> Because if you expect the value of your cash to rise, you would probably hold onto your cash.
So why don't you? By that logic, you don't own a computer. There has not been a single minute for the past thirty years when it was not an invariant that if you wait a little longer, you can get a better computer, or more lately, mobile phone or *pad-device for the same (or, not rarely, less). Yet, these items sell like hotcakes.
When deflation is temporary, yes, then it's true - but when the deflation is constant, it's not.
People buy a computer when the utility they will derive from it outweighs the monetary cost. They know they may get a better deal in the future, but immediate needs may outweigh potential future savings.
Bitcoin is being criticized for having built in deflation (not incidental deflation), thus comparing it to a category of goods (computers) that is also exposed to almost algorithmic deflation is relevant.
So, given the built in deflation of Bitcoins, if you have some Bitcoins and need or want product X, why is knowing that you can have two X in a year, or four X in two, if you just hold on to your coins, going to keep you from getting your X now?
Isn't that too, as you state, a question of whether "the utility they will derive from it outweighs the monetary cost" ?
So why don't you? By that logic, you don't own a computer. There has not been a single minute for the past thirty years when it was not an invariant that if you wait a little longer, you can get a better computer, or more lately, mobile phone or *pad-device for the same (or, not rarely, less). Yet, these items sell like hotcakes.
When deflation is temporary, yes, then it's true - but when the deflation is constant, it's not.