All this is lovely irrelevance. The best money is the one that works best to enable commerce. Adequacy trumps perfection. Thus, fiat money may well be scarce enough if the user base's politics is up to the task. Bad government produces bad money. Good government produces good money. It's a simple as that. Bitcoin can save the money from bad government, but it can't save commerce, so who cares?

One of the most common mistakes bitcoiners make is in thinking that when it comes to the attributes of money, more is better. More isn't better. OPTIMAL is better. Bitcoin is too scarce. It will be hoarded, which means it is a store of value and not a medium of exchange.

The money used in a barter economy should lose value slowly and predictably over time, because that's what makes commerce most practical. Any store of value that does not lose value will be replaced AS A MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE by one that does.

Any article about bitcoin does not mention and refute Gresham is wrong. And since Gresham cannot be refuted, welll, do the math.