Failed to load module canberra-gtk-module file too short

Personally, I think that the divisibility of most coins,

And if a cryptocurrency is not a speculative asset, adopters have no incentive to hold or use it, and it will never be adopted. They can't be good speculative assets and usable currencies, because the qualities that make something a usable currency leave it worthless as a speculative asset. My point is that it is all contradictory - it just doesn't work. I'm finding it hard to understand where you position is on this. In practice, the government could do a lot better on 2, but even their clumsy attempts combined with the brute force of their power is usually enough to take the edge off a depression. The government gives the money to those that they think will spend it, or enters a stagnant market and uses the money to buy goods/labor and increase demand. Part of the reason that governments can get away with increasing supply to stimulate the economy is because:ДЎ) They are meaningfully countering deflation, which can occur in depressions and discourages spending.Дў) They are redestributive, or attempts to be. It would have no stimulating effect on the economy.

Though the supply is larger, it does not buy any more goods -prices would just increase tenfold, or by whatever factor the supply was increased by.

In the situation you posit above, your currency expansion is more akin to a stock split: There is technically more currency in circulation, but no reason for the market cap to increase. Sorry, I feel I'm not doing a great job of explaining lolДon't worry about it, it can be hard to be clear when talking about these things.

Failed to load module canberra-gtk-module file too short