How can Nano be used as a payment/currency if there is a fixed supply?
I see this argument come up from time to time and had some of the same thoughts myself early on. Besides the arguments of spend and replace and that Nano can be a better digital gold than Bitcoin that can be sent much faster and fee-less, there is still a bit more I would like to respond to this:
Discussions on this topic often lead to Keynesian vs Austrian economics, pros and cons of inflationary monetary policy, etc. which I think are not imperative. There are definitely strong arguments for Nano's viability with these debates, but the point I want to make is that it doesn't have to be such an all or nothing argument...Nano doesn't have to replace all Fiat currencies and all other cryptos, **it can just be an option. What is wrong with giving people a choice?**
Everyone can choose for themselves whether they would rather pay or save in fiat/another method or whether we want to pay or save in Nano. If I am a seller, I can choose for myself whether I wish to be paid in fiat or Nano or another crypto or even gold/silver (although those payment methods aren't really practical). Personally, if Nano is mainstream, I'd prefer to be paid in Nano since I know the value can't be harmed by inflation and it can be sent/received fast and fee-lessly. I think that decision can sway even stronger to Nano's favor as services to convert between currencies when needed trend towards fee-less and become mainstream as well.