Though this is not the very first time this would be discussed here on the forum, the same reason is part of the do called conditions that warrants many to adopt the use of bitcoin than fiat in their financial economy, why because inflation has dealt badly on them and they would rather choose to have an alternative than left without a choice in handling financial economy, Bitcoin has everything it requires for us to remained convinced of its relevance and adoption, if we read more about the network.

More bitcoins will be created by mining with time so it's not evidence for you and anyone to say Bitcoin is deflationary with time at any rate even -2% annually.

Bitcoin is truly inflationary but Satoshi Nakamoto programmed Bitcoin protocol and designed Bitcoin inflationary rate is halved every 210,000 blocks. With an average time of Bitcoin block is 10 minutes, 210,000 blocks would last for about 4 years.

All bitcoins in total supply will be mined until a year of 2140 and before all nearly 21 million bitcoins mined by Bitcoin miners, Bitcoin will never be inflationary. We only can call Bitcoin as inflationary after 2140 year, and after 21 million bitcoins appeared.

How is the 21 millions Bitcoin cap defined and enforced?

OP, that has nothing to do with deflation. Strategy is just a buyer in the market, a larger buyer, but no different than any other buyer. You don't define if an asset is deflationary or not buy how many people are buying or selling, otherwise it's deflationary/inflationary status would change every day based on whether there was more buying or selling.

And the 450 newly mined bitcoins daily is nothing compared to the volumes that are traded daily.

So the whole thing is a pretty meaningless statement.

Bitcoin is not deflationary, in 2009, 6 years ago like your example or now and in future years till 2140. We also can not say many bitcoins lost and some reports say it is about 3 or 4 million bitcoins, but those lost bitcoins don't make Bitcoin deflationary.

We don't say fiat currencies are deflationary because people lost their fiat currency by any reason, so we can not say it with Bitcoin because there are lost bitcoins.

Bitcoin is better than fiat currencies because Bitcoin has a cap for its total supply while fiat currencies don't have any cap and this makes Bitcoin very attractive with people who want to find an asset that can help them to save their money against fiat currency inflation.

My intake to this is that when we talk about deflation in bitcoin price, let's also put it forward that it also has inflation which sums it a volatile currency while it limited supplies of the 21 million bitcoins facilitates it potential hedge for economy inflation. Though that's only acted as this valuable hedge when the community users and investors are buying continually without a sudden plan to sell too early which of course as it stance, 19.3 million bitcoins has been mined due to demands rates. There then makes bitcoin a good hedge to store values.

Even microstrategy would tend to sell their assets, they immediate market value will still give the market a good shape for new entries. We just need to believe that those institution companies invested in bitcoin will sell their assets somedays because they're not just invested on bitcoin to serve as hedge for investors like us with little amount of holdings. Perhaps they'd sell somedays but sure would reinvest because money in the savings isn't ever enough to rely on the long term future.
So, let's expect them to sell in the future but wouldn't get an end of bitcoin being a good store of digital assets.

Bitcoin will be looked back on the same way early investors got in on the dot com boom. This is history in the making and honestly the price is going to flip gold and go over 1 million i have no doubt

You are right MicroStrategy which has its stock traded on public market can not just decide to sell all its Bitcoin whenever it feels to sell. Bitcoin that MicroStrategy owns belongs to company itself not directly to people who own shares in company. However how much that Bitcoin is worth affects how much whole company is worth and that affects how much shareholders stock is worth. Shareholders can choose to sell their own stock in MicroStrategy if they want but they do not get to decide when or if company sells its Bitcoin. If MicroStrategy wanted to sell much of its Bitcoin they would need to tell shareholders and that could make people want to buy sell or keep their stock.

Why are some people so hung up about MS and the fact that they can choose at
any time to sell their Bitcoin? So many people welcome the fact that they are buying
so much on a regular basis.

This has nothing to do with Bitcoin being deflationary. The amount of Bitcoin
being bought and sold on an hourly basis fluctuates depending on market sentiment.


Erm . . . 2 things:

1. we know as you state yourself, Bitcoin supply is capped at 21,000,000

2. we know that there is a mechanism in place to half Bitcoins mining reward
every 4 years, thats guaranteed.

So when we say FIAT is inflationary we base this on the fact the governments can
and do pring any amount of currency which essentially increases supply and there
is no cap. . . so Bitcoin IS deflationary.

Also it is inevitable that a certain amount of Satoshis and Bitcoin will be lost
forever either through transaction errors, wallet issues or wallets containing
dust amounts for example.

Bitcoiners who understand the concept and consensus of Bitcoin will understand that with or without the organization, the Bitcoin price will push higher. Technically, the investors who are happy about Bitcoin's acknowledgement and investment by organizations are not only about the market price but the assurance that Bitcoin will gain worldwide.
Is not that I am not happy that institutions and others are entering the market, but we need to be more careful than ever for their surprise party in the market.

Nah. It's the disadvantage to the advantage presented by institutional and organization investors entering the market, which is why a lot of Bitcoiners advise holders not to accumulate BTC through institutional investors, because the model of practice is somehow different from the culture of Bitcoin decentralization.

You need a certain level of competency to be able to hold BTC and even more to be able to hold it safely. People need to accept that this is how the world is, and without these options a lot of people would not have BTC at all.

They can't find a real disadvantage to it, so they are coming up with this.