...
It's just an equal sign with both *IDENTICAL* values at each side of the equal sign. That shouldn't be debatable.
...
I don't particularly care for the 1 BTC = 1 BTC argument and I wouldn't focus on, or even mention, it to sell anyone on the idea of BTC.
But here you keep ignoring the time variable when you try to assert 1 USD to be 1 USD.
This is
only ever true in an isolated snapshot of an arbitrary "now". The functionality of 1 USD at any time t is different from the functionality of 1 USD at any time s that is sufficiently far from t. This does not happen with BTC.
I'm not sure in what other way to verbalize the fact that 1 USD is not always going to be 1 USD. It's not about the paper bill, or the number that shows up in a bank account. Those are entirely arbitrary and irrelevant when it comes to the functionality as money.
If you had a fiat currency without a central bank (or a functional equivalent) you'd have the 1 USD = 1 USD argument in the same way that you have 1 BTC = 1 BTC.
Funny seeing you argue so hard against the idea of a reflexive property but not really surprising.
One thing is always equal to itself regardless of how its value changes.
If you want to say
X
1 ≠ X
2, with X
1 being the value of something in 1984 and X
2 being the value of something today
then sure, there's a case to be made for that.
However, a dollar bill printed in 1995 has absolutely the same value as a dollar bill printed today. You can hold them up side by side, and they will both buy you the same amount of coffee. You have to clarify what conditions you are comparing X
1 to X
2, otherwise you're just not making sense.