Ok people, I'm talking about a man made resource with a finite supply being supposedly used as a currency. I admit I have phrased some things incorrectly, I don't have a degree in economics, only journalism. I'm addressing a problem that I see with using something like bitcoin as a currency and no one, in this 4 page thread has really given me a solution, just run arounds like 'read up on it yourself.' So far there has not really been a stable price, which is essential for a currency of trade. From the useful posts, people seems to be denying that Bitcoin is a Ponzi (fair enough, I agree) but haven't denied its speculative nature, that there is a finite supply and obtaining it raw will get increasingly more difficult. Doesn't having such highly speculative features render its primary objective - being a self-regulating currency - useless? I think this resonates even in the current trend where more people are using it for price speculation rather than trade and sustaining an mobile economy.

Can someone please explain to me how this problem might untangle. That somehow these speculative features will balance out over time and a stable price could be achieved. Because otherwise there really is no financial revolution and it is just like every other speculative bubble like the Dutch tulips.

I draw a distinction between Bitcoin and natural resources because I believe there is a inherent value in natural resources. You can use it to do something else. Silicon was traded because people found a use for it, otherwise it would just lie on the ground worthless! People only traded for natural resources, not traded in.

Would be great if someone can actually help me because I am trying to write as accurately as possible and I haven't found any online resources that discuss this issue.