If you will read on what he said about Bitcoin, he's making statements based on skepticism, and the fact that it's very volatile.
He's an economist, so I don't have the right to be against somebody that's well-versed when it comes to economics... and maybe in Bitcoin as well.
LINKI'll just say my opinion based on what he said. He said at one point It may have the opposite effect. If the governments in there, they might send it to zero immediately. Well, this might be true because the government might just manipulate the market even more as they have huge holdings of Bitcoin. That's if the US will continue what they said about Bitcoin becoming their strategic reserve asset. Also in the article, it was stated that "The economist argued that bitcoin cannot replace traditional currency since financial assets must serve a practical purpose to retain value." Well, the purpose of Bitcoin right now is: 1. Store of value and 2. A speculative asset. That's all. Like him though, I don't see Bitcoin replacing traditional currencies, and TBH, it isn't the main purpose of Bitcoin after all.
At the end of the day, OP just put the title "Bitcoin is doomed to be worthless", so that many will share their opinion on this one. It's a bit clickbait-y for me, but still, Fama just shared his insights, and I don't see anything negative on what he said despite him saying that Bitcoin might go to zero soon. He's an economist after all.
