Here's an economics problem about bitcoin as a store of value I want to see Marcus and Adam even attempt to address. The post is a reply to a Nick Szabo quote I don't think is correct:
Any commodity that can be stored and so traded can be used as store of value that will render the owner immune from the perceived or actual risks of holding a floating currency.
First of all, just about every currency is a "floating currency" unless the entire supply has been entirely mined from the closed ecosystem and you no longer have to worry about cost of production affecting value. But even then, you're still governed by people's sentiment for how much they value that object to trade their goods and services for vs bartering with something else. Everything about the currency is going to be floating in one way or another.
Secondly, bitcoin having a potentially wildly floating cost of production is one of it's greatest weaknesses and one reason it's not a store of value. A wildly volatile to the downside cost of production is a black swan event in itself and would render confidence in that asset to nothingness. If we lived in an open ecosystem, which anyone who claims we will be mining asteroids for metals does, then the cost of production and it's ability to not plummet is the main factor that makes gold a store of value at all. If you live in a closed ecosystem it's not that big of a factor since you're bound by supply.
As for bitcoin, the fact that mining NEVER ENDS is exactly the equivalent of using gold as money while being in an open ecosystem. If cost of production craters, you're screwed. This can happen in bitcoin easily. The act of previous holders just hoarding their money and refusing to sell low doesn't help because the network is officially dead in the first place if there's no mining fees to siphon off at this new lower cost of production, so the fresh lower cost of production coins drag everything else down with it.
cost of production has very little effect on price
even if ( for no good reason ) the cost of mining the remaining 9million coins was
0, price would not be affected.
so what if the miner dumps 12.5BTC every 10mins and makes a profit.
its NOTHING compared to the global trading volume, and the market itself dosnt really care about how much or how little the miner is profiting
consider fiat's cost of production and the rate at which the FED prints it and INJECTS it into the economy... yet fiat is still a relatively stable store of value.
You're acting like bitcoin has a finite supply. In theory it does, but not in practice since transaction fees are recycled and mining continues FOREVER. It's the equivalent of if platinum costs $1000 an ounce to mine at some point but people are recycling old cars and getting it for $100 an ounce. The lowest available price is the only one that matters. It doesn't matter if the cost of production was $1 million for a coin at some point. It's an open entropy system so if the cost of production goes to zero, people simply plug into the system and mine those recycled coins for free rather than paying you $1 million.
If there are no recycled fees to mine, it means the system was already dead in the first place. The act of making fees recycle is the equivalent of infinite supply when a bitcoin is an arbitrary unit in the first place, just with the store of value aspect of that supply resting on cost of production instead of scarcity. Each halving doubles cost of production, which enables you to increase price or lower mining input. If you run out of halvings and then lower cost of production, you should have a corresponding effect to devalue other already existing coins. Do you see now why cost of production actually does matter?
Most people with an IQ of 70 that don't know their head from a hole in the ground call bitcoin a ponzi but have no idea how it even works, yet if you really do understand how it works, it actually does resemble somewhat of a ponzi where arbitrary dates are inserted and proclaimed that on this date, the price must rise if mining input stays the same. If that's not a "scheme" of some type, then I don't know what is.