null

It was phrased as a question on purpose, to get you to think about it.

Your assertion is that no one would spend their Bitcoin on bread, and they'd instead use fiat currency. I'm asking you: why would they take their capital, regardless of what form it's in, and spend it on bread, if they knew they could hold onto that capital and it would appreciate in value?

The answer is very obvious: they need to eat.

But if they're not buying things to buy bitcoin because they want to get returns off their bitcoin

I just explained why they would buy things. I said it twice, actually.

No we aren't...

We're back to: people would spend it in order to buy things

That's mining them, not making them. The supply is hard-capped.

How do you make them?

In the short term, maybe.

But if Bitcoin is always going to go up in value, why would it make sense to spend your USDs buying goods and services instead of using them to buy Bitcoin and increasing the value of that capital?

there's not really any use cases for it outside of crime

I just listed 5...

As a general thing because I found myself trying to justify my Gear Acquisition Syndrome -- it's a good idea to split services across devices, rather than having some monolithic home server (which is where most people start). That way if one box goes down, it doesn't take down your whole stack.

If you have some machines scattered about doing different things, it might be time to consider logically grouping services and splitting them across that hardware.

I'd try putting the H2O inside that ice cold cup. You'll thank me later.

They are limited by an authority which you can trust will not try to kill it off.

So they're artificially limited, so long as that trust exists.

Why would anyone buy anything with it when tomorrow they could have bought ten of the thing they bought today?

Because people need things and to get them they have to buy them?

Have you ever heard of anyone using bitcoin for anything other than speculation?

Yup.