Because it's a commodity. The difference? You can't just print more commodity, if you need to, like you do with fiat currencies.
There is a difference between the bitcoin and a currency, however, until all 21 million coins are generated, it should be treated as such. People DO produce the currency, and that alone makes it a currency. Although, once all 21 million are generated, it will oddly enough become a sort of... reverse currency where instead of making more, the amount slowly dwindles with lost coins, etc.
Bitcoins however are produced at a steady, predictable pace, you can't just decide to make some more as with fiat. But as you said, I don't really think it matters so much for the end-user, as long as you can use it to get stuff.
Because it's a commodity. The difference? You can't just print more commodity, if you need to, like you do with fiat currencies. There is a fixed supply limit. And in that aspect bitcoin can never be a currency.
'Yet' was just me being hopeful for the future, as in: hope for more widespread adoption (merchants, merchants, merchants..), maybe official recognition by the governments? etc.
Hope I haven't spouted too much nonsense/BS, I'm still kind of new to this whole economy/money thing
'Yet' was just me being hopeful for the future, as in: hope for more widespread adoption (merchants, merchants, merchants..), maybe official recognition by the governments? etc.
Hope I haven't spouted too much nonsense/BS, I'm still kind of new to this whole economy/money thing
Newspapers can be printed, and they're a commodity. Gold was a money even though it was not printed.
My hair is a bird, your argument is invalid.
Yes, gold was used as money but it's still a commodity. Though as I said, I don't think it matters so much.