With fiat, the central banks can intervene during a crisis to help stabilize things but with Bitcoin there is no such financial emergency cushion. This implies that economic shocks might be more severe and prices and wages would be left to do all the adjustments.
I think tokens and ICOs could probably solve that problem. They are the best bet for "credit", i.e. loans, in a cryptocurrency-only world.An example from prehistory (pre-2009)
: When 2001 there was a strong recession and economic crisis in Argentina, the government had fixed the exchange rate to the US dollar and guaranteed that there was always an 1:1 reserve, so the Central Bank couldn't do the usual "money printing" trick to stabilize the economy.What did people do? They resorted massively to a bartering system which used a (still mostly pre-digital, i.e. printed) token called the Crédito. This was of course not shown in the formal economy's stats, but the massive recession of that year didn't led to massive increases in health/social stats like infant mortality as you would expect. Probably due to the benefits of the barter system, the social impact of the crisis was not as high as expected.
This could happen in a similar situation in a Bitcoin-only economy. People could resort to some temporary altcoins backed by real work to create parallel economies (there are already projects for that like the Moneda Par in Argentina), and businesses could use ICOs to finance their investments. Of course the "standards" of ICOs in terms of credibility, seriousness and trustworthiness would have to be much higher than now, but I don't think that is impossible to achieve, for example if the system of "certifications" for ICOs becomes more professional.