Agreed, this reasoning about Bitcoin is entirely backwards.
Any discussion of the value of Bitcoin needs to address some of the unique properties is has as a network, namely resistance to Sybil attacks, a solution to the Byzantine Generals Problem, and Nakamoto Consensus.
This article is clearly from the point of view of an economist that doesn't understand in what ways Bitcoin is novel. Without understanding the value that Bitcoin presents, it's not surprising to find it lacking in value.
Don't think this is from the point of view of any sort of economist at all. Exhibit A:
> Inflation is synonymous with a decrease in the value of money which in effect means that inflation is a partial default on the debt contract that money represents.
Any discussion of the value of Bitcoin needs to address some of the unique properties is has as a network, namely resistance to Sybil attacks, a solution to the Byzantine Generals Problem, and Nakamoto Consensus.
This article is clearly from the point of view of an economist that doesn't understand in what ways Bitcoin is novel. Without understanding the value that Bitcoin presents, it's not surprising to find it lacking in value.