You conclusion should be, we cannot approach "type 1" stability, if we destroy bitcoin's properties as a type 2 (ie gold) therefore it is core's mandate to guard bitcoin's type 2 properties as a digital gold.
And if they try to make bitcoin type 1 then it immediately, even by intention, destorys bitcoin's properties as a type 2 (gold)
Could you just clarify what it is you're concerned about regarding core's potential to "destroy" bitcoin's type 2 properties ? (I'm not really up to speed on the original agenda behind this thread - sorry 'bout that - I just became interested because of the monetary analytics).
Surely the only way they could 'destroy' Bitcoin's type-2 properties would be to make its supply variable and subject to liquidity demand ? (i.e. abandon the emission protocol).
anyone that knows anything about keynes/hayek or szabo/nash KNOWS you cannot centrally plan or design a type 1 money in and of itself (any more than you can stir muddy water clean).
Indeed. By that do you mean that diamonds, bundles of grain, gold bars or sea shells do not come with an inbuilt 'central bank' that monitors inflation and adjusts it's own trading rate against goods and services accordingly ?
Therefore, bitcoin - being modelled on an archetype that embodies the monetary properties of the items listed above - likeways cannot be coerced into a type 1 (price stability) role ?