Most people still think in fiat terms.

They look at Bitcoin’s price in dollars and try to anchor it to today’s global asset market, which is also measured in dollars. That framing assumes the dollar remains the dominant unit of account indefinitely.

If Bitcoin were to reach the final stage of monetary adoption, becoming a widely used unit of account, valuation would invert. Assets would no longer be priced primarily in dollars and then translated into Bitcoin. They would be natively priced in sats.

That means every asset and every liability would have a Bitcoin price. Property. Equity. Debt. Commodities. Luxury goods. Intellectual property. Everything that carries economic value.

At the same time, global productivity does not stand still. Technology, automation, and innovation continue to expand the quantity and quality of goods and services. The stock of valuable things in the world grows over time.

In that scenario, a fixed-supply monetary base measuring a growing pool of productive assets will naturally reflect that expansion in its purchasing power relative to weaker monetary units.

The common objection comes from projecting a future Bitcoin-denominated world onto today’s fiat-denominated balance sheets. It assumes today’s dollar aggregates are a hard ceiling. They are not. They are contingent on the monetary system currently in place.

If a transition were to occur, the relevant question would not be “how high can Bitcoin go in dollars,” but rather “what happens to the dollar’s purchasing power relative to a fixed monetary supply in a world of expanding output.”

Those are two very different analytical frames.

#Bitcoin