept my views, I care that you make flatly wrong statements based on shallow knowledge and smugly pretend towards understanding and in so doing contribute to the ridiculous smokescreen regarding this particular topic in this particular forum.<p>It was not flatly wrong. You did not account for the fact that currency in a bank would have appreciated due to interest. It seems you lack a very basic understanding of how the current banking system works and have dedicated yourself to pump bitcoin rather than objectively compare it to the existing system.<p>&gt;In all the aforementioned cases of the inevitable death of fiat currency, trade and commerce did not simply cease, non fiat currencies took over. There is no reason to assume a change to this pattern.<p>There has never been a case that wiped out all government currencies at once, which is what a &#x27;massive sovereign debt bust&#x27; implies. Perhaps you meant something else and failed to convey it.<p>If you are referring to one currency collapsing, then usually what happens at this point is people just use currencies from other countries. Trading in commodities is a nightmare and would only be the result of massive global instability, in which case the bitcoin network would likely be taken down (or would fork several times) due to countries severing Internet connections.