Ser, read the post again, and please get the actual context. What I said was, from the viewpoint of a normie and/or a person from the traditional banking system, Bitcoin might be considered a "Ponzi" by those people like how we Bitcoin HODLers consider shitcoins.
Plus from a another, more controversial viewpoint, Bitcoin is ACTUALLY a "Ponzi", but a sort of naturally-occurring "Ponzi" LIKE GOLD.
A Ponzi scheme? Bitcoin is far from it and should never be considered such by any reasonable person.
Being used to fiat is not a valid reason for anyone to play idiocy on a fact. Does Bitcoin pay A and deny payment to B? Or it uses the money of A to pay B etc, just like a Ponzi scheme? Certainly not. Bitcoin is a currency, but in the form of a decentralised crypto network, that's the only difference it has with fiat currencies. If the government allows it to have full rights and potential, it will help the people more than the fiat currency.
No, I never said it's a Ponzi "Scheme" with an entity on top running the "Scheme". Get the whole context. Bitcoin, like Gold, is a naturally-occurring Ponzi. It's simply a market that was boot-strapped by a community that values the asset.
BUT, Bitcoin does have technical features that ARE VALUED especially by some groups of people that are in need of censorship-resistance.