As long as there is an agreement and consensus between two parties, anything can be used as currency, I understand that but what I want is to become a legal currency and be mass adoption.
It is a legal currency but it is not a legal tender. Generally I don’t think Bitcoin will become a legal tender at least widely. In terms of mass adoption, there is nothing to adopt if the general mindset is for people to make a quick buck and just don’t use it.
Going back to your original response, legal tender or mass adoption is not exactly the threshold for a P2P currency to take off. There is no reason why we should shift the goal post to that far and it is better for us to be realistic and accept that either of which may never be possible.
You may be right about the ETF, it doesn't promote the use cases or utility of bitcoin but also doesn't using bitcoin as a currency count as a utility? Many people are having difficulty transferring money or making cross-border payments and bitcoin is helping them do that, isn't that the utility of bitcoin? Even a seashell or a stone can become currency with the consent of both parties, so claiming that bitcoin has no utility is unfair to bitcoin.
You said that Bitcoin is not on track to becoming a P2P currency and further used ETFs to substantiate its worth.
I did not say that Bitcoin has no utility. The fact that ‘hodling’ has become so common basically means that people are treating it akin to an asset. The primary argument is that Bitcoin should be treated as an asset and it should not be used. I did say that Bitcoin should be used and that is where the value comes from.
Bitcoin ETF argument is actually fairly flawed as a counter point because it is precisely what fund managers are encouraging. Purchasing up tons of Bitcoins and essentially locking them in funds. This further cements its status as a speculative asset.