I challenge you to make any of your theory make sense using the equation of exchange...
At a words-level: the oldest deflationary good there is land continues to be traded and recommended for investment, ...
Also, permanent-inflation coins exist. ...
OK, here we go; M*V=P*Q (M=mass, V=revolving velocity, P=price, Q=trading quant.). If we observe the market as it is now, we see that mass is stable and all other variables are very unstable. Price fluctuates and so does trading volume. Most of the time we have low trading volume, with occasional spikes (positive and negative) in price accompanied with much higher volumes. So we can conclude we have low and unstable velocity of money, which I think is pretty bad. The goal should be exactly the opposite, a high and stable velocity, supported by stable prices and constant high trading volumes.
When you compare Bitcoin to land, there is one huge difference; land is a resource that provides yield (rent, crops, ...). Bitcoin is just money, it can only provide profit when traded.
The only bright future I see is when a currency becomes relevant. Many small coexisting currencies are doomed to also be irrelevant. Bitcoin is now on a good path. For it to succeed completely, it needs a stable price which will allow more and more goods to be sold for Bitcoins directly. Otherwise it will remain more or less a bubble, even if deflatory in nature.
I see many people defending the deflatory nature per se. Why??? The goal should be for it to be strong, globally relevant and foremost useful to as many people as possible.