I should clarify... what I meant to say is:
High volume trade is certainly possible with a long-term value storage vehicle, but very unlikely because the properties of such an entity actively discourage it. This is why bitcoin has such a small circulating supply relative to the total available coins... nobody wants to spend their bitcoins when they can just accumulate them and watch the price go up. This is why I don't think bitcoin will ever be a "spending currency" so to speak.
A great currency for trade is one that is both easy to get and easy to spend, and this quality is acheived by deteriorating its long-term value integrity. Bitcoins are neither easy to get nor easy to spend, as the PoW increasingly favors the privileged, and the coin's deflationary qualities force you to fight logic to spend it.
I think we all agree the tendency to accumulate could be offset with a form of inflation (static or dynamic), but I'm coming to see that the tendency to accumulate may still be there despite that (I'll have to do quite a bit more reading on this, and know right where to look). A perfect inflation would manifest as a constant balance to keep the marketcap approaching infinity at an uncontrolled rate. Presently I know that a certificate issuing agency, based off of Monero holdings would be highly critical of an inflation ... but at the same time I can see that same accumulation impeding the ability to keep it a "spending currency".
Regarding anonymous value storage, I'm saying it's useless because all you really need is anonymous currency. You can use that currency to purchase bitcoins or anything you want with anonymity. "Unnecessary" is probably a much better choice of word.
I hold the opinion that both a store of value and the need for it to be currency will come to be a central point in this currency. I could see many troubles with a $77 million business trying to operate within the confines of what Monero, being only a currency, and not a valid store of value. Imagine trying to use purchase orders, only to have your currency be worth 2% less than it was when you sent it out last year. I see that some form of debasement is necessary, but for it to do both value would have to trickle out very slowly. Maybe this is a malformed opinion, but perhaps you could share insight?