I need help thinking this through:
Pomp Podcast #663 was with a tech entrepreneur named Jeff Booth. The biggest thing Jeff argues is that continued Fed QE will lead to either a massive global depression and/or a revolution. Finally, he states that either event will lead to Bitcoin becoming the primary world reserve currency. Listen here: [https://open.spotify.com/episode/2JrsGPu6sq0UZMwNyVKhq6?si=140aec2e16544cc7](https://open.spotify.com/episode/2JrsGPu6sq0UZMwNyVKhq6?si=140aec2e16544cc7)
That got me thinking: in these two scenarios, what would a fiat to Bitcoin transition look like? Would BTC back currencies or would it replace them?
If backed, would governments “buy” our BTC back, just like the US our great-great grandparent’s gold in the 1930s?
If replaced (BTC as single world currency), how would BTC be distributed?
Either way, these two options suck because of inorganic distribution. Those with Sats won’t willingly give them up to those that don’t have any; those with power will do their best to stack as many Sats as possible during distribution.
The last transition (not covered by Booth) is through the Capitalist market. If both companies and consumers find transacting in BTC mutually beneficial, consumers and companies will naturally flow towards mainstream BTC adoption. For example, McDonalds is accepting BTC as a form of payment in El Salvador. If McDonalds can entice consumers to purchase in BTC, then they don’t have to pay VISA transaction costs. Provided no monopolies are present within the fast food sector (there’s not), equilibrium will be mutually beneficial to both consumers and McDonalds. Naturally, this will signal other consumers and other companies to behave in similar fashion. In sum, Capitalism could drive organic BTC adoption, escape depression, without the need for revolution, in the most equitable way.