As I said earlier, gold has not had a fixed supply, including over the thousands of years that was cited as it being something close to a monetary standard. ZB did not address this. So the historical example of gold does not support the premise that bitcoin can serve as a universal monetary standard. The experiment of a fixed supply monetary standard has never been run, and certainly not run repeatedly to determine the range of outcomes.
The very mention of "fixed supply monetary standard" shows a misunderstanding of what money is in the first place. Here I mean money the system, not the actual units. Money is a ledger tracking who owns what
percentage of the total claims on goods and services in an economy. This ledger has historically been maintained using pieces of scarce metal, paper promises by a central issuer, and now in the most natural and direct way: as an actual ledger (Bitcoin).
You're confused. When a gold miner pulls gold out of the ground (or out of the ocean, or off an asteroid), everyone else's percentage of the total declines. That doesn't happen with bitcoin. My one bitcoin is 1/21m of the total, forever. The two are not the same.
There has never been a fixed supply money, or ledger, or whatever you want to call it, because fixed supplies don't exist except as a mathematical construction.
This use of a mathematical construction as a monetary base is an unprecedented experiment. Whatever you think will happen or should happen is unproven speculation.